In article <33dp87$r1d@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>,
Bryce J. Jones <dw977@cleveland.Freenet.Edu> wrote:
>Um, how many edges are there?
One.
> It makes it sound singular some times, but makes it sound plural other
> times. If it is singular, what happens when two people should get it?
This never occurs. You can get The Edge as a result of a succesful
bleed, or a political action.
Anytime anyone bleeds anyone else, they get The Edge -- even if
someone else had it. It's very hard to hold on to (but the extra
blood is worth the effort).
If a political card grants someone The Edge as a result of a vote,
again, it's taken away from whoever has it at the moment.
--
Doug DeJulio
ddj@zardoz.elbows.org
ddj@zardoz.elbows.org (Doug DeJulio) writes:
>In article <33dp87$r1d@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>,
>Bryce J. Jones <dw977@cleveland.Freenet.Edu> wrote:>>Um, how many edges are there?>One.>> It makes it sound singular some times, but makes it sound plural other
>> times. If it is singular, what happens when two people should get it?>This never occurs. You can get The Edge as a result of a succesful
>bleed, or a political action.>Anytime anyone bleeds anyone else, they get The Edge -- even if
>someone else had it. It's very hard to hold on to (but the extra
>blood is worth the effort).
No no no, you have to bleed YOUR PREY (see section 5). You don't get it
for bleeding any other player.
--
| kreme@netcom.com \ 1015 South Gaylord, Denver, CO 80209 #100 |
| PGP Fingerprint \ 1D 5E F7 C8 7E C2 F9 87 0F 86 C9 B0 D2 63 9C B2 |
| [303/722-2009] Vox \ I haven't seen anything like that since the |
| [303/777-2911] Data \ Pin~ata death duels on Nuevo Tiajuana!! |
Cerebus The Aardvark <kreme@netcom.com> wrote:
>No no no, you have to bleed YOUR PREY (see section 5). You don't get it
>for bleeding any other player.
Actually, you do (see Section 12.3.1, under "Bleed"). Note that you
can only ever bleed someone other than your prey if a card specifically
allows you to... Computer Hacking must still be directed at your
prey, for example.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <33lcch$ij7@perv.hal.com>, Tom Wylie <aahz@hal.COM> wrote:
>Cerebus The Aardvark <kreme@netcom.com> wrote:>>No no no, you have to bleed YOUR PREY (see section 5). You don't get it
>>for bleeding any other player.>
>Actually, you do (see Section 12.3.1, under "Bleed"). Note that you
>can only ever bleed someone other than your prey if a card specifically
>allows you to... Computer Hacking must still be directed at your
>prey, for example.
>
>
Check that. The FAQ says "If, however, a card allows you to bleed as a
direct action, then you can attempt to bleed any Methuselah you like."
| If you've got a hot lead on a new | *--Joe--*
| PC game, call the announce line at | jsciv@vt.edu
| ** csipga@discus.ise.vt.edu ** |
+-------------------------------------+----------------------------------
"Carnivores, oy!" -- Timon, TLK
Joe Cochran <jsciv@megavolt.cc.vt.edu> wrote:
>Check that. The FAQ says "If, however, a card allows you to bleed as a
>direct action, then you can attempt to bleed any Methuselah you like."
I did check on that, guess I'll triple check.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <33lcch$ij7@perv.hal.com>, Tom Wylie <aahz@hal.COM> wrote:
>Cerebus The Aardvark <kreme@netcom.com> wrote:>>No no no, you have to bleed YOUR PREY (see section 5). You don't get it
>>for bleeding any other player.>
>Actually, you do (see Section 12.3.1, under "Bleed"). Note that you
>can only ever bleed someone other than your prey if a card specifically
>allows you to... Computer Hacking must still be directed at your
>prey, for example.
