Cardname: Psyche!
Cardtype: Combat
Set: CE, FN, Jyhad, VTES
Discipline: Celerity
Cardtext: [cel] Press.
[CEL] Only usable at the end of a combat when both combatants are still
ready. Enter combat with the opposing minion. This is a new combat.
The superior is played after combat ends, even though the card is a
combat card. [RTR 19980928]
Leaves the question if it's ever legal to play at the superior level
as there is no longer an opposing minion present.
For reference remember old version of Kiss of Ra where you could not
play Change of target afterwards because of the lack of a blocking
minion. (Superior level)
The other question is of course why Psyche isn't played during the
same timeslot as Telepathic Tracking superior or Coordinate Attacks.
Of course designer intent isn't to have Psyche! superior always
illegal to play, but designer intent probably wasn't to have the
card Guard Duty work, or rather fail to work, as it does today
(action targeting location requires more stealth than the intercept
currently available in order to allow the useof the card).
Looking at Psyche superior and the errata/clarification we see how
the card could be illegal. The sentence declaring the requirements
kicks in with the help of the errata/clarification, then there's a
full stop. Next sentence potentially flunks because of the errata/
clarification.
Comments?
Sten During
Sten During wrote:
> Cardname: Psyche!> The superior is played after combat ends, even though the card is a
> combat card. [RTR 19980928]
>
> Leaves the question if it's ever legal to play at the superior level
> as there is no longer an opposing minion present.
[...]
> Comments?
It's a combat card. It has a built-in concept of combatants. See also
Catatonic Fear's damage.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
LSJ wrote:
> Sten During wrote:
>>> Cardname: Psyche!
>> The superior is played after combat ends, even though the card is a
>> combat card. [RTR 19980928]
>>
>> Leaves the question if it's ever legal to play at the superior level
>> as there is no longer an opposing minion present.>
>
> [...]
>>> Comments?>
>
> It's a combat card. It has a built-in concept of combatants. See also
> Catatonic Fear's damage.
>
But that's too easy an explanation :)
When Catatonic Fear is played there is very much an opposing minion
present, which isn't the case for Psyche! superior.
This is a matter of if the card should be legal to play, because it
should, but if it's techically legal to play, and I think it isn't.
Combat has ended, it's after combat. At the moment it's legal to play
there is an absence of an opposing minion and thus flunks as a result
of no valid target available.
"Built-in concept" isn't enough. See for example Abandoning the Flesh
which explicitly is a reaction card. Reaction cards have a built-in
concept of being playable by a reacting vampire. The card explicitly
even mentions diablerie but is illegal to play during one as a result
of other rules.
Change of Target is playable when the acting minion is blocked. Cards
playable when an action minion is blocked have a built-in concept of
being playable before combat starts, if any. However, Brujah Frenzy
makes an action blocked. Change of Target should be playable, but is
ruled not to be. Must be a blocking minion present was the last
explanation I heard. There's no text on Change of Target looking for
a blocking minion, yet one is needed. There is explicit text on Psyche!
superior looking for an opposing minion, and there is none.
Technically Psyche! superior probably can't be played, so something in
the techical engine would benefit from a change, because Psyche!
should of course be playable and for most purposes to what it does
today.
Sten During
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:43:24 +0200, Sten During <ya...@netg.se> wrote:
> This is a matter of if the card should be legal to play, because it
> should, but if it's techically legal to play, and I think it isn't.
> Combat has ended, it's after combat. At the moment it's legal to play
> there is an absence of an opposing minion and thus flunks as a result
> of no valid target available.
The latest text of Psyche, from the online (old) VTES site:
Psyche! [Jyhad:U, VTES:U, FN:PA2, CE:U/PB]
Cardtype: Combat
Discipline: Celerity
[cel] Press.
[CEL] Only usable at the end of a combat when both combatants are still
ready. Enter combat with the opposing minion. This is a new combat.
I think that "at the end of the combat" is basically the single last
opportunity to play combat cards. "At the end of combat" marks the
elusive event horizon, which is still part of the combat, but which
also marks its inevitable end. A single step further, and you are out
in the clear, and combat has ended. But there is still room to play
cards usable at the end of combat (and at the end of the round).
--
Bye,
Daneel
[ quoted text not captured ]
Claryfying errata explicitly states Psyche superior (in difference from
Telepatchic Tracking superior and Coordinate Attacks) is played after
combat despite current cardtext on Psyche!
Sten During
Sten During <ya...@netg.se> wrote in message news:<2ud55gF...@uni-berlin.de>...
> For reference remember old version of Kiss of Ra where you could not
> play Change of target afterwards because of the lack of a blocking
> minion. (Superior level)
Point of order - you still can't use CoT after KoR, but that's because
of the current wordings. Take a look:
Kiss of Ra (relevant text)
The block attempt is canceled, the blocking vampire burns 2 blood, and
the current action is ended (without combat).
Change of Target (releveant text)
Only usable when this action minion is blocked (play before combat if
any).
You may have been aware of this when you wrote the above, but some
people might be misled or confused about this.
Regarding your overall question - the timing may not be the same as
things like Telepathic Tracking or Coordinate Attacks, but it's not
without precedent. Consider the timing on Hidden Lurker and Fast
Reaction - those are basically the same as Psyche(sup). Then just
consider that the term "opposing minion" is the generically inclusive
term that covers either "acting minion" or "blocking minion" as
referenced by those cards. Would that clear things up for you?
