Gehenna Rules Questions for LSJ!

Based off of the cards I saw at the pre-release and the spoilers on the newsgroup/forum, I have a few questions regarding some of the new Gehenna cards. Please forgive me if card text or spoilers turn out to be wrong! =P #1. On the White Wolf forum, it was stated that for Alastor, "If this referendum is successful, search your library for an equipment card and place this card and the equipment on the chosen vampire. Pay half the cost (round down) of the equipment." A. Since you are placing the equipment (and not equipping), does this mean that you do not have to meet the appropriate requirements? B. Thus Igo can get the Femur of Toomler, Smudge can get the Ankara Citadel, Sandra can get the Chalice of Kinship, and Antoinette can get an Inscription (if so, what level is it)? C. Also, if the cost is a blood cost, does the Alastor or the vampire who called the Alastor pay for it? D. If the Alastor is Black Cat, does her special further help reduce the cost? #2. Does Centralized Background Check increase the cost of pool that needs to be paid for Peace Treaty? Based on the previous ruling for Black Cat and Peace Treaty, I'd say that it would. Thus if Hugo had a .44 Magnum, you would need to pay 3 pool, if Black Cat had a Deer Rifle you'd have to pay 2 pool, and if Koko had a Zip Gun or Weighted Walking Stick, you'd have to pay 1 pool. Correct? #3. Descent into Darkness says "Turn the acting vampire and any cards on him or her face down, out of play (breaking any temporary control effects)." So just to make sure, if I Tempted my prey's Guido and have him Descent into Darkness, my prey gains control of Guido (and hence the Descent), correct? #4. A. The Order of St. Blaise refers to adding counters to a location you control. Are counters synonymous with blood/pool? For example, Powerbase: Madrid explicitly uses the term counters, Tomb uses the term blood counters, but Alamut, Powerbase: Chicago, and Pere Lachaise all use the term blood. B. Assuming the above is true, can you use the Order on Inveraray, Scotland if it already has 3 blood? I'd say no, since it states "no more than 3 blood may be put on this card." C. Since Powerbase: Madrid has no specific limitation, are you able to use the Order to make it so that PB: Madrid has 66 counters? (And thus can grant 66 additional votes). #5. A. To make sure, Leadership Vacuum counts the total number of votes the vampire has, not just the number of votes the title grants, right? So for Jaroslav with a Legendary Vampire, X = 5. For Angelica who got 20 additional votes via Political Struggles, X = 23. For Genevieve, X = 1. For a Baron with a Firebrand, X = 3. For Carna, X = 0 when a Beyond Approach is in play? Correct? B. And on the flipside, conditional votes don't count? So Sundown, the extra vote from the right clan for a Barony, Paragon, and Aura of Invincibility don't count? #6. A few specific questions on how Poison Pill interacts with other cards. A. How about Poison Pill + Ancient Influence? My predator calls Ancient Influence, he chooses Arika, I choose Sutekh. Even though I have a net gain, I'm still "losing pool." Thus the net effect would be that I gain 6 (11 - 5) and he gains 1 (11 - 5 - 5), correct? B. How about indirect means of pool loss? Say, Sabbat Threat for example. C. Just to make sure, there is no such thing as negative pool loss, right? So giving pool is not the same as negative pool loss, and thus Poison Pill we never give players pool, right? (This might be significant since other languages have different conventions, and even not all English speakers are that proficient in English!). #7. Questions regarding The Diamond Thunderbolt. Newsgroup spoiler card text is: The diamond Thunderbolt. Master. 0 cost. Master: out-of-turn. Only usable when control of a vampire you control is about to change or a vampire you control is about to enter combat. Control of that vampire does not change, and that vampire gains 1 blood. A. How does this interact with Hostile Takeover and Temptation of Greater Power? Is there no opportunity to play Diamond Thunderbolt? Is the control change cancelled and the bid not paid? Or is the control change cancelled, but the bid is still paid (and thus that player gains pool but doesn't lose a minion). The last scenario would pretty much wallpaper HT and ToGP methinks. B. How does this work with temporary control effects? Is losing control of a minion (because a temporary control effect has ended) considered "control is about to change"? a. For example, it's my predator's turn. After he's done with his actions, I take control of my prey's minion with Spirit Marionette. I then take another action (either bleed if that critter is a Malkavian or do something else with my other Malkavians). I then lose control of that minion and control changes. What happens if I play Diamond Thunderbolt? Do I keep the minion forever? Or until the *next* action? b. Previously you [LSJ] had ruled that for Parmendies, "He comes back at the point your untap phase begins (just as you're about to untap all your cards)." Since the loss of control isn't during the predator's turn, what happens if the predator plays Diamond Thunderbolt so he doesn't have to return Parmenides? c. Ridiculous scenario but, during some other player's turn, you have a Malkavian using the Madness Network to play Chain of Command to bring out Parmenides. Can you use Diamond Thunderbolt to counter his drawback and keep him? C. If control is changed via the burning of counters and Diamond Thunderbolt is played, the counters remain burnt, right? So if someone burns 3 counters off of Temptation to steal Milo and Diamond is played, the counters are gone. Or if there are 10 corruption counters on Arika and Lalitha plays one final Corruption and Diamond is played, all the corruption counters are gone? #8. A. If Chain of Command is played to bring out a single vampire (with 1 blood) and you then Heidelburg the blood off, the Chained vampire is stuck, right? (must hunt and must bleed so can't do anything). Assuming that he remains in this state, does he stay in play indefinitely then? B. Similarly, if you Chain of Command 4 Aabt Kindred's into play and you never bring out Nefertiti, these little critters stay around, correct? (Though they can't take any actions, even undirected, now). C. What happens if permanent control of a Chained vampire changes before the Chain effect happens? Does he still go to the bottom of the crypt? Does he go to the original player's or the current controller's crypt? And finally, not exactly a Gehenna question, but it came up at one of the "Gehenna" pre-releases: #1. Flaming Candle states "Only one Flaming Candle can be played in a game." Filchware's Pawn Shop states "Any minion may equip with any non-location equipment card in any Methuselah's ash heap as an undirected +1 stealth equip action (he or she must meet the requirements of the card, if any)." Is equipping with Filchware's Pawn Shop the same as playing the card? Thus can you use Filchware to equip with a Flaming Candle even after a Flaming Candle had previously been played? Ok, now that I've gotten all of those questions out of my system... Halcyan 2