>
>
re: CH and others being labeled as D actions so only your prey can block...
isn't Bleeding a Directed action already, anyway? If so, why the
redundancy? All these cards say 'Bleed' on them still, so there
can't be any confusion that the action is a Bleed, and can only be
blocked by the Bleedee... so why have a 'D'? Or is this at least one
instance in the game where it was made sure no one could misunderstand
that it was still directed (even though it led to other confusion).
aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:
>Cerebus The Aardvark <kreme@netcom.com> wrote:>>No no no, you have to bleed YOUR PREY (see section 5). You don't get it
>>for bleeding any other player.>Actually, you do (see Section 12.3.1, under "Bleed"). Note that you
>can only ever bleed someone other than your prey if a card specifically
>allows you to... Computer Hacking must still be directed at your
>prey, for example.
Section 5: The edge is a symbol showing that your vampires have won you
special influence in the game. Itt is given to players who successfully
BLEED their prey.
12.3.1: Whenever a minion successfully bleeds a methusalah, the controller
of that minion gains control of the edge.
So which is it? The rule quite clearly contradict each other. We've been
playing only when you bleed your prey, which i think makes sense.
Obviously an officail rules committee ruling is needed here since the
current rules contradict each other.
--
| kreme@netcom.com \ 1015 South Gaylord, Denver, CO 80209 #100 |
| PGP Fingerprint \ 1D 5E F7 C8 7E C2 F9 87 0F 86 C9 B0 D2 63 9C B2 |
| [303/722-2009] Vox \ |
| [303/777-2911] Data \ REMEMBER: No one knows you are a dog. |
Cerebus The Aardvark (kreme@netcom.com) wrote:
: aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:: Section 5: The edge is a symbol showing that your vampires have won you
: special influence in the game. Itt is given to players who successfully
: BLEED their prey.
: 12.3.1: Whenever a minion successfully bleeds a methusalah, the controller
: of that minion gains control of the edge.
: So which is it? The rule quite clearly contradict each other. We've been
: playing only when you bleed your prey, which i think makes sense.
: Obviously an officail rules committee ruling is needed here since the
: current rules contradict each other.
What do you mean which is it? They say the same thing. Whenever one of
your minions bleed your prey, you gain the Edge. I don't understand where
the problem is...
--
Dennis Stalnaker | The worst thing that could ever happen to a person is
solomon@usa.net | for that person to be comfortable, because once you
Colorado Springs | are comfortable, you stop trying for somthing better.
In article <940827.133058.5498@cougar.cc.oxy.edu>,
Clinton Richard Wolf <wolf@oxy.edu> wrote:
> re: CH and others being labeled as D actions so only your prey can block...
> isn't Bleeding a Directed action already, anyway? If so, why the
> redundancy? All these cards say 'Bleed' on them still, so there
> can't be any confusion that the action is a Bleed, and can only be
> blocked by the Bleedee... so why have a 'D'? Or is this at least one
> instance in the game where it was made sure no one could misunderstand
> that it was still directed (even though it led to other confusion).
If the card has an action icon on it, it's neccesary. A Bleed action
is one without a card. When you play a Computer Hacking card, you're
not taking a Bleed action, you're taking a "Computer Hacking" action
the consequence of which is a bleed. So the (D) really is neccesary.
If it were an Action Modifier, this wouldn't be the case.
--
Doug DeJulio
ddj@zardoz.elbows.org
solomon@cscns.com (Dennis Stalnaker) writes:
>Cerebus The Aardvark (kreme@netcom.com) wrote:
>: aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:>: Section 5: The edge is a symbol showing that your vampires have won you
>: special influence in the game. Itt is given to players who successfully
>: BLEED their prey.
>: 12.3.1: Whenever a minion successfully bleeds a methusalah, the controller
>: of that minion gains control of the edge.
>: So which is it? The rule quite clearly contradict each other. We've been
>: playing only when you bleed your prey, which i think makes sense.
>: Obviously an officail rules committee ruling is needed here since the
>: current rules contradict each other.>What do you mean which is it? They say the same thing. Whenever one of
>your minions bleed your prey, you gain the Edge. I don't understand where
>the problem is...