Eric Simon
Prince of Chicago
Eric Simon wrote:
> Sten During <ya...@netg.se> wrote in message news:<2ud55gF...@uni-berlin.de>...
>>>For reference remember old version of Kiss of Ra where you could not
>>play Change of target afterwards because of the lack of a blocking
>>minion. (Superior level)>
>
> Point of order - you still can't use CoT after KoR, but that's because
> of the current wordings. Take a look:
>
<SNIP>
>
> You may have been aware of this when you wrote the above, but some
> people might be misled or confused about this.
Yes, thus reference to "old KoR".
>
> Regarding your overall question - the timing may not be the same as
> things like Telepathic Tracking or Coordinate Attacks, but it's not
> without precedent. Consider the timing on Hidden Lurker and Fast
> Reaction - those are basically the same as Psyche(sup). Then just
> consider that the term "opposing minion" is the generically inclusive
> term that covers either "acting minion" or "blocking minion" as
> referenced by those cards. Would that clear things up for you?
>
Prob here is rather it's all too clear. Acting minion and blocking
minion exists throughout actions blocked (standard failed action
which was blocked and resulted in combat).
With the current rules for this card it's is, in difference from
what you suggested, without precedent. For example, the words 'the
acting minion' prevents Hidden Lurker's sister, Fast Reaction, to
be used to exact revenge on a vampire involved in combat by means
of Malleable Visage or the 'Slave' rule as those vampires are not
'acting minion', ie corresponding to the absence of an 'opposing
minion' in the case pf Psyche! superior.
With other examples where the obvious use of a card is made illegal
with a reference to 'cardtext' or 'english language' I can't see why
an arbitrary interpretation to the contrary referring to 'brevity'
or, as you suggest, 'generally inclusive' should be made.
We've been splitting hairs earlier in this game with the most peculiar
rules as result so, let's put some effort into splitting hairs and
attempt to find out if one of the most common counters to Strike:
Combat Ends is indeed legal to use at all.
Sten During
Sten During <ya...@netg.se> wrote in message news:<2uh88sF...@uni-berlin.de>...
[snip]
> With other examples where the obvious use of a card is made illegal
> with a reference to 'cardtext' or 'english language' I can't see why
> an arbitrary interpretation to the contrary referring to 'brevity'
> or, as you suggest, 'generally inclusive' should be made.
>
> We've been splitting hairs earlier in this game with the most peculiar
> rules as result so, let's put some effort into splitting hairs and
> attempt to find out if one of the most common counters to Strike:
> Combat Ends is indeed legal to use at all.
>
> Sten During
Okay, so it seems like your primary objection is the use of the term
"opposing minion" outside of combat. I can see that being a problem,
but technically Provision of the Silsila also does so. The second
sentence reads, "Only usable if the opposing minion is not ready and
this Assamite is ready." This is a reaction card that is played AFTER
combat, and uses the term "opposing minion" in the present tense,
which suggests that the cards remember who the opposing minion in a
previous combat was (thus allowing for current wording of Psyche).
Alternately, consider the superior of Blissful Agony - another example
of after-combat effect referring to an "opposing minion". The later
part of the effect must remember who the opposing minion was at the
time of the S:CE.
All of this is just possible precedent, which I think is what you're
looking for. If you're looking for linguistic reasonableness, I'm not
sure you're going to find it, honestly.
Eric Simon
Eric Simon wrote:
>>We've been splitting hairs earlier in this game with the most peculiar
>>rules as result so, let's put some effort into splitting hairs and
>>attempt to find out if one of the most common counters to Strike:
>>Combat Ends is indeed legal to use at all.
>>
>> Sten During>
>
> Okay, so it seems like your primary objection is the use of the term
> "opposing minion" outside of combat. I can see that being a problem,
> but technically Provision of the Silsila also does so. The second
> sentence reads, "Only usable if the opposing minion is not ready and
> this Assamite is ready." This is a reaction card that is played AFTER
Ah, good point. This is quality hairsplitting :)
> combat, and uses the term "opposing minion" in the present tense,
> which suggests that the cards remember who the opposing minion in a
> previous combat was (thus allowing for current wording of Psyche).
Yes, agreed. This is indeed similar to the situation with Psyche!.
If playable (for the reasons mentioned earlier) or not is another
matter, but I withdraw my stating the lack of a precedence.
>
> Alternately, consider the superior of Blissful Agony - another example
> of after-combat effect referring to an "opposing minion". The later
> part of the effect must remember who the opposing minion was at the
> time of the S:CE.
This is not a similar situation. The card text is read during the
declaration of strikes when an opposing minion is indeed present.
After strike-resolution, coming later, the minion playing this card
is forced to enter combat with a minion not controlled by the
controller of the, currently still existing, opponent.
>
> All of this is just possible precedent, which I think is what you're
> looking for. If you're looking for linguistic reasonableness, I'm not
> sure you're going to find it, honestly.
>
I think this is the core of the question. Linguistic reason has indeed
been a source for rulings. A shift to 'common sense' used with the
implied 'but for christs sake, get a grip man' (something I'm not in
any way saying you did) seems peculiar to me.
For me, a consequent usage of applying more or less well-reasoned
technical, or for that matter, lingustical arguments is something
this game gains from. I was, as stated, aiming at the hairsplitting
used in other cases and chose to offer this specific case of, admittedly
rather stupid, hairsplitting.
Sten During