LSJ (Q) - New RTR

R. David Zopf wrote: > LSJ, > Please offer a quick clarification on Form of Mist according to the > new ruling. > > Form of Mist: > New card text: > "Superior: Strike: Combat Ends. If this vampire is the acting > vampire, this > vampire gets +1 stealth (and this card counts as an action modifier) > and the > action continues as if unblocked." > > RDZ's nefarious Scenario: > Vamp A bleeds, is blocked, plays sup. FoM, and is blocked again... > > Since FoM "card counts as an action modifier," would a player be > prohibited from choosing to play a Form of Mist in the second combat? > Or would the FoM strike be playable with the "action continues" text > nullified? Or is there some other resolution I'm missing? (Note to > all, I like the fact that this is being limited, I just want to know > more about exactly how much is being limited...) As an action modifier it would not be playable in a second combat since it has already been played once during the current action. -- Robert Goudie rrgo...@earthlink.net http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net

LSJ, Please offer a quick clarification on Form of Mist according to the new ruling. Form of Mist: New card text: "Superior: Strike: Combat Ends. If this vampire is the acting vampire, this vampire gets +1 stealth (and this card counts as an action modifier) and the action continues as if unblocked." RDZ's nefarious Scenario: Vamp A bleeds, is blocked, plays sup. FoM, and is blocked again... Since FoM "card counts as an action modifier," would a player be prohibited from choosing to play a Form of Mist in the second combat? Or would the FoM strike be playable with the "action continues" text nullified? Or is there some other resolution I'm missing? (Note to all, I like the fact that this is being limited, I just want to know more about exactly how much is being limited...) Regards, R. David Zopf guenh...@mindspring.com Atom Weaver

Robert Goudie <rrgo...@earthlink.net> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] > As an action modifier it would not be playable in a second combat since it has > already been played once during the current action. Correct. Note that the vamp could play it at inferior (to Dodge), since the inferior is not an action modifier. -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Searchable database of official card text, errata, and rulings: http://deckserver.net/cgi-deckserver/rulemonger.cgi/powersearch -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading