2nd Tradition, Pentex Subversion and deflecting

Second Tradition, The Requires a ready prince or justicar. +2 intercept. Also usable by a tapped prince or justicar, even if intercept is not yet needed, to burn a blood to untap and __attempt_to_block__ with +2 intercept. Pentex Subversion Unique master. Put this card on any ready minion. The minion with this card may not perform any actions and cannot __block__ actions. This card may be burned by any other minion as a (D) action. I've underlined the significant phrases. The question is, can a tapped Prince/Justicar with Pentex Subversion untap with 2nd Tradition to deflect a bleed? I mean they cannot BLOCK actions, not ATTEMPT blocking, right? -- Cheers, veyDer

On Aug 22, 7:53 am, Bart omiej veyDer Rudzki <vey...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've underlined the significant phrases. The question is, can a tapped > Prince/Justicar with Pentex Subversion untap with 2nd Tradition to > deflect a bleed? No. > I mean they cannot BLOCK actions, not ATTEMPT blocking, right? You cannot attempt something that you are prohibited from doing. This is covered in the FAQ, section 3.3. http://www.TheLasombra.com/vtes_faq.htm Cards which require a block attempt as part of their untap effect (2nd Tradition, Eternal Vigilance, Speak with Spirits, Special Report, The Mole) cannot be played if your vampires cannot block the action. Carpe noctem. Lasombra http://www.TheLasombra.com

[ quoted text not captured ] Correct. Xe cannot block, so xe cannot attempt to block, so xe cannot play Second Tradition. Similarly, a P/J cannot play Second Tradition during a referendum (attempting to enable a Dread Gaze or Political Backlash, for example). Nor play 2nd when another Methuselah is being bled (to enable Eagle's Sight or whatever).

> > Similarly, a P/J cannot play 2nd when > another Methuselah is being bled (to enable Eagle's Sight or whatever). can Anneke play the 2nd tradition in such a case?

[ quoted text not captured ] Yes, since she can block. But not if she has Pentex(tm) Subversion, of course.

coincoi...@hotmail.com schrieb: >> Similarly, a P/J cannot play 2nd when >> another Methuselah is being bled (to enable Eagle's Sight or whatever). > > > can Anneke play the 2nd tradition in such a case? > Of course (assuming you are *not* talking about Pentex). Think of her ability is an "always-on" Eeagle愀 Sight. -- Johannes Walch

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in news:IOVyi.620$JD...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net: > Bart?omiej veyDer Rudzki wrote: >> I've underlined the significant phrases. The question is, can a >> tapped Prince/Justicar with Pentex Subversion untap with 2nd >> Tradition to deflect a bleed? I mean they cannot BLOCK actions, not >> ATTEMPT blocking, right? > > Correct. *Xe* cannot block, so *xe* cannot attempt to block, so *xe* > cannot play Second Tradition. > **Another attempt at a true gender-neutral pronoun? I like this one the best, of the ones you've tried so far.... DZ

On 22 Ago, 15:13, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote: > LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote innews:IOVyi.620$JD...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net: [ quoted text not captured ] Sounds like Venetian dialect to me... :-D Emiliano

On Aug 22, 1:37 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] And any Meth could do the strange (i had to do it once xD) play that is, wake (on the qui vive on this case), to play a eagle sight, and then play the second, to block a political action from the other side of the table xD Strang but legal. (or am I wrong?) Bruno Brujah Prince of Mafra

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 14:56:26 -0000, "b.ja...@gmail.com" wrote: >And any Meth could do the strange (i had to do it once xD) play that >is, wake (on the qui vive on this case), to play a eagle sight, and >then play the second, to block a political action from the other side >of the table xD >Strang but legal. (or am I wrong?) This is explicitly covered in the faq, section 3.31: http://www.thelasombra.com/vtes_faq.htm#c3s31 3.31 Can I use a card that requires me to block, to untap against an action that is directed at someone else? No. Cards which require a block attempt as part of their untap effect (2nd Tradition, Eternal Vigilance, Speak with Spirits, Special Report, The Mole) cannot be played if your vampires cannot block the action. If you want to block an action that is directed at someone else, you must first play an Eagle's Sight or Falcon's Eye before playing a card that untaps you and requires you to block. In other words, you would first have to play a Wake with Evening's Freshness or Forced Awakening, then play the Eagle's Sight or Falcon's Eye to gain the ability to block, then you could use the untap and block cards.

On Aug 23, 5:31 pm, The Lasombra <TheLasom...@hotmail.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] That was what i said (although my english is not the best). First on the qui vive, second eagle sight, and then second tradition :p

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:13:07 GMT, atomweaver <atomw...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> Correct. *Xe* cannot block, so *xe* cannot attempt to block, so *xe* >> cannot play Second Tradition. > > **Another attempt at a true gender-neutral pronoun? I like this one the > best, of the ones you've tried so far.... ...which isn't much due to the merit of *xe*, honestly. More due to the lack of merit of the previous attempts. I still vote for "they", though, probably just because that's what I learned from my English Grammar books. -- Regards, Daneel

> > **Another attempt at a true gender-neutral pronoun? I like this one the > > best, of the ones you've tried so far.... > > ...which isn't much due to the merit of *xe*, honestly. More due to the > lack of merit of the previous attempts. > > I still vote for "they", though, probably just because that's what I > learned from my English Grammar books. The use of "they" as a gender neutral pronoun is idiomatically common, but simply not correct. I do not recommend using it at all.

In message <1187941074.5...@r23g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, CthuluKitty <vtana...@riseup.net> writes: >> I still vote for "they", though, probably just because that's what I >> learned from my English Grammar books. > >The use of "they" as a gender neutral pronoun is idiomatically common, >but simply not correct. I do not recommend using it at all. Correct according to whom? The OED documents it quite happily. 2. Often used in reference to a singular noun made universal by every, any, no, etc., or applicable to one of either sex (= ‘he or she’). First citation: 1526 -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.