One says your prey, the other (and Tom) says "a Methuselah" that would be
ANY methusela, your predator, the guy 4 down the table, the guy in the next
room 30 people away... whomever. BIG BIG Difference.
--
| kreme@netcom.com \ 1015 South Gaylord, Denver, CO 80209 #100 |
| PGP Fingerprint \ 1D 5E F7 C8 7E C2 F9 87 0F 86 C9 B0 D2 63 9C B2 |
| [303/722-2009] Vox \ |
| [303/777-2911] Data \ REMEMBER: No one knows you are a dog. |
In article <kremeCvA70o.IvG@netcom.com>,
Cerebus The Aardvark <kreme@netcom.com> wrote:
>solomon@cscns.com (Dennis Stalnaker) writes:
>>>Cerebus The Aardvark (kreme@netcom.com) wrote:
>>: aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:>>>: Section 5: The edge is a symbol showing that your vampires have won you
>>: special influence in the game. Itt is given to players who successfully
>>: BLEED their prey.
>>: 12.3.1: Whenever a minion successfully bleeds a methusalah, the controller
>>: of that minion gains control of the edge.
>>: So which is it? The rule quite clearly contradict each other. We've been
>>What do you mean which is it? They say the same thing. Whenever one of
>>your minions bleed your prey, you gain the Edge. I don't understand where
>>the problem is...>
>One says your prey, the other (and Tom) says "a Methuselah" that would be
>ANY methusela, your predator, the guy 4 down the table, the guy in the next
>room 30 people away... whomever. BIG BIG Difference.
>
Not unless you have a card I haven't seen yet. Under normal circumstances,
you only are allowed to bleed your prey, and only be bled by your predator.
(See pg 21 of the rulebook: You may attempt to bleed the player who is your
prey...)
--
Kirby Krueger
kirbyk@netcom.com
{ The third line is strangely obscured. }
In article <kirbykCvA8DD.6ry@netcom.com>,
Kirby Krueger <kirbyk@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <kremeCvA70o.IvG@netcom.com>,
>Cerebus The Aardvark <kreme@netcom.com> wrote:>>One says your prey, the other (and Tom) says "a Methuselah" that would be
>>ANY methusela, your predator, the guy 4 down the table, the guy in the next
>>room 30 people away... whomever. BIG BIG Difference.>
>Not unless you have a card I haven't seen yet. Under normal circumstances,
>you only are allowed to bleed your prey, and only be bled by your predator.
>(See pg 21 of the rulebook: You may attempt to bleed the player who is your
>prey...)
There are cards you haven't seen yet, then. For example, there's an
Auspex card that lets you redirect a bleed against you so that it hits
another Methuselah.
We only noticed the section that said you get The Edge for bleeding
your Prey, so we were playing that redirected bleeds *don't* get you
The Edge.
--
Doug DeJulio
ddj@zardoz.elbows.org
Kirby Krueger (kirbyk@netcom.com) wrote:
: In article <kremeCvA70o.IvG@netcom.com> Cerebus The Aardvark <kreme@netcom.com> wrote:
: >solomon@cscns.com (Dennis Stalnaker) writes:
: >>: So which is it? The rule quite clearly contradict each other. We've been
: >>What do you mean which is it? They say the same thing. Whenever one of
: >>your minions bleed your prey, you gain the Edge. I don't understand where
: >>the problem is...
: >
: >One says your prey, the other (and Tom) says "a Methuselah" that would be
: >ANY methusela, your predator, the guy 4 down the table, the guy in the next
: >room 30 people away... whomever. BIG BIG Difference.
: >
: Not unless you have a card I haven't seen yet. Under normal circumstances,
: you only are allowed to bleed your prey, and only be bled by your predator.
: (See pg 21 of the rulebook: You may attempt to bleed the player who is your
: prey...)
In a game I watched, Pred attempted to Bleed Prey. Prey then played a
card that redirected the Bleed to Meth X. Meth X is now successfully
bled, but because Pred did not Bleed Prey, Pred did not get the Edge.