Halcyan 2 wrote: > #1. On the White Wolf forum, it was stated that for Alastor, "If this > referendum is successful, search your library for an equipment card and place > this card and > the equipment on the chosen vampire. Pay half the cost (round down) > of the equipment." > > A. Since you are placing the equipment (and not equipping), does this mean that > you do not have to meet the appropriate requirements? Yes. > B. Thus Igo can get the Femur of Toomler, Smudge can get the Ankara Citadel, > Sandra can get the Chalice of Kinship, and Antoinette can get an Inscription > (if so, what level is it)? Igo, the Alastor? Yeah. What Level? C'mon, you know the answer to that: when a card enters play without a specified level, it is normal (non-superior). > C. Also, if the cost is a blood cost, does the Alastor or the vampire who > called the Alastor pay for it? The target Alastor pays. > D. If the Alastor is Black Cat, does her special further help reduce the cost? Yes. > #2. Does Centralized Background Check increase the cost of pool that needs to > be paid for Peace Treaty? Based on the previous ruling for Black Cat and Peace > Treaty, I'd say that it would. Thus if Hugo had a .44 Magnum, you would need to > pay 3 pool, if Black Cat had a Deer Rifle you'd have to pay 2 pool, and if Koko > had a Zip Gun or Weighted Walking Stick, you'd have to pay 1 pool. Correct? Yes. > #3. Descent into Darkness says "Turn the acting vampire and any cards on him or > her face down, out of play (breaking any temporary control effects)." So just > to make sure, if I Tempted my prey's Guido and have him Descent into Darkness, > my prey gains control of Guido (and hence the Descent), correct? Yes. > #4. A. The Order of St. Blaise refers to adding counters to a location you > control. Are counters synonymous with blood/pool? For example, Powerbase: > Madrid explicitly uses the term counters, Tomb uses the term blood counters, > but Alamut, Powerbase: Chicago, and Pere Lachaise all use the term blood. Yes. > B. Assuming the above is true, can you use the Order on Inveraray, Scotland if > it already has 3 blood? I'd say no, since it states "no more than 3 blood may > be put on this card." No (correct). > C. Since Powerbase: Madrid has no specific limitation, are you able to use the > Order to make it so that PB: Madrid has 66 counters? (And thus can grant 66 > additional votes). Yes. > #5. A. To make sure, Leadership Vacuum counts the total number of votes the > vampire has, not just the number of votes the title grants, right? So for > Jaroslav with a Legendary Vampire, X = 5. For Angelica who got 20 additional > votes via Political Struggles, X = 23. For Genevieve, X = 1. For a Baron with a > Firebrand, X = 3. For Carna, X = 0 when a Beyond Approach is in play? Correct? Yes. > B. And on the flipside, conditional votes don't count? So Sundown, the extra > vote from the right clan for a Barony, Paragon, and Aura of Invincibility don't > count? Correct. > #6. A few specific questions on how Poison Pill interacts with other cards. > > A. How about Poison Pill + Ancient Influence? My predator calls Ancient > Influence, he chooses Arika, I choose Sutekh. Even though I have a net gain, > I'm still "losing pool." Thus the net effect would be that I gain 6 (11 - 5) > and he gains 1 (11 - 5 - 5), correct? Yes. > B. How about indirect means of pool loss? Say, Sabbat Threat for example. No. > C. Just to make sure, there is no such thing as negative pool loss, right? So > giving pool is not the same as negative pool loss, and thus Poison Pill we > never give players pool, right? (This might be significant since other > languages have different conventions, and even not all English speakers are > that proficient in English!). Right. > #7. Questions regarding The Diamond Thunderbolt. Newsgroup spoiler card text > is: > > The diamond Thunderbolt. > Master. > 0 cost. > Master: out-of-turn. > Only usable when control of a vampire you control is about to > change or a vampire you control is about to enter combat. > Control of that vampire does not change, and that vampire gains > 1 blood. > > A. How does this interact with Hostile Takeover and Temptation of Greater > Power? Is there no opportunity to play Diamond Thunderbolt? Is the control There is opportunity, provided it is not your turn (which seems likely :-). > change cancelled and the bid not paid? Or is the control change cancelled, but > the bid is still paid (and thus that player gains pool but doesn't lose a > minion). The last scenario would pretty much wallpaper HT and ToGP methinks. The bid is still paid. > B. How does this work with temporary control effects? Is losing control of a > minion (because a temporary control effect has ended) considered "control is > about to > change"? Yes, but it wouldn't maintain the currently-ending temporary control effect. So the loss of control would still occur (again, after DT was resolved for the initial loss). > a. For example, it's my predator's turn. After he's done with his actions, I > take control of my prey's minion with Spirit Marionette. I then take another > action (either bleed if that critter is a Malkavian or do something else with > my other Malkavians). I then lose control of that minion and control changes. > What happens if I play Diamond Thunderbolt? Do I keep the minion forever? Or > until the *next* action? You play DT. Control doesn't change. Then you note that SM's control effect hasp expired (still) and give the minion back. > b. Previously you [LSJ] had ruled that for Parmendies, "He comes back at the > point your untap phase begins (just as you're about to untap all your cards)." > Since the loss of control isn't during the predator's turn, what happens if the > predator plays Diamond Thunderbolt so he doesn't have to return Parmenides? The same as above - the temporary control effect has expired. > c. Ridiculous scenario but, during some other player's turn, you have a > Malkavian using the Madness Network to play Chain of Command to bring out > Parmenides. Can you use Diamond Thunderbolt to counter his drawback and keep > him? Sure. > C. If control is changed via the burning of counters and Diamond Thunderbolt is > played, the counters remain burnt, right? So if someone burns 3 counters off of > Temptation to steal Milo and Diamond is played, the counters are gone. Or if > there are 10 corruption counters on Arika and Lalitha plays one final > Corruption and Diamond is played, all the corruption counters are gone? They are still burnt, yes. > #8. A. If Chain of Command is played to bring out a single vampire (with 1 > blood) and you then Heidelburg the blood off, the Chained vampire is stuck, > right? (must hunt and must bleed so can't do anything). Assuming that he > remains in this state, does he stay in play indefinitely then? No. Chain of Command's card text handles this: "when all that can bleed have". > B. Similarly, if you Chain of Command 4 Aabt Kindred's into play and you never > bring out Nefertiti, these little critters stay around, correct? (Though they > can't take any actions, even undirected, now). No, as above. > C. What happens if permanent control of a Chained vampire changes before the > Chain effect happens? Does he still go to the bottom of the crypt? Does he go > to the original player's or the current controller's crypt? He goes to the crypt. All vampires that go to crypt go to their owners' crypts. > And finally, not exactly a Gehenna question, but it came up at one of the > "Gehenna" pre-releases: > > #1. Flaming Candle states "Only one Flaming Candle can be played in a game." > Filchware's Pawn Shop states "Any minion may equip with any non-location > equipment card in any Methuselah's ash heap as an undirected +1 stealth equip > action (he or she must meet the requirements of the card, if any)." > > Is equipping with Filchware's Pawn Shop the same as playing the card? Thus can > you use Filchware to equip with a Flaming Candle even after a Flaming Candle > had previously been played? Yes. -- 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/

