eternal vigilance - NPR?

Can you multirush wtih Eternal Vigilance or Imperial decree (assuming rushing different vampires)? Or does it follow the no repeat action rule?

[ quoted text not captured ] EV allows a block attempt, not a rush. Imperial Decree is a card in play, so is restricted. http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/rulebook/rulebook.html#sec6_1_6

On May 8, 9:26 am, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Can you multirush wtih Eternal Vigilance or Imperial decree (assuming > rushing different vampires)? Or does it follow the no repeat action > rule? I assume you mean Covenant of Blood (the Non-Camrilla version). Each copy of Covenant of Blood/Imperial Decree creates it's own action so you could potentially place two copies of Covenant of Blood into play and use EACH copy to generate its own rush action for multi- rushing.

[ quoted text not captured ] I think the intended question is a bit more complex. I'd assume the following is meant: I have one copy of Covenant of Blood in play. I have a vampire that can use the action provided by covenant of blood and this action has 2 distinct targets. After taking an action per Covenant of Blood to rush my first target, I untap. Is is legal to now use the same Covenant of Blood to rush my second target, assuming said target is still around? ----- Covenant cardtext: Requires a ready Non-Camarilla vampire with a capacity above 7. Put this card in play. Any non-Camarilla vampire may enter combat with any Camarilla vampire controlled by another Methuselah as a (D) action. Any vampire may burn this card as a (D) action; Camarilla vampires get -1 stealth when attempting that action. ----- Relevant rulebook text: (6.1.6) "A minion cannot perform an action with the same action card or via the same card in play (including from the minion's own card text) more than once each turn, even if he untaps" ----- So: the answer is no. You cannot rush two different targets through the action provided by a single card in play, regardless of target. The quoted text in the rulebook doesn't even take into account wether a different target makes an action distinct from the same action with another target. The reason why he cannot take these two actions is because they would provided by a single card in play. Cheers, Bram

On May 8, 9:55 am, Bram Vink <jja.v...@hccnet.nl> wrote: > On May 8, 4:32 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote: > > > On May 8, 9:26 am, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > Can you multirush wtih Eternal Vigilance or Imperial decree (assuming > > > rushing different vampires)? Or does it follow the no repeat action > > > rule? > > > I assume you mean Covenant of Blood (the Non-Camrilla version). > > > Each copy of Covenant of Blood/Imperial Decree creates it's own action > > so you could potentially place two copies of Covenant of Blood into > > play and use EACH copy to generate its own rush action for multi- > > rushing. > > I think the intended question is a bit more complex. > I'd assume the following is meant: <snip your baseless assumption which LSJ already covered> He asked if it was possible, and it is possible. You can multirush with Covenant of Blood/Imperial Decree but each rush must be supplied by it own distinct copy of Covenant of Blood/Imperial Decree that is in play. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr XZealot Archon of the Swamp

On May 8, 5:08 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote: > On May 8, 9:55 am, Bram Vink <jja.v...@hccnet.nl> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 8, 4:32 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote: > > > > On May 8, 9:26 am, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > Can you multirush wtih Eternal Vigilance or Imperial decree (assuming > > > > rushing different vampires)? Or does it follow the no repeat action > > > > rule? > > > > I assume you mean Covenant of Blood (the Non-Camrilla version). > > > > Each copy of Covenant of Blood/Imperial Decree creates it's own action > > > so you could potentially place two copies of Covenant of Blood into > > > play and use EACH copy to generate its own rush action for multi- > > > rushing. > > > I think the intended question is a bit more complex. > > I'd assume the following is meant: > > <snip your baseless assumption which LSJ already covered> Sigh. I should just flame you but really I can't bring up the energy. I'm going to settle for slightly sarcastic. I suggest you look up the usage of the word 'or' before you make baseless comments. In common use this word is exclusive. Yes, LSJ covered it. I thought it might require clarification both for you and for him. Obviously it did. > He asked if it was possible, and it is possible. > > You can multirush with Covenant of Blood/Imperial Decree but each rush > must be supplied by it own distinct copy of Covenant of Blood/Imperial > Decree that is in play. Which points to the exact answer on his question being 'no, it follows the rules'. Cheers, Bram

[ quoted text not captured ] Your English gets worse and worse. There are two distinct questions which are phrased in a manner to assume mutual exclusivity of the answers, but in fact, the answers are not mutually exclusive. There is a condition that can be met where both of the answers are yes. "Can you multirush wtih Eternal Vigilance or Imperial decree (assuming rushing different vampires)? " "Or does it follow the no repeat action rule?" The answer is yes you can multirush with imperial Decree (provided there are multiple copies in play). and yes it does follow the no repeat action. [ quoted text not captured ]

oh boy, almost as good as reyda vs. david cherryholmes. i really missed it, go on :)

On May 8, 12:20 pm, Johannes Walch <johannes.wa...@vekn.de> wrote: > oh boy, almost as good as reyda vs. david cherryholmes. > i really missed it, go on :) The first one to say "butnugget" wins. ;)

[ quoted text not captured ] Hey, he didn't say your name three times, you aren't supposed to appear yet... -John Flournoy

[ quoted text not captured ] But the candyman can..

Now the movie's turned into a play...... still good though. :P --> J grail_pbem "at" hotmail.com