And this does seem to lead to a contradiction.
kirbyk@netcom.com (Kirby Krueger) writes:
> Not unless you have a card I haven't seen yet. Under normal circumstances,
> you only are allowed to bleed your prey, and only be bled by your predator.
> (See pg 21 of the rulebook: You may attempt to bleed the player who is your
> prey...)
>
You haven't seen "Computer Hacking" Yet? hmm.. I thought it
was Common. I have a fleet of them anyway. They let you bleed anyone
as a direct action at +1. However, the normal bleeding that doesn't
require a card only works on your Prey.
--
Alex Feely
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I grow tired of continuous games and trivalities, torturous endeavors and
continued pain, I want the sky and I want to keep it for once.
af2e@andrew.cmu.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not unless you have a card I haven't seen yet. Under normal circumstances,
you only are allowed to bleed your prey, and only be bled by your predator.
(See pg 21 of the rulebook: You may attempt to bleed the player who is your
prey...)
"Telepathic Misdirection" - A minion bleeding you is now bleeding
a methuselah of your choice, other than that minion's methuselah.
You may be attempting to bleed your prey, but it doesn't mean that's
who you'll end up bleeding...
Sasquatch
===============================================================================
bigfoot@akeake.its.vuw.ac.nz "No Man can mimic the walk of the Sasquatch" -?
Campbell@real.life "...but if you can't then it doesn't matter anyway"-FNM
==I=N=S=E=R=T===S=U=B=L=I=M=I=N=A=L===M=E=S=S=A=G=E===H=E=R=E==================
Cerebus The Aardvark <kreme@netcom.com> wrote:
>Section 5: The edge is a symbol showing that your vampires have won you
>special influence in the game. Itt is given to players who successfully
>BLEED their prey.
>
>12.3.1: Whenever a minion successfully bleeds a methusalah, the controller
>of that minion gains control of the edge.
>
>So which is it? The rule quite clearly contradict each other...
Hm. I'm not sure how the entry in section 5 flat-out contradicts 12.3.1.
It could be clearer of course, but is it contradictory?... Probably
another dialect thing ;)
In any case, section 12.3.1 is correct/more complete.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Tom Wylie (aahz@hal.COM) wrote:
: Cerebus The Aardvark <kreme@netcom.com> wrote:
: >Section 5: The edge is a symbol showing that your vampires have won you
: >special influence in the game. Itt is given to players who successfully
: >BLEED their prey.
: >
: >12.3.1: Whenever a minion successfully bleeds a methusalah, the controller
: >of that minion gains control of the edge.
: >
: >So which is it? The rule quite clearly contradict each other...: Hm. I'm not sure how the entry in section 5 flat-out contradicts 12.3.1.
: It could be clearer of course, but is it contradictory?... Probably
: another dialect thing ;): In any case, section 12.3.1 is correct/more complete.
Does that mean that the person with the edge retains it until someone
eles successfuly "Bleeds" another person, or do they give it up after the
nextt turn?
Black <tara@dorsai.org> wrote:
>Does that mean that the person with the edge retains it until someone
>eles successfuly "Bleeds" another person, or do they give it up after the
>nextt turn?
Once you get the Edge, you hang onto it definitely, until someone else
gets it, or you have to spend it for a vote or to deal with threat
counters or what have you.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <342qgk$q7a@perv.hal.com>, Tom Wylie <aahz@hal.COM> wrote:
>Black <tara@dorsai.org> wrote:>>Does that mean that the person with the edge retains it until someone
>>eles successfuly "Bleeds" another person, or do they give it up after the
>>nextt turn?>
>Once you get the Edge, you hang onto it definitely, until someone else
>gets it, or you have to spend it for a vote or to deal with threat
>counters or what have you.
About threat counters...
WHEN can you give up The Edge to get rid of a threat counter? It's
not specified in the rules anywhere I've seen.