lots of snipping.... > > C. Since Powerbase: Madrid has no specific limitation, are you able to use the > Order to make it so that PB: Madrid has 66 counters? (And thus can grant 66 > additional votes). So does this mean that if I use Into the Fire on a Ventrue, then use a Crusade on him to make him a titled Sabbat Ventrue, he can benefit from Powerbase Madrid right? Even from a bloated, 66-vote giving Powerbase: Madrid? :) Then all I have to to is tap it to insta-oust someone duing a referendum in which I used Elder Kindred Network! :D Daniel.

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:40A9E4C1...@white-wolf.com... > Halcyan 2 wrote: > > #1. On the White Wolf forum, it was stated that for Alastor, "If this > > referendum is successful, search your library for an equipment card and place > > this card and > > the equipment on the chosen vampire. Pay half the cost (round down) > > of the equipment." > > B. Thus Igo can get the Femur of Toomler, Smudge can get the Ankara Citadel, > > Sandra can get the Chalice of Kinship, and Antoinette can get an Inscription > > (if so, what level is it)? > > Igo, the Alastor? Yeah. Note, of course, that some equipment with requirements needs the holder to meet the requirements in order to *use* the equipment, not just to equip with it. But if you could have usefully Heidelberged it to a "wrong clan" vampire, you can also usefully Alastor it to a wrong-clan vampire. > > D. If the Alastor is Black Cat, does her special further help reduce the cost? > > Yes. I don't expect that Black Cat is actually slated for reprint anytime soon (or perhaps ever), but looking at the original "cost reduction applies while stuff is in play, not just when being equipped" ruling [TOM 9-Nov-1994], it does not seem to at all follow from her card text: "Equipping Black Cat costs 1 less pool (but never less than 0 pool)." I doubt that it would be useful to anyone to reverse how Black Cat works ten years later, but if by some chance she does get reprinted at some point, it seems like it would be useful to make that ruling into errata, or card-text migration. Centralized Background Check, on the other hand, is quite clearly phrased. :-) > > #5. A. To make sure, Leadership Vacuum counts the total number of votes the > > vampire has, not just the number of votes the title grants, right? So for > > Jaroslav with a Legendary Vampire, X = 5. For Angelica who got 20 additional > > votes via Political Struggles, X = 23. For Genevieve, X = 1. For a Baron with a > > Firebrand, X = 3. For Carna, X = 0 when a Beyond Approach is in play? Correct? > > Yes. > > > B. And on the flipside, conditional votes don't count? So Sundown, the extra > > vote from the right clan for a Barony, Paragon, and Aura of Invincibility don't > > count? > > Correct. How much conditionality is required for the "non-title" votes to not count for Leadership Vacuum (and Political Struggle too, I suppose)? In the example above, Firebrand only grants votes during political actions (not blood hunt referenda); likewise Beyond Reproach only reduces Primogen's value during political actions. > > #6. A few specific questions on how Poison Pill interacts with other cards. > > > > A. How about Poison Pill + Ancient Influence? My predator calls Ancient > > Influence, he chooses Arika, I choose Sutekh. Even though I have a net gain, > > I'm still "losing pool." Thus the net effect would be that I gain 6 (11 - 5) > > and he gains 1 (11 - 5 - 5), correct? > > Yes. Nice one, Halcyan! I hadn't thought of that. Works well on Reins of Power, too. :-) > > #7. Questions regarding The Diamond Thunderbolt. Newsgroup spoiler card text > > is: > > > > The diamond Thunderbolt. > > Master. > > 0 cost. > > Master: out-of-turn. > > Only usable when control of a vampire you control is about to > > change or a vampire you control is about to enter combat. > > Control of that vampire does not change, and that vampire gains > > 1 blood. > > B. How does this work with temporary control effects? Is losing control of a > > minion (because a temporary control effect has ended) considered "control is > > about to > > change"? > > Yes, but it wouldn't maintain the currently-ending temporary control > effect. So the loss of control would still occur (again, after DT was > resolved for the initial loss). So basically, temporary control effects are "continuously" trying to return control (as many times as necessary) when their duration has expired? > > And finally, not exactly a Gehenna question, but it came up at one of the > > "Gehenna" pre-releases: > > > > #1. Flaming Candle states "Only one Flaming Candle can be played in a game." > > Filchware's Pawn Shop states "Any minion may equip with any non-location > > equipment card in any Methuselah's ash heap as an undirected +1 stealth equip > > action (he or she must meet the requirements of the card, if any)." > > > > Is equipping with Filchware's Pawn Shop the same as playing the card? Thus can > > you use Filchware to equip with a Flaming Candle even after a Flaming Candle > > had previously been played? > > Yes. You *can*? If you are "equipping" with the card via Filchware's, aren't you basically just playing the card from a different origin point than usual? If a Filchware's Pawn Shop-like effect existed for political action cards, would you really be able to call a second Political Stranglehold in the same game? Josh and that's what i call a lot of questions!

