[LSJ] Direct Intervention again...

So I was reading a recent discussion on DI, and saw that if, say, I'm using a Conditioning, and it get's DI'ed, while I can't play a new Conditioning (due to the action modifier rules), I can play, say, a Threats, 'cause the text that prevents that from happening (on Conditioning) didn't actually come into play due to the DI. By virtue of this, if I play an Immortal Grapple, and it gets DI'ed, can I play another Immortal Grapple, as the only thing that prevents the play of multiple IGs in a round is the text on IG? I seem to remember that you couldn't do this. Am I confused? Peter D Bakija PD...@bigplanet.com http://www.myplanet.net/pdb6 "she tore down Paris on the tail of Thom Paine but the left wing's broken and the right's insane" -Bowie

"Peter D Bakija" <PD...@bigplanet.com> wrote in message news:BA81955C.C8AD%PD...@bigplanet.com... > So I was reading a recent discussion on DI, and saw that if, say, I'm using > a Conditioning, and it get's DI'ed, while I can't play a new Conditioning > (due to the action modifier rules), I can play, say, a Threats, 'cause the > text that prevents that from happening (on Conditioning) didn't actually > come into play due to the DI. > > By virtue of this, if I play an Immortal Grapple, and it gets DI'ed, can I > play another Immortal Grapple, as the only thing that prevents the play of > multiple IGs in a round is the text on IG? > > I seem to remember that you couldn't do this. You can't. > Am I confused? Of course you are. DI doesn't work the same for everything, even though it should. This is one of those counter-intuative things you just have to memorize. The *effect* (via card text) of *playing* bleed modifier X is that "you can't play another action modifier to further increase the bleed for this action"[a], and that *effect* (via card text) is cancelled by the DI. The rules state that a minion can't *play* the SAME action modifier more than once during a single action[b], and since DI didn't cancel the rules, just the effect (via card text) of playing bleed modifier X, you CAN play another[!a] but DIFFERENT[b] bleed modifier during the action. You could also say that the *effect* (via card text) of *playing* IG is that "a vampire may play only one IG each round"[c], and that *effect* (via card text) is cancelled by the DI. The rules do not state that a minion can't play the same combat card more than once during a single action, therefore you can[d], and since DI didn't cancel the rules, just the effect (via card text) of playing IG, you can play ANOTHER IG[!c] combat card[d] during the action. Except you can't. :P LSJ, explain it to me again. I'm Dum(TM). > Peter D Bakija > PD...@bigplanet.com > http://www.myplanet.net/pdb6 Kevin M., Prince of Henderson, NV (USA) "Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier

>So I was reading a recent discussion on DI, and saw that if, say, I'm using >a Conditioning, and it get's DI'ed, while I can't play a new Conditioning >(due to the action modifier rules), I can play, say, a Threats, 'cause the >text that prevents that from happening (on Conditioning) didn't actually >come into play due to the DI. > >By virtue of this, if I play an Immortal Grapple, and it gets DI'ed, can I >play another Immortal Grapple, as the only thing that prevents the play of >multiple IGs in a round is the text on IG? I'm sure Kevin put it more elegantly but when a card like Immortal Grapple or Ancient Influence is DI'ed, the entire effect of that card is cancelled (even though it still counts as being played). Thus it is the card text of all subsequent copies that prevent the card from being played. The Immortal Grapple that was first played states that "A vampire may play only one Immortal Grapple each round." but that part was cancelled by the DI. However, the other copy of IG in your hand still says the same thing and that prevents you from playing the other one. The wording for Threats/Conditioning/Bonding is different however. If it said something like "you can only play one action modifier to increase the bleed per action" then it would function like the IG situation above. However, since the wording is different, when you play a Conditioning, the restriction is cancelled by the DI and the wording on the Threats card does not prohibit you from playing it. Another good example is comparing it to playing Elder Intervention / Pack Tactics. If you play Elder Intervention and it is cancelled the entire effect is cancelled. You can't play another Elder Intervention due to the action modifier rules but you also can't play Pack Tactics because the card text of Pack Tactics prevents it from being played. Hope that helps. Halcyan 2