If you say "at any time", then the moment it's obvious a bleed is
going to be succesful, people will give it up. That's unfair -- the
person giving up The Edge was going to lose it *anyway*.
I'd like it to be:
1) When you first acquire the edge, you can immediately give it up,
2) When you first get a reason to give up the edge (eg. acquire a
threat counter), you can immediately give it up, and
3) At the end of your turn (during your discard phase) you can give it up.
What was the intent of the original authors?
--
Doug DeJulio
ddj+@pitt.edu
In article <kremeCvA70o.IvG@netcom.com> kreme@netcom.com (Cerebus The Aardvark) writes:
>solomon@cscns.com (Dennis Stalnaker) writes:
>>>Cerebus The Aardvark (kreme@netcom.com) wrote:
>>: aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:>>>: Section 5: The edge is a symbol showing that your vampires have won you
>>: special influence in the game. Itt is given to players who successfully
>>: BLEED their prey.
>>: 12.3.1: Whenever a minion successfully bleeds a methusalah, the controller
>>: of that minion gains control of the edge.
>>: So which is it? The rule quite clearly contradict each other. We've been
>>: playing only when you bleed your prey, which i think makes sense.
>>: Obviously an officail rules committee ruling is needed here since the
>>: current rules contradict each other.>>>What do you mean which is it? They say the same thing. Whenever one of
>>your minions bleed your prey, you gain the Edge. I don't understand where
>>the problem is...>
>One says your prey, the other (and Tom) says "a Methuselah" that would be
>ANY methusela, your predator, the guy 4 down the table, the guy in the next
>room 30 people away... whomever. BIG BIG Difference.
Are there cards that allow one of your minions to bleed another methuselah
other than your prey? I would assume so, otherwise there would be no
problem. I would also assume that the second ruling is the true one,
whenever a minion bleeds a methuselah, the controller of that minion gets
the edge. The edge represents success over the other players in the game,
though for the most part, I can see only getting it from bleeding your prey.
Chris
Doug Dejulio <ddj+@pitt.edu> wrote:
>WHEN can you give up The Edge to get rid of a threat counter? It's
>not specified in the rules anywhere I've seen.
>If you say "at any time", then the moment it's obvious a bleed is
>going to be succesful, people will give it up. That's unfair -- the
>person giving up The Edge was going to lose it *anyway*.
If they hang onto the Edge there are two situations:
1. That player only has one threat counter. Thus the threat and the
Edge offset each other in terms of the blood pool. Basically, the person
is hanging onto the Edge to get a vote at some point, and if they do
use it for a vote, then the threat won't have anything to offset its
loss, and they'll start losing pool again every turn. It does provide a
deterrent to being hit with more Sabbat Threats, though, since the
second one will be "useless".
2. That player has two threat counters, and thus will be losing pool
every turn. Again, the only benefit from hanging onto the edge is to
get a vote at some point, but in this case it's almost certainly a bad
idea to do so, since you're constantly losing blood in the meantime, and
will be back to losing it twice as fast once you do vote with the Edge.
IMHO, if they want to get a vote in exchange for long-term loss of
pool, they're welcome to it. I don't think is this particularly more
"fair" or "unfair" than using the Edge to make a Regaining the Upper
Hand vote fail ("if I can't have it, no one will!") Keeping the edge
rather than getting rid of threat counters just isn't buying them anything.
While I'll ask about this, I strongly suspect you're free to trade in
the Edge at any time.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Doug Dejulio <ddj+@pitt.edu> wrote:
>About threat counters...
>
>WHEN can you give up The Edge to get rid of a threat counter? It's
>not specified in the rules anywhere I've seen.
>
>If you say "at any time", then the moment it's obvious a bleed is
>going to be succesful, people will give it up. That's unfair -- the
>person giving up The Edge was going to lose it *anyway*.
Umm, Doug, I believe Tom was refering to a card called "Sabbat Threat." It's
a political action that gives players "Threat Counters." Every turn you
have a threat counter on you, you lose a blood from your pool. Should
this action be taken (and not blocked) and the vote passes, the only
remaining way to lose the counter it may create is to give up the Edge.