Daniel Figueiredo wrote: > So does this mean that if I use Into the Fire on a Ventrue, then use a > Crusade on him to make him a titled Sabbat Ventrue, he can benefit > from Powerbase Madrid right? Even from a bloated, 66-vote giving > Powerbase: Madrid? :) Then all I have to to is tap it to insta-oust > someone duing a referendum in which I used Elder Kindred Network! :D However, as the game has obviously gone on at least 64 turns by that point, it may not guarantee an oust... --Colin McGuigan

"Joshua Duffin" <duff...@bls.gov> wrote: > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > D. If the Alastor is Black Cat, does her special further help reduce > the cost? > > > > Yes. > > I don't expect that Black Cat is actually slated for reprint anytime > soon (or perhaps ever), but looking at the original "cost reduction > applies while stuff is in play, not just when being equipped" ruling > [TOM 9-Nov-1994], it does not seem to at all follow from her card text: > "Equipping Black Cat costs 1 less pool (but never less than 0 pool)." I > doubt that it would be useful to anyone to reverse how Black Cat works > ten years later, but if by some chance she does get reprinted at some > point, it seems like it would be useful to make that ruling into errata, > or card-text migration. Hmm. Yes, the 1994 ruling from the design team does seem to have been overturned/ignored by the 1995 card text, which mirrors the original 1994 card text. Interesting. The errata/ruling still stands, though. > How much conditionality is required for the "non-title" votes to not > count for Leadership Vacuum (and Political Struggle too, I suppose)? In Any at all. > the example above, Firebrand only grants votes during political actions > (not blood hunt referenda); likewise Beyond Reproach only reduces > Primogen's value during political actions. So neither would count. The vampire's "base" votes would count. > > > The diamond Thunderbolt. > > > Only usable when control of a vampire you control is about to > > > change or a vampire you control is about to enter combat. > > > Control of that vampire does not change, and that vampire gains > > > 1 blood. > > > > B. How does this work with temporary control effects? Is losing > control of a > > > minion (because a temporary control effect has ended) considered > "control is > > > about to > > > change"? > > > > Yes, but it wouldn't maintain the currently-ending temporary control > > effect. So the loss of control would still occur (again, after DT was > > resolved for the initial loss). > > So basically, temporary control effects are "continuously" trying to > return control (as many times as necessary) when their duration has > expired? No. They don't "try" to do anything. They simply expire. When the temporary change of control effect expires, the underlying control shines through. Removing "Fall of the Sabbat" (by ousting its controller, for example) doesn't try to change each Indy vampire to Sabbat. It simply removes the "no Sabbat" and "former Sabbat vampires are Independent" temporary effects. Which is why it won't drag a Sabbat-gone-Anarch vampire back to the Sabbat. > You *can*? If you are "equipping" with the card via Filchware's, aren't > you basically just playing the card from a different origin point than > usual? If a Filchware's Pawn Shop-like effect existed for political > action cards, would you really be able to call a second Political > Stranglehold in the same game? Muddled question. It can only be "played" once. Equipping via Filchware isn't "playing" the card, so isn't restricted by the restriction on how many times it can be played. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:eb4eb7f8.04051...@posting.google.com... > "Joshua Duffin" <duff...@bls.gov> wrote: [Filchware's Pawn Shop v. Flaming Candle] > > You *can*? If you are "equipping" with the card via Filchware's, aren't > > you basically just playing the card from a different origin point than > > usual? If a Filchware's Pawn Shop-like effect existed for political > > action cards, would you really be able to call a second Political > > Stranglehold in the same game? > > Muddled question. It can only be "played" once. Equipping via > Filchware > isn't "playing" the card, so isn't restricted by the restriction on > how many times it can be played. OK. Likewise, Echo of Harmonies is not "playing" the card on Echo of Harmonies (parallel card text to Filchware's Pawn Shop) so a Political Stranglehold should be callable a second time in the same game via Echo of Harmonies. But this contradicts your ruling of 19-Dec-2001: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3C212481.E0AEB7C8%40white-wolf.com If this new ruling is the one you're going with, it should also allow Grasp the Ghostly to re-use Flaming Candle, it seems? Actually, Grasp the Ghostly might work with Flaming Candle even if the Filchware's equip *did* count as "playing" the card. Kiss of Lachesis, too. You could probably also Reality Mirror a Reality Mirror (the other one would have to have been discarded rather than played, of course), or, more usefully, some other "once per game" combat card if such a thing existed. (Reality Mirror says to use the ability of the other combat card "as if" played from hand; I would think that since it's not actually being played from your hand it should work too.) Sorry I didn't have the examples before, I hadn't thought of any that actually existed off the top of my head. And thanks for the other answers, very helpful. :-) Josh off the frying pan