In message <2CX6a.9609$Nf.2...@news1.west.cox.net>, Kevin M. <you...@imaspammer.org> writes: >Of course you are. DI doesn't work the same for everything, even though >it should. This is one of those counter-intuative things you just have >to memorize. No, Direct Intervention works the same for everything (with a couple of extra bits on top for retrieving cost). However, different cards work differently *in the first place*. There is a RULE in the game that says "You may not play the same action modifier twice in the same action with the same minion." Direct Intervention cancels the effect of the card, not the fact that it was *ever played*. So, you play Threats. It gets DI-ed. *But you still played Threats*. So you cannot play another Threats. The *entire text* of Threats is cancelled. So there is nothing prohibiting you from playing another bleed modifier from the Threats card text. (But you cannot play Threats again, due to the same action modifier.) You wanted to play Threats, but it was DI-ed. So you play Conditioning. Conditioning's card text: "After playing this card, you cannot play another action modifier to further increase the bleed for this action." *AFTER PLAYING THIS CARD*. Conditioning does not look at *previously* played cards. And there has been no *previous* card text to stop Conditioning being played. (Threats' card text was cancelled.) Next type of card: Immortal Grapple. There is no rule that says "Two copies of the same combat card cannot be played during the same combat." For instance, you can play Flash twice in the same combat, or the same round of combat. (For instance, to maneuver away to long range twice, with a maneuver to close range in between, or a maneuver and a press, both at inferior.) So, you play Immortal Grapple. It gets DI-ed. There is nothing *in terms of the rules* that prevents you playing another Immortal Grapple. HOWEVER, card text says: " A vampire may play only 1 Immortal Grapple each round." This is *VERY* different to Threats and Conditioning etc. They refer to bleed modifiers played *afterwards*. Immortal Grapple refers to Immortal Grapple in the *entire round*. Just as with Threats, Immortal Grapple was played, but its text was cancelled. Immortal Grapple was still played, however. The card text *on the second Immortal Grapple* says "Only one can be played". Since playing it would automatically break this card text (it would see that *2* had been played), you cannot play it. Direct Intervention still works the same. Immortal Grapple was still played and had no effect. *But the second copy of Immortal Grapple's card text prevents it being played the second time round, because it looks at the whole round.* This is not the same card text as Threats or Bonding. (Threats or Bonding etc. saying "Only one action modifier per action" would mean they couldn't be played with DOM Command of the Beast, rendering it largely useless, because they would look retroactively at the action, even though the lack of card text exploits the fact that the only things that prevent a bleed modifier being played are the repeat- action-modifier rule AND the fact that the bleed modifiers only restrict *later* bleed modifiers, not *earlier* ones.) Next type of card: Action. There is a rule which refers to repeating actions - either by it being a *bleed* or a *political action* or a *named card*. However, this only kicks in *when the action resolves*. With Direct Intervention, you stop the card *as it is played*, so the action never even *starts*. Direct Intervention goes in the gap before the action is even announced. (So you play DI before you play, say, Seduction.) So, I play Govern the Unaligned. I get DI-ed. There is no rule that says I cannot take another bleed action (because it never resolved) or play GtU again (because it never resolved). "The taint is applied to the minion who is the acting minion when the action resolves (successfully, blocked, ended, or otherwise)." [LSJ 20021217] 'Right. The NRA rule doesn't care about action cards "played". It cares about actions performed. If the action never happens, it isn't performed.' [LSJ 20011005] (And the NRA rule works in the same respect as the new TCE rule.) Any others? -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 Hi! I'm Nancy Drew! You must be the Hardy Boys! 13D7E668C3695D623D5D

James Coupe wrote: (snip great explanation) > Any others? don't get too cocky ;)

Kevin M. wrote: > DI doesn't work the same for everything, even though it should. DI "works" the same for everything. DI cancels the effect of the card as it is played. DI doesn't erase the fact that the card was played. See James Coupe's extended restatement of the rulings that have been made based on this "the same for everything"ness. > This is one of those counter-intuative things you just have > to memorize. If you choose not to observe the details of the rules and card text, many things may seem counter-intuitive and relegated to rote memorization, yes. > The *effect* (via card text) of *playing* bleed modifier X is that "you > can't play another action modifier to further increase the bleed for > this action"[a], and that *effect* (via card text) is cancelled by the > DI. The rules state that a minion can't *play* the SAME action modifier > more than once during a single action[b], and since DI didn't cancel the > rules, just the effect (via card text) of playing bleed modifier X, you > CAN play another[!a] but DIFFERENT[b] bleed modifier during the action. Correct. > You could also say that the *effect* (via card text) of *playing* IG is > that "a vampire may play only one IG each round"[c], and that *effect* > (via card text) is cancelled by the DI. The rules do not state that a > minion can't play the same combat card more than once during a single > action, therefore you can[d], and since DI didn't cancel the rules, just > the effect (via card text) of playing IG, you can play ANOTHER IG[!c] > combat card[d] during the action. Except you can't. :P > > LSJ, explain it to me again. I'm Dum(TM). Card text on the second IG that you wish to play prohibits you from playing it (since the first was played, as you note). (The effect of the second card, [b] or the #2IG, was not canceled by the DI that canceled the first card.) Card text on the uncanceled IG: "A vampire may play only 1 Immortal Grapple each round." -- 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/