Threat counters have nothing to do with being bleed. (While it is a threat,
and you would like to counter it, it's not quite the same.) Yet another
victim the the brilliantly (sic) written rules. Still, if you can
conprehend the rules (requiring a PhD in Astrophysics) the game is fun.
-- Alan De Smet
chaos@yar.cs.wisc.edu
Mostly (But not entirely) Harmless
Kirby Krueger writes
KK:Not unless you have a card I haven't seen yet. Under normal
:circumstances, you only are allowed to bleed your prey, and
:only be bled by your predator. (See pg 21 of the rulebook: You may
:attempt to bleed the player who is your prey...)
:
I wrote to questions, and they came back with the following response.
Plus, the new rules supplement confirms this:
I wrote
BRM:5. Legal Manipulations / Govern the Unaligned / any card that
:says "(D): Bleed at +x": I claim that it is still a bleed action,
:and therefore can only be directed toward your prey, but others
:have claimed that it can be directed toward any Methuselah,
:since it has the (D).
:
question@fungusaur.wizards.com wrote
***: The others are correct. Because it has the (D) symbol, you can
:actually bleed people who aren't your prey.
:
--
Michael Schmahl (Black-Robe Mage) WWIVnet: 1@10405 (Oblivion)
Internet: fxmgs @acad3.alaska.edu, or fsmgs @camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu
Kirby Krueger writes
:Not unless you have a card I haven't seen yet. Under normal
:circumstances, you only are allowed to bleed your prey, and
:only be bled by your predator. (See pg 21 of the rulebook: You may
:attempt to bleed the player who is your prey...)
:
Night Moves: (std) Bleed you prey or your predator at +3 stealth. If
bleed ends up at more than one, ignore the excess. (sup) Bleed your
prey or your predator at +6 stealth. If bleed ends up at more than one,
ignore the excess.
--
Michael Schmahl (Black-Robe Mage) WWIVnet: 1@10405 (Oblivion)
Internet: fxmgs @acad3.alaska.edu, or fsmgs @camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu
In article <345nbm$6cu@perv.hal.com>, Tom Wylie <aahz@hal.COM> wrote:
>Doug Dejulio <ddj+@pitt.edu> wrote:
>1. That player only has one threat counter. Thus the threat and the
>Edge offset each other in terms of the blood pool. Basically, the person
>is hanging onto the Edge to get a vote at some point[....]
There's a Vampire that will take The Edge as an action, but only if
it's uncontrolled. If someone is holding on to The Edge, that Vampire
can't take it.
>IMHO, if they want to get a vote in exchange for long-term loss of
>pool, they're welcome to it. I don't think is this particularly more
>"fair" or "unfair" than using the Edge to make a Regaining the Upper
>Hand vote fail ("if I can't have it, no one will!") Keeping the edge
>rather than getting rid of threat counters just isn't buying them anything.
>While I'll ask about this, I strongly suspect you're free to trade in
>the Edge at any time.
Threat counters aren't the only thing that work this way. I think
"Tragic Love Affair" can be burned by giving up The Edge. You'll have
the situation of someone who is keeping The Edge to gain blood, but
decides when someone else takes it, "if I'm going to lose it anyway, I
may as well get rid of the Tragic Love Affair".
--
Doug DeJulio
ddj+@pitt.edu
In article <346bcc$3g1@spool.cs.wisc.edu>,
Mostly Harmless [Alan De Smet] <chaos@picard.cs.wisc.edu> wrote:
>Doug Dejulio <ddj+@pitt.edu> wrote:>>About threat counters...
>>
>>WHEN can you give up The Edge to get rid of a threat counter? It's
>>not specified in the rules anywhere I've seen.