LSJ wrote: > Halcyan 2 wrote: >> C. Also, if the cost is a blood cost, does the Alastor or the >> vampire who called the Alastor pay for it? > > The target Alastor pays. > At default, the (blood) cost for the action is not payed by the acting minion ? >> D. If the Alastor is Black Cat, does her special further help reduce >> the cost? > > Yes. > The alastor says just "place" the equipment, not "equip". So, does black cat abilty trigger even with effects that reads "move/place" ? >> #6. A few specific questions on how Poison Pill interacts with other >> cards. >> >> A. How about Poison Pill + Ancient Influence? My predator calls >> Ancient Influence, he chooses Arika, I choose Sutekh. Even though I >> have a net gain, I'm still "losing pool." Thus the net effect would >> be that I gain 6 (11 - 5) and he gains 1 (11 - 5 - 5), correct? > > Yes. > Should be not assumed that a methuselah "loses pool" after the resolution of the ancient influence/ reign of power as a whole and not in steps ? "Gaining life", in an old 3D, was assumed to be "It covers everying that results in the vampire having more blood than it did immediately before." http://groups.google.com/groups?q=tetragrammaton:+ex+nihilo+gain+lif e+group:rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad&hl=it&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=rec.games.tra ding-cards.jyhad&safe=off&selm=3B5D6F86.C3A4AE27%40white-wolf.com&rnum=3shou Should be not the same with a methuselah "losing pool", resolving a single effect (ancient influence) ? >> #1. Flaming Candle states "Only one Flaming Candle can be played in >> a game." Filchware's Pawn Shop states "Any minion may equip with any >> non-location equipment card in any Methuselah's ash heap as an >> undirected +1 stealth equip action (he or she must meet the >> requirements of the card, if any)." >> >> Is equipping with Filchware's Pawn Shop the same as playing the >> card? Thus can you use Filchware to equip with a Flaming Candle even >> after a Flaming Candle had previously been played? > > Yes. If so, can i call say, an ancient influence via a charming lobby after another AI has been previously played in the same game ? The actual charming lobby's text reads " This vampire calls a referendum listed on a political action card in your hand (play that card)" - "play that card" is between parenthesis, which seems to imply that with such kind of effect (as CL or filchware pawn shop) youa nyway have to "play the card" (though not in the "normal fashion" in tregard of effect such as direct intervantion & the like). clarification welcome thanks Emiliano, v:ekn Prince of Rome

LSJ wrote: > Muddled question. It can only be "played" once. Equipping via > Filchware > isn't "playing" the card, so isn't restricted by the restriction on > how > many times it can be played. Confusion: Ancient Influence says "Only one Ancient Influence can be played in a game." Echo of Harmonies says "This vampire may burn that card to call the referendum as a +1 stealth political action." I read that as the Echo effect isn't "playing" the card. Especially with the Erciyes Fragment ruling that "burning" a card (eg, a Political Action for a vote) is distinct from "playing" a card. --Colin McGuigan

Posting via google so i'm sorry if someone already noted this.... LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<40A9E4C1...@white-wolf.com>... > Halcyan 2 wrote: ....snip.... > > C. Also, if the cost is a blood cost, does the Alastor or the vampire who > > called the Alastor pay for it? > > The target Alastor pays. I haven't seen the card, so i'm speaking on rumors, but is not usual that the acting minion pays unless specified? in that case the player of the alastor card? ..... > > #5. A. To make sure, Leadership Vacuum counts the total number of votes the > > vampire has, not just the number of votes the title grants, right? So for > > Jaroslav with a Legendary Vampire, X = 5. For Angelica who got 20 additional > > votes via Political Struggles, X = 23. For Genevieve, X = 1. For a Baron with a > > Firebrand, X = 3. For Carna, X = 0 when a Beyond Approach is in play? Correct? > > Yes. but firebrand does not gives 1 extra vote, just 1 extra vote when that vampire is calling a referendum, so when he leaves he has 2 unless he went to torpor following a referenum called by himself why should he have X=3? > > #6. A few specific questions on how Poison Pill interacts with other cards. > > > > A. How about Poison Pill + Ancient Influence? My predator calls Ancient > > Influence, he chooses Arika, I choose Sutekh. Even though I have a net gain, > > I'm still "losing pool." Thus the net effect would be that I gain 6 (11 - 5) > > and he gains 1 (11 - 5 - 5), correct? > > Yes. but you did not lose pool you gained pool! why should the overall be counted in between the resolution and not at the end.( i know is not a strong example, but with disarm you count the overall damage inflicted and compare to the overall damage sustained..., why in reins or ancient this doesn't work?) a related question: if i play an anarchist uprising and all the other players play a poison pill each, i lose a total of pool = total number of minions in play? ..... > > change cancelled and the bid not paid? Or is the control change cancelled, but > > the bid is still paid (and thus that player gains pool but doesn't lose a > > minion). The last scenario would pretty much wallpaper HT and ToGP methinks. > > The bid is still paid. I always thought i pay for a service i do receive, if for some reason, at the last moment i don't receive the service i won't pay. why in this case should be different? and while in HT the text seems to suggest this your answer ToGP has a wording give vamp and pay so if i cancel i cancel everything from that phrase on.. ..... > > C. If control is changed via the burning of counters and Diamond Thunderbolt is > > played, the counters remain burnt, right? So if someone burns 3 counters off of > > Temptation to steal Milo and Diamond is played, the counters are gone. Or if > > there are 10 corruption counters on Arika and Lalitha plays one final > > Corruption and Diamond is played, all the corruption counters are gone? > > They are still burnt, yes. I would ask a why on this ruling for the same reasons on ToGP above ....... > > #1. Flaming Candle states "Only one Flaming Candle can be played in a game." > > Filchware's Pawn Shop states "Any minion may equip with any non-location > > equipment card in any Methuselah's ash heap as an undirected +1 stealth equip > > action (he or she must meet the requirements of the card, if any)." > > > > Is equipping with Filchware's Pawn Shop the same as playing the card? Thus can > > you use Filchware to equip with a Flaming Candle even after a Flaming Candle > > had previously been played? > > Yes. then why i can't call 2 ancient influence using echo of harmonies? i do not play AI twice i play it the first time and move and burn from play the second seems to me very similar to equip via play and equip via pawnshop Sorry again if i'm late and repeating with some questions Andrea

