rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Forced Awakening Order of events

9 messages from 5 participants · 22 June 2000
original thread on Google Groups

legb...@my-deja.com

Troubled conscience time, again! Last night i forced awake [in response to one of John's bleeds] an AUS vamp with one blood, and then Telepathically misdirected the bleed to my prey. THEN i burned one blood for failing to block, or rather didn't, because my vamp then had no blood. i THINK this is OK, because i did the Forced Awake and TM thing before the opportunity-to-block window had passed. Is this correct? How about if i had tried to block to draw out the stealth? Could i then have TM'd myself down to 0 blood and then paid [or rather not paid] the FA cost? i'm fairly sure that if i had forced awake after the opportunity- to-block window had passed i would have had to burn a blood for failing to block before i could play the TM - is that right? Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

kp...@my-deja.com

In article <8issgu$rkp$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] Well, once you play TM, a new chance to block arises. If you decline the block, FA, and TM, then the action could still be TM/TM back at you, and the FA vampire could still successfully block. I would think you haven't failed to block until the action is complete. For a bleed, you would burn the vamp blood and the pool lose at the same time. How does FA work with Form of Mist? You block, but the action continues. Is a blood burned? I think not, since the block worked, but was later overturned. Kevin [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ

legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > > Troubled conscience time, again! Last night i forced awake [in response > to one of John's bleeds] an AUS vamp with one blood, and then > Telepathically misdirected the bleed to my prey. THEN i burned one blood > for failing to block, or rather didn't, because my vamp then had no > blood. i THINK this is OK, because i did the Forced Awake and TM thing > before the opportunity-to-block window had passed. Is this correct? How > about if i had tried to block to draw out the stealth? Could i then have > TM'd myself down to 0 blood and then paid [or rather not paid] the FA > cost? i'm fairly sure that if i had forced awake after the opportunity- > to-block window had passed i would have had to burn a blood for failing > to block before i could play the TM - is that right? Forced Awakening - Reaction * The vampire burns a blood (if he fails to block) when the action begins to resolve (successfully or not). [LSJ 21-APR-1999] And, as always, a "burn blood" effect applied to an empty vampire has no effect. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

legb...@my-deja.com

In article <3951FC51...@white-wolf.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] So just to make ABSOLUTELY sure i understand this: i can force awake at any time during a bleed TM or deflect, paying the blood Then burn a blood [if i do not block successfully some time during the action]; and if i've got no blood then i don't burn anything. Correct? [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ

kp...@my-deja.com wrote: > How does FA work with Form of Mist? You block, but the action > continues. Is a blood burned? I think not, since the block worked, > but was later overturned. Correct. (The block was not overturned - the action merely continued "as if unblocked".) -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ

legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > Forced Awakening - Reaction > > > > * The vampire burns a blood (if he fails to block) when the action begins > > to resolve (successfully or not). [LSJ 21-APR-1999] > > > > And, as always, a "burn blood" effect applied to an empty vampire has no > > effect. > > So just to make ABSOLUTELY sure i understand this: > > i can force awake at any time during a bleed > TM or deflect, paying the blood > Then burn a blood [if i do not block successfully some time during the > action]; and if i've got no blood then i don't burn anything. > > Correct? Yes, if "then" is when the action resolves (successfully or is blocked). [ quoted text not captured ]

isild...@my-deja.com

> > And, as always, a "burn blood" effect applied to an empty vampire has no > effect. > I hate to open a can of worms here, but what happens if you "burn blood" (ala Blood to Water) and the Vamp either has 0 blood or less than the stated amount to be burned (i.e. burn 3 blood but vamp only has 1)?? Does that send the vamp into torpor? Or does burning blood (BtW) on a vamp with 0 blood (say you knocked him to 0 in the first round) have no effect? And while we're on that question, If a vamp is at 0 blood and someone tries to steal blood what happens? Nothing? Or does the vamp go into torpor? Same could be applied I assume to having 1 blood and vamp tries to steal 2... interesting stuff Is [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe

On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > i can force awake at any time during a bleed > TM or deflect, paying the blood > Then burn a blood [if i do not block successfully some time during the > action]; and if i've got no blood then i don't burn anything. > > Correct? Correct, since burnign the blood is an effect, rather than a payment. For those who regard this as a problem, remember that this requires vampires sitting round on 1 blood who are generally prime candidates for a Banishment or a combat..... -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "I know my ex-boyfriend lies. Oh, he does it every time. It's just his permanent disguise, yeah, yeah, but he's drop dead gorgeous."

James Coupe

On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 isild...@my-deja.com wrote: > I hate to open a can of worms here, but what happens if you "burn > blood" (ala Blood to Water) and the Vamp either has 0 blood or less > than the stated amount to be burned (i.e. burn 3 blood but vamp only > has 1)?? They burn as much blood as possible for the Blood to Water effect, and then stay at 0 blood. > Does that send the vamp into torpor? No. Excess *damage* sends vampires to torpor, not excess burn blood. (Or, alternatively, a Send To Torpor effect, like Coma). > Or does burning blood > (BtW) on a vamp with 0 blood (say you knocked him to 0 in the first > round) have no effect? It would have no effect. And if you ask someone with X blood to burn Y blood, where X is less than Y (e.g. you say burn 5, and I only have 2), you leave them on 0 blood. > And while we're on that question, If a vamp is at 0 blood and someone > tries to steal blood what happens? They strike and steal 0 blood. > Nothing? Or does the vamp go into > torpor? No. Stealing blood is not damage, so they do not go to torpor. Regarding blood loss, only blood lost through damage *or* an effect explicitly sending them to torpor as well. > Same could be applied I assume to having 1 blood and vamp > tries to steal 2... The stealing vampire woudl gain 1 blood. The stolen from vampire would lose 1 blood, and not go to torpor. [ quoted text not captured ]