>>
>>If you say "at any time", then the moment it's obvious a bleed is
>>going to be succesful, people will give it up. That's unfair -- the
>>person giving up The Edge was going to lose it *anyway*.>
>Umm, Doug, I believe Tom was refering to a card called "Sabbat Threat." It's
>a political action that gives players "Threat Counters." Every turn you
>have a threat counter on you, you lose a blood from your pool. Should
>this action be taken (and not blocked) and the vote passes, the only
>remaining way to lose the counter it may create is to give up the Edge.
>Threat counters have nothing to do with being bleed. (While it is a threat,
>and you would like to counter it, it's not quite the same.) Yet another
>victim the the brilliantly (sic) written rules. Still, if you can
>conprehend the rules (requiring a PhD in Astrophysics) the game is fun.
I understand what Tom was talking about exactly. You didn't
understand me. Let me be more explicit.
We were playing a multiplayer game. A Sabbat Threat vote passed.
Player "Moe" got a threat counter. Plater "Moe" also had The Edge.
He held on to it.
Later, player "Larry" had his turn. Player "Larry" decided to bleed
player "Curly". "Curly" tried to block, and "Larry" played a +stealth
action modifier. Now, if "Larry" succeeds in bleeding "Curly",
"Larry" will get The Edge and "Moe" won't have it any more. So, AT
THIS TIME, "Moe" decided to give up The Edge to destroy a threat
counter.
Do you see what I mean?
--
Doug DeJulio
ddj+@pitt.edu
fsmgs@camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu (Michael "Black-Robe Mage" Schmahl) writes:
>BRM:5. Legal Manipulations / Govern the Unaligned / any card that
> :says "(D): Bleed at +x": I claim that it is still a bleed action,
> :and therefore can only be directed toward your prey, but others
> :have claimed that it can be directed toward any Methuselah,
> :since it has the (D).
> :
>
>question@fungusaur.wizards.com wrote
>***: The others are correct. Because it has the (D) symbol, you can
> :actually bleed people who aren't your prey.
This is rather weird. Why, then would Night Moves have to state "bleed your
predator or prey", since it's already a (D) card?
Wish they'd post these revised rules, as the current set is rather explicit.
A (D) action is simply one which only the affected Methusalah's minions can
block. It doesn't give one some special power to "direct" the action at some
target one normally can't. And one can only do a bleed at one's prey.
Alec
--
Alec Habig, Indiana University High Energy Astrophysics
ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu
http://astrowww.astro.indiana.edu/personnel/ahabig/
Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns.
MS == fsmgs@camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu (Michael "Black-Robe Mage" Schmahl)
AH == Alec Habig <ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu>
MS> The others are correct. Because it has the (D) symbol, you can actually
MS> bleed people who aren't your prey.
AH> This is rather weird. Why, then would Night Moves have to state "bleed
AH> your predator or prey", since it's already a (D) card?
In a >3-player game, there's a lot of difference between "any Methuselah"
and "your predator or prey". The {D} would normally let you bleed any
Methuselah, but the card narrows that to "only your predator or prey".
-------------------------------------------++-------------------------------
Josh Smith, Certified Evil Genius || Pleasure: irilyth@hmc.edu
Harvey Mudd College, Claremont CA USA |+-------------------------------
http://www.hmc.edu/~irilyth/homepage.html || Business: josh@hmc.edu
-------------------------------------------++-------------------------------
Alec Habig <ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu> wrote:
>>***: The others are correct. Because it has the (D) symbol, you can
>> :actually bleed people who aren't your prey. >This is rather weird. Why, then would Night Moves have to state "bleed your
>predator or prey", since it's already a (D) card?
To restrict its effect. Normally you could bleed *anyone* with a <D> card;
Night Moves is limiting that to two other players. Basically a game balance
decision.
>Wish they'd post these revised rules, as the current set is rather explicit.
>A (D) action is simply one which only the affected Methusalah's minions can
>block. It doesn't give one some special power to "direct" the action at some
>target one normally can't. And one can only do a bleed at one's prey.
