V:TES Complete Rules Reference 4.0

The Rules Outline (aka Complete Rules Reference) is being revived after an 8-year hiatus. Take a look at the new version at http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/?line=outline (which can also reached through VTES -> Rulebook -> Outline).

[ quoted text not captured ] Something's wrong with the text layout - the first bit of each line seems chopped. Using IE7 at 1280x1024. Will have a look later. Thanks Tobias

On 25 jun, 15:28, "tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com" [ quoted text not captured ] Interestingly, it looks fine at home (IE 7 on a broadscreen laptop). Tobias

[ quoted text not captured ] Rules in outline form are a thing of beauty. I <heart> the Rules Outline. /applause -Jason

[ quoted text not captured ] I adjusted one of the margin settings, based on your initial feedback.

[ quoted text not captured ] Good job - i'm browsing with firefox and everything seems OK :-) thanks Emiliano

[ quoted text not captured ] This is great. Any chance it could be provided in a pdf format for download? Andy VEKN Setite Ruler of Cambridge

In message <1182843116.8...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, Slytherin <an...@operamail.com> writes: >This is great. Any chance it could be provided in a pdf format for >download? Just hit "File" -> "Save" from your web browser? Works in IE, Opera, Safari, and Firefox. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

[ quoted text not captured ] Very nice work, indeed. I noted some minor issues with spelling, which I refrain from nitpicking upon in detail here, and this: - In V. B. 2. b., the kholo title is omitted. - Should there be a mention of the Golden Rule for cards? That is, if a card text overrides something in the rules, and, therefore, the Rules Reference, the card takes precedence? I noted this while reading the last in the introduction to VI., because there _are_ combat cards which may be played by minions not involved in the combat. Regards, Hardy Range

[ quoted text not captured ] http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/HTML/outline.html Print -> PDF Printer (Works similarly for other similar pages, but note the HTML/ pages' links and images will be broken.)

Hardy Range wrote: > On Jun 25, 3:26 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> The Rules Outline (aka Complete Rules Reference) is being revived after an >> 8-year hiatus. >> >> Take a look at the new version at >> >> http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/?line=outline >> >> (which can also reached through VTES -> Rulebook -> Outline). > > Very nice work, indeed. > > I noted some minor issues with spelling, which I refrain from > nitpicking upon in detail here, and this: > > - In V. B. 2. b., the kholo title is omitted. Fixed. > - Should there be a mention of the Golden Rule for cards? I don't think it's needed.

[ quoted text not captured ] That's not an option everyone has, IIRC.

[ quoted text not captured ] oh, there are enough free tools to get this stuff done if one cares enough. just "froogle" for stuff like "FreePdfXP" or "ghostscript" or "pdfcreator" Alf - they work, and they are free

[ quoted text not captured ] Uh. Right. So Just Use the link given, then (And save the HTML).

On Jun 25, 3:26 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Hi, I have some questions: a) II - PLAYING CARDS AND OTHER EFFECTS - C Pay cost and resolve effect (unless canceled in step B). I suppose, the unless canceled clause is valid for both paying and resolving. If so, doesn't it contradict with "paying the cost is default"? ( http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/browse_thread/thread/b26bcf72df5fa151/a426e3a82881654f?lnk=gst&q=cancel+cost+author%3ALSJ&rnum=7#a426e3a82881654f ) b) IV - HOW TO PERFORM ACTIONS - D Complete action. - 1 If the action is one that cannot be repeated (bleed, political action, action card, or card in play), the acting minion now becomes unable to perform this action again this turn. [6.1.1][6.1.6][6.1.7] According to this (in combination with IV.C.3), it is valid to bleed with minion A -> block attempt -> tangle atropos' hand [pot] -> bleed again with A, but bleed with A ->block -> FoM (sup) -> another block attempt -> tangle atropos' hand [pot] -> bleed again with A is not. Or another situation: bleed with A -> Mask to B -> block -> FoM -> successful bleed (B cannot bleed again this turn, A can) vs. bleed with A -> block -> FoM -> Mask to B -> successful bleed (both A and B can't bleed this turn) Should these situations have these different results, or am I just misunderstanding the way "continue the action as if unblocked" interacts with the whole sequence? BTW: is a FoM continued action "blocked, but continuing as IF unblocked" or is just "unblocked (but was blocked some time ago)"? c) IV.D.3 If action was blocked, the action is unsuccessful and blocked. [6.2.3] Are the steps (a - pay cost, b - tap blocking minion, c- combat) performed sequentially? If so, does playing Obedience with the blocking minion (somewhere in step c) retroactivelly cancel the "b - tap blocking minion" step? Thanks, dvorax.

dvorax wrote: > On Jun 25, 3:26 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> The Rules Outline (aka Complete Rules Reference) is being revived after an >> 8-year hiatus. >> >> Take a look at the new version at >> >> http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/?line=outline >> >> (which can also reached through VTES -> Rulebook -> Outline). > > Hi, I have some questions: > > a) II - PLAYING CARDS AND OTHER EFFECTS - C Pay cost and resolve > effect (unless canceled in step B). > I suppose, the unless canceled clause is valid for both paying and > resolving. If so, doesn't it contradict with "paying the cost is > default"? Yeah. I'll fix that. The default is that cost is paid. ( > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/browse_thread/thread/b26bcf72df5fa151/a426e3a82881654f?lnk=gst&q=cancel+cost+author%3ALSJ&rnum=7#a426e3a82881654f > ) When linking specific posts, use the "more options" -> "individual message" link: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/a426e3a82881654f > b) IV - HOW TO PERFORM ACTIONS - D Complete action. - 1 If the action > is one that cannot be repeated (bleed, political action, action card, > or card in play), the acting minion now becomes unable to perform this > action again this turn. [6.1.1][6.1.6][6.1.7] > According to this (in combination with IV.C.3), it is valid to bleed > with minion A -> block attempt -> tangle atropos' hand [pot] -> bleed > again with A, but bleed with A ->block -> FoM (sup) -> another block > attempt -> tangle atropos' hand [pot] -> bleed again with A is not. Correct. > Or another situation: bleed with A -> Mask to B -> block -> FoM -> > successful bleed (B cannot bleed again this turn, A can) vs. bleed > with A -> block -> FoM -> Mask to B -> successful bleed (both A and B > can't bleed this turn) Correct. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/b5e9fb73baf47cee http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/22b1441bff958fda > Should these situations have these different results, or am I just > misunderstanding the way "continue the action as if unblocked" > interacts with the whole sequence? They "should" have these different results, yes, since FoM doesn't erase the taint. > BTW: is a FoM continued action "blocked, but continuing as IF > unblocked" or is just "unblocked (but was blocked some time ago)"? The block succeeded. The action continues as if unblocked. > c) IV.D.3 If action was blocked, the action is unsuccessful and > blocked. [6.2.3] > Are the steps (a - pay cost, b - tap blocking minion, c- combat) > performed sequentially? If so, does playing Obedience with the > blocking minion (somewhere in step c) retroactivelly cancel the "b - > tap blocking minion" step? Will fix. It is simultaneous. Thanks.

On 27 juin, 15:01, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > a) II - PLAYING CARDS AND OTHER EFFECTS - C Pay cost and resolve > > effect (unless canceled in step B). > > I suppose, the unless canceled clause is valid for both paying and > > resolving. If so, doesn't it contradict with "paying the cost is > > default"? > > Yeah. I'll fix that. > The default is that cost is paid. BTW, I ever wondered if the text in brackets on Direct Intervention and the like was a remainder or not : "(No cost is paid)". Apparently not since the default is that the cost should be paid , but the brackets confuses me. Any reason to put those brackets?

[ quoted text not captured ] Same as "(round up)" or "(round down)". Neither of those is the default. The brackets are used because of the relation of the clause to the main clause -- separating them with a period or semicolon would be somewhat "less" good.