andrea wrote: > a related question: if i play an anarchist uprising and all the other > players play a poison pill each, i lose a total of pool = total number > of minions in play? Yes. Sucks to be you at that point. =P > I always thought i pay for a service i do receive, if for some reason, > at the last moment i don't receive the service i won't pay. > why in this case should be different? > and while in HT the text seems to suggest this your answer > ToGP has a wording give vamp and pay so if i cancel i cancel > everything from that phrase on.. Unlike other cancel effects, Diamond Thunderbolt doesn't cancel the playing (or tapping and burning Temptation or Seduction counters, or what have you) of the card -- just the take control effect. I believe -- and am very curious if this is true or not -- that you could make a deal via the Succubus Club to trade your vampire for 5 pool, agree to the trade, and then play Diamond Thunderbolt to keep your vampire while still collecting the 5 pool. Ditto for Malkavian Time Auction? LSJ, would that be correct? --Colin McGuigan

Colin McGuigan <magu...@BGONEspeakeasy.net> wrote in message news:<sW6dnYemt8V...@speakeasy.net>... [ quoted text not captured ] I know I know!! :) Just one of those things that can´t hurt to know! :) What if LSJ asks this during the next trivia part of the next V:TES chat? :)

Colin McGuigan <magu...@BGONEspeakeasy.net> wrote: > I believe -- and am very curious if this is true or not -- that you > could make a deal via the Succubus Club to trade your vampire for 5 > pool, agree to the trade, and then play Diamond Thunderbolt to keep > your vampire while still collecting the 5 pool. Ditto for Malkavian > Time Auction? > > LSJ, would that be correct? IANLSJ but Succubus Club is used during *your* turn, and DT is a Master:OOT, so... > --Colin McGuigan 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

Joshua Duffin wrote: > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >>"Joshua Duffin" <duff...@bls.gov> wrote: >>Muddled question. It can only be "played" once. Equipping via >>Filchware >>isn't "playing" the card, so isn't restricted by the restriction on >>how many times it can be played. > > OK. Likewise, Echo of Harmonies is not "playing" the card on Echo of > Harmonies (parallel card text to Filchware's Pawn Shop) so a Political > Stranglehold should be callable a second time in the same game via Echo > of Harmonies. But this contradicts your ruling of 19-Dec-2001: > > http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3C212481.E0AEB7C8%40white-wolf.com Good catch. So Filchware's cannot be used to replay Flaming Candle. (Reversal of above). [ quoted text not captured ]

Tetragrammaton wrote: > LSJ wrote: >>Halcyan 2 wrote: >>>C. Also, if the cost is a blood cost, does the Alastor or the >>>vampire who called the Alastor pay for it? >>The target Alastor pays. > > At default, the (blood) cost for the action is not payed by the acting > minion ? It isn't the cost of the action. >>>D. If the Alastor is Black Cat, does her special further help reduce >>>the cost? >> >>Yes. > > The alastor says just "place" the equipment, not "equip". > So, does black cat abilty trigger even with effects that reads "move/place" > ? By long-standing ruling, equipment's cost if the equipment is on Black Cat. >>>#6. A few specific questions on how Poison Pill interacts with other >>>cards. >>> >>>A. How about Poison Pill + Ancient Influence? My predator calls >>>Ancient Influence, he chooses Arika, I choose Sutekh. Even though I >>>have a net gain, I'm still "losing pool." Thus the net effect would >>>be that I gain 6 (11 - 5) and he gains 1 (11 - 5 - 5), correct? >> >>Yes. > > Should be not assumed that a methuselah "loses pool" > after the resolution of the ancient influence/ reign of power > as a whole and not in steps ? No. Card text. "Each Methuselah then burns 5 pool." > "Gaining life", in an old 3D, was assumed to be > "It covers everying that results in the vampire having more blood than it > did immediately > before." > http://groups.google.com/groups?q=tetragrammaton:+ex+nihilo+gain+lif > e+group:rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad&hl=it&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=rec.games.tra > ding-cards.jyhad&safe=off&selm=3B5D6F86.C3A4AE27%40white-wolf.com&rnum=3shou Link to long, and I cannot parse "3D", sorry. Please relink with short link or elaborate on 3D. > Should be not the same with a methuselah "losing pool", resolving a single > effect (ancient influence) ? You may be referring to effects which restrict a vampire gaining. Which is not in conflict with this ruling. If such a vampire gets an effect which gains 1 blood and loses 1 blood, he fails to gain (by his special restriction) and still loses, so he'd be down 1 blood. [ quoted text not captured ]

andrea wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<40A9E4C1...@white-wolf.com>... >>Halcyan 2 wrote: [snip items answered elsewhere] > a related question: if i play an anarchist uprising and all the other > players play a poison pill each, i lose a total of pool = total number > of minions in play? ? Yes. >>>change cancelled and the bid not paid? Or is the control change cancelled, but >>>the bid is still paid (and thus that player gains pool but doesn't lose a >>>minion). The last scenario would pretty much wallpaper HT and ToGP methinks. >> >>The bid is still paid. > > I always thought i pay for a service i do receive, if for some reason, > at the last moment i don't receive the service i won't pay. > why in this case should be different? See also Watenda. Canceling an effect doesn't inherently cancel the cost. > and while in HT the text seems to suggest this your answer > ToGP has a wording give vamp and pay so if i cancel i cancel > everything from that phrase on.. How so? >>>C. If control is changed via the burning of counters and Diamond Thunderbolt is >>>played, the counters remain burnt, right? So if someone burns 3 counters off of >>>Temptation to steal Milo and Diamond is played, the counters are gone. Or if >>>there are 10 corruption counters on Arika and Lalitha plays one final >>>Corruption and Diamond is played, all the corruption counters are gone? >> >>They are still burnt, yes. > > I would ask a why on this ruling for the same reasons on ToGP above The same reasons, yes. [ quoted text not captured ]

Colin McGuigan wrote: > I believe -- and am very curious if this is true or not -- that you > could make a deal via the Succubus Club to trade your vampire for 5 > pool, agree to the trade, and then play Diamond Thunderbolt to keep your > vampire while still collecting the 5 pool. Ditto for Malkavian Time > Auction? > > LSJ, would that be correct? Correct. But not on your turn (difficult to do with Malk Time Auction). [ quoted text not captured ]

Kevin M. wrote: > Colin McGuigan <magu...@BGONEspeakeasy.net> wrote: > >>I believe -- and am very curious if this is true or not -- that you >>could make a deal via the Succubus Club to trade your vampire for 5 >>pool, agree to the trade, and then play Diamond Thunderbolt to keep >>your vampire while still collecting the 5 pool. Ditto for Malkavian >>Time Auction? >> >>LSJ, would that be correct? > > > IANLSJ but Succubus Club is used during *your* turn, and DT is a Master:OOT, > so... It might be someone else's Club that you're making a deal via (on their untap phase). [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<xxzqc.2670$fF3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>... > Tetragrammaton wrote: > > LSJ wrote: > >>Halcyan 2 wrote: ...... [ quoted text not captured ] how do you post a short link? On the poison pill effect At the end of an Ancient influence if your vamp is 5 or more you don't say that you lost blood but you gained blood. so why should poison pill look on the steps of how that blood has beein gained if i play with an imposing phantasm against a nephandus and i do 1 strike i put two counter on the card because i did 2 damage (IP) and -1 damage (NeP)? and even if i prevent i put counter on the phantasm because does not say succesfully inflicted and i can count in between? Also, i know that this is not linked to the text interpretation but the effect of the card is to wallpaperize Ancient Influence as there is no sense to try to give blood to everyone if you risk losing 10-20 pool with a single political that will anyway benefit the others. Related question...under Charming lobby et similia there is a time window to play the poison pill (as there is not a votes are cast moment, maybe there is not a before votes are cast window) Andrea

> >>>#6. A few specific questions on how Poison Pill interacts with other > >>>cards. > >>> > >>>A. How about Poison Pill + Ancient Influence? My predator calls > >>>Ancient Influence, he chooses Arika, I choose Sutekh. Even though I > >>>have a net gain, I'm still "losing pool." Thus the net effect would > >>>be that I gain 6 (11 - 5) and he gains 1 (11 - 5 - 5), correct? > >> > >>Yes. > > > > Should be not assumed that a methuselah "loses pool" > > after the resolution of the ancient influence/ reign of power > > as a whole and not in steps ? > > No. Card text. "Each Methuselah then burns 5 pool." Just to confirm. If you play a Reins of Power and your predator reacts with Poison Pill you will suffer a pool loss of TWICE the capacity of his chosen vampire and then gain 6 (resulting in a net loss of 16 if your predator controls an 11-cap) ? And there is nothing preventing several minions from playing Poison Pill is there? Personally I think it would be more balanced if the Poison Pill reflected the net pool loss resulting from a political action. By having no discipline or clan/sect requirements and not costing blood I suspect it will be a common vote defense card for non-political decks. This ruling does make Ancient Influence a rather bad card by having everybody gain pool except yourself?!? And Reins of Power can turn into a spectacular shot in the foot I do realize that your prey - who you presumably are targetting with the pool loss votes - probably have little interest in vaporizing his predator with Poison Pills but still.... FC

Kevin M. wrote: > IANLSJ but Succubus Club is used during *your* turn, and DT is a Master:OOT, > so... Could be somebody else's Succubus Club, used on their turn. Also, could've sworn DT was usable during your turn, but apparently not. Oh well. --Colin McGuigan

Is Poison Pill usable when someone calls a peace treaty and you choose to pay the cost to re-equip equipment that costs pool? Does Wormwood actually reduce the capacity of vampires to X, or are they simply treated as such (as per card text)? (The intent of the question is to see whether blood drains off due to a potential actual lowering of capacity). Ankur Gupta Prince of West Lafayette, IN

