LSJ and friends: Qs

Hi all, Some questions: 1) Will a vamp with 1 blood that plays Force of Will and then pays 1 blood to play Earth Control go to torpor, even if the Force of Will fizzle due to lack of blood? 2) If vamp A is blocked, and then vamp a plays Illusion of the Kindred, is there time to play Fast Reaction (or vice versa for Hidden Lurker), since in some way combat was completed with a combat ended before range was chosen? 3) In the Clarification, Errata, and Rulings, I have noted a typo on the website concerning Illusion of the Kindred. "..., the cting Meth chooses whether he is sent to the ash heap or removed from the game." A) Does that differ from the card text since card was reprinted with Final Nights? B) If the vamp could be sent to the ash heap, who has the final decisions on that, acting Meth., reacting Meth, or vamp owner? GP41

GP41 wrote: > > Hi all, > > Some questions: > > 1) Will a vamp with 1 blood that plays Force of Will and then pays 1 > blood to play Earth Control go to torpor, even if the Force of Will > fizzle due to lack of blood? Yes. Card text indicates that the damage is not part of the successful resolution of the action. > 2) If vamp A is blocked, and then vamp a plays Illusion of the Kindred, > is there time to play Fast Reaction (or vice versa for Hidden Lurker), > since in some way combat was completed with a combat ended before range > was chosen? Time, yes. Means, no. You cannot play a combat-starter when a combat is already pending. Which renders the question of whether there is time to play it moot. > 3) In the Clarification, Errata, and Rulings, I have noted a typo on > the website concerning Illusion of the Kindred. "..., the cting Meth > chooses whether he is sent to the ash heap or removed from the game." > A) Does that differ from the card text since card was reprinted with > Final Nights? Card text: Only usable before range is determined. [chi] Combat ends. Move the bottom card of your crypt to your ready region. He or she does not contest any other vampires or titles in play. The vampire has an amount of blood equal to half of his or her capacity (round down). Combat begins between the vampire and the opposing minion. Remove the vampire from the game at the end of combat. [CHI] As above, but the vampire has an amount of blood equal to his or her capacity. > B) If the vamp could be sent to the ash heap, who has the final > decisions on that, acting Meth., reacting Meth, or vamp owner? Per the ruling you cite, the Acting Methuselah. -- 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" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3DD4EF5C...@white-wolf.com... > GP41 wrote: > > > 1) Will a vamp with 1 blood that plays Force of Will and then pays 1 > > blood to play Earth Control go to torpor, even if the Force of Will > > fizzle due to lack of blood? > > Yes. Card text indicates that the damage is not part of the successful > resolution of the action. Doesn't the Force of Will/Change of Target interaction suggest the opposite? I thought that ruling was based on the interpretation that the action has to end by being blocked or resolving for the damage to take place, eg canceling the action doesn't do it. It seems like a fizzling action also shouldn't do it, unless that's considered "the action resolving", just for no effect? Josh change of will

Joshua Duffin wrote: > > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message > news:3DD4EF5C...@white-wolf.com... > > GP41 wrote: > > > > > 1) Will a vamp with 1 blood that plays Force of Will and then pays 1 > > > blood to play Earth Control go to torpor, even if the Force of Will > > > fizzle due to lack of blood? > > > > Yes. Card text indicates that the damage is not part of the successful > > resolution of the action. > > Doesn't the Force of Will/Change of Target interaction suggest the > opposite? It used to. It doesn't any more (post-CE). > I thought that ruling was based on the interpretation > that the action has to end by being blocked or resolving for the > damage to take place, eg canceling the action doesn't do it. When the action is canceled, sure. If you DI the FoW, for instance, no damage will be taken. The fizzled action wasn't canceled in the example, however. > It seems like a fizzling action also shouldn't do it, unless that's > considered "the action resolving", just for no effect? Right. It doesn't actually "fizzle" until it gets to resolution. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3DD5171B...@white-wolf.com... > Joshua Duffin wrote: > > > > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message > > news:3DD4EF5C...@white-wolf.com... > > > GP41 wrote: > > > > > > > 1) Will a vamp with 1 blood that plays Force of Will and then pays 1 > > > > blood to play Earth Control go to torpor, even if the Force of Will > > > > fizzle due to lack of blood? > > > > > > Yes. Card text indicates that the damage is not part of the successful > > > resolution of the action. > > > > Doesn't the Force of Will/Change of Target interaction suggest the > > opposite? > > It used to. > It doesn't any more (post-CE). Hmmm. You're not saying that the FoW/CoT interaction has changed, are you? Just that it's more clear with CE wording on CoT? Or am I missing something? Josh tagline not found

"Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ar36eh$eo6of$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de... [ quoted text not captured ] Actually, I think their interaction has changed per the new wording of Change of Target. "Only usable when this acting minion is blocked (play before combat, if any). Untap the acting minion, do not tap the blocking minion, and end the current action. (It is not successful.) This minion cannot perform the same action again this turn." It used to say cancel the action or something similar to that instead of "end the current action." To me that suggests that CoT doesn't remove any side effects of playing a card such as Force of Will. Similarly, if you modified an action with Daring the Dawn or Day Op, were blocked by an Ally and played Change of Target, I think you'd still have to go to Torpor (untapped mind you, but I think the reasoning follows from the current card text). LSJ?

[ quoted text not captured ] Exactly. > Similarly, if you > modified an action with Daring the Dawn or Day Op, were blocked by an Ally > and played Change of Target, I think you'd still have to go to Torpor > (untapped mind you, but I think the reasoning follows from the current card > text). LSJ? Correct. [ quoted text not captured ]