Well, actually, <D> bleeds such as Computer Hacking do allow you to bleed
anyone you want. The rules for directed actions override the rules about
who you can bleed.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Before I could do anything to stop it, Tom Wylie wrote:
> Well, actually, <D> bleeds such as Computer Hacking do allow you to bleed
> anyone you want. The rules for directed actions override the rules about
> who you can bleed.
This doesn't read right to me. I just got my updated rules in the mail,
and in section 13.3.1 (Who May Block Whom), when it describes Directed
Actions, it says:
"The only directed actions that do not require a card are bleeding and
encountering another Methuselah's vampire in torpor."
By your interpretation, since Bleeding is a (D) action, I should be able
to Bleed anyone I want. Fact is, I can't - I can *only* bleed my prey.
Computer Hacking says "(D) Bleed at +1." This just sounds like a bonus on
your Bleed, which is normally at +0. Night Moves is more specific as it
says "(D) Bleed your predator or prey at +3 stealth." Clearly this is a
rules override. Govern the Unaligned and Legal Manipulation also allow
(D) Bleed actions. Now I can bleed anyone I want? These look like
modifiers to the normal Bleed action.
I also have one card (can't find it right now - perhaps someone can fill in
the blanks for me) the specifically says you can Bleed any Methuselah in
the game. What's the point of this text if a (D) action lets you bleed
anyone you want anyway?
Maybe this is covered in one of the Random Rulings (I haven't been able to
stay up to date on those), but it seems odd to me. Bleed is Bleed and
affects your prey unless a card says you can bleed another Methuselah.
Otherwise, enough of these cards and we get the kind of free-for-all
Richard Garfield was trying to avoid with the predator/prey relationship.
--
There be that can pack the cards and yet cannot play | a-Henh!
well; so there are some that are good in canvasses and | Brian Wilson
factions, that are otherwise weak men. |
Francis Bacon |
Brian Wilson <bwilson@gate.net> wrote:
>> Well, actually, <D> bleeds such as Computer Hacking do allow you to bleed
>> anyone you want. The rules for directed actions override the rules about
>> who you can bleed.>This doesn't read right to me. I just got my updated rules in the mail,
>and in section 13.3.1 (Who May Block Whom), when it describes Directed
>Actions, it says:
>"The only directed actions that do not require a card are bleeding and
>encountering another Methuselah's vampire in torpor."
If you bleed sans a card, then you can only bleed your prey, and that
action is direction. If you're using an action card to bleed, then the
rules for directed actions take precedence, and you can bleed anyone
you want (unless the card constrains you somehow). Specifically, you
*can* use Computer Hacking to bleed anyone you want, because the rules
for directed action take precedence. You can only use Night Moves to
bleed your predator or prey, since the card text takes precedence.
>I also have one card (can't find it right now - perhaps someone can fill in
>the blanks for me) the specifically says you can Bleed any Methuselah in
>the game. What's the point of this text if a (D) action lets you bleed
>anyone you want anyway?
Cat Burglary is a little redundant, yes.
>Otherwise, enough of these cards and we get the kind of free-for-all
>Richard Garfield was trying to avoid with the predator/prey relationship.
Well, the final decision that you can use Computer Hacking and such to
bleed anyone you want come out of a meeting at which Richard was
in attendance.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Before I could do anything to stop it, Tom Wylie wrote:
> If you bleed sans a card, then you can only bleed your prey, and that
> action is direction. If you're using an action card to bleed, then the
> rules for directed actions take precedence, and you can bleed anyone
> you want (unless the card constrains you somehow). Specifically, you
> *can* use Computer Hacking to bleed anyone you want, because the rules
> for directed action take precedence. You can only use Night Moves to
> bleed your predator or prey, since the card text takes precedence.
I got my revised rules in the mail and read the section on "Whom do you
bleed?" Everything is clear now. I thought someone had made an arbitrary
ruling after the rules were printed, but I was wrong.
--
There be that can pack the cards and yet cannot play | a-Henh!
well; so there are some that are good in canvasses and | Brian Wilson
factions, that are otherwise weak men. |
Francis Bacon |