"FC" <fcap...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:c8fhal$l4n$1...@news.net.uni-c.dk... > Just to confirm. If you play a Reins of Power and your predator reacts > with Poison Pill you will suffer a pool loss of TWICE the capacity of his > chosen vampire and then gain 6 (resulting in a net loss of 16 if your > predator controls an 11-cap) ? Sort of. Poison Pill makes the calling Methuselah lose the same as the Poison Pill player loses. So for Reins of Power, calling Meth loses the usual "predator's capacity", and Poison Pill makes the calling Meth also lose "grandpredator's capacity". > And there is nothing preventing several minions from playing Poison > Pill is there? Nope. > Personally I think it would be more balanced if the Poison Pill reflected > the net pool loss resulting from a political action. By having no discipline > or clan/sect requirements and not costing blood I suspect it will be > a common vote defense card for non-political decks. This ruling does > make Ancient Influence a rather bad card by having everybody gain > pool except yourself?!? Well, but Delaying Tactics is probably in general still a better disciplineless vote defense card. Poison Pill has to be played before votes are cast; you can't actually make your Reins of Power or Ancient Influence-playing prey get screwed by playing Poison Pill, it just means that they will probably have to vote down their own Reins of Power/Ancient Influence. > And Reins of Power can turn into a spectacular shot in the foot > > I do realize that your prey - who you presumably are targetting with the > pool loss votes - probably have little interest in vaporizing his predator > with Poison Pills but still.... I doubt it'll be unbalanced vote-defense-wise. It doesn't "judo" the voter's action nearly as much as bleed bounce does for bleed, does it? And bleed is a cardless action. (ie people are always bleeding -> bleed bounce is almost always useful, whereas people aren't always voting -> vote defense isn't always useful -> vote defense usually can't get as many card slots as bleed defense.) Josh the deadly asp!

Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: > Is Poison Pill usable when someone calls a peace treaty and you choose to > pay the cost to re-equip equipment that costs pool? Yes. > Does Wormwood actually reduce the capacity of vampires to X, or are they > simply treated as such (as per card text)? (The intent of the question is > to see whether blood drains off due to a potential actual lowering of > capacity). The two options in the question are the same thing. Blood in excess of capacity drains off. [ quoted text not captured ]

>> Does Wormwood actually reduce the capacity of vampires to X, or are they >> simply treated as such (as per card text)? (The intent of the question is >> to see whether blood drains off due to a potential actual lowering of >> capacity). > > The two options in the question are the same thing. Blood in excess of > capacity drains off. Ok, so Skin of Night "treats aggravated damage as normal", but it's still aggravated, so one can't Soak it. And I also understand that if you have a 7-cap vampire who is treated as a 3-cap vampire, you can't hold 7 blood, so it drains off. And that you're also affected as if a 3-cap by "older" and "younger" clauses on cards that reference it. But for some reason, I'm not attaching this "drains off" aspect of capacity treatment as the same thing. . . . I have a followup question so as to understand this "treated as if" phrasing properly: If there were a theoretical card "Wormwood, The One We Didn't Print" that only affected a vampire as far as effects that reference age is concerned, how would that be phrased? Ankur

"andrea" <andrea....@infinito.it> wrote in message news:8b06c4c.04051...@posting.google.com... > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<xxzqc.2670$fF3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>... > > Tetragrammaton wrote: > > > "Gaining life", in an old 3D, was assumed to be > > > "It covers everying that results in the vampire having more blood than it > > > did immediately > > > before." > > > http://groups.google.com/groups?q=tetragrammaton:+ex+nihilo+gain+lif > > > e+group:rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad&hl=it&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=rec.games .tra > > > ding-cards.jyhad&safe=off&selm=3B5D6F86.C3A4AE27%40white-wolf.com&rnum=3 shou > > > > Link to long, and I cannot parse "3D", sorry. > > Please relink with short link or elaborate on 3D. > how do you post a short link? You could try http://tinylink.com, or when you find the article you're looking for on Google-groups, use the "View: Original Format" link in the upper right, and then delete by hand in the "Address" bar everything after the end of the "groups?selm=" part (the end of the "selected message" piece is delimited by an &, when you have viewed original format, all that should follow the & is "&output=gplain"). That's how you make the shortest possible Google-groups link, anyhow. Usually it'll end up short enough to show up properly in newsreaders. :-) For the message that Tetragrammaton seems to have been trying to point to, it is: http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3B5D6F86.C3A4AE27%40white-wolf.com The answer in that message was that "everything that makes a vampire have more blood than he or she did before counts as gaining blood". That is, even if a card or effect doesn't use the word "gain", it still counts as gaining if the vampire has more blood afterward than before. This is, I think, entirely in accordance with the interpretation that Ancient Influence both causes a gain and a loss of pool, and that even if they end up offsetting each other normally, they still both occur (and count both as gains and losses). With Reins of Power, the effects appear to be simultaneous instead of sequential ("Each Methuselah gains 6 pool. Each Methuselah also burns an amount of pool equal to the capacity of his or her predator's chosen vampire.") but they are still written as separate effects - there is both a gain and a burning of pool. > if i play with an imposing phantasm against a nephandus and i do 1 > strike i put two counter on the card because i did 2 damage (IP) and > -1 damage (NeP)? I'm not clear on the counters you're talking about here. Imposing Phantasm doesn't use counters. "[chi] Only usable before range is chosen. This vampire gets +1 strength for the remainder of combat. When combat ends, if the opposing minion is ready, the opposing minion gains an amount of blood (or life) equal to the amount he or she lost due to damage this combat. A vampire can play only one Imposing Phantasm each combat. [CHI] As above, and this vampire gets an additional strike this round." > and even if i prevent i put counter on the phantasm because does not > say succesfully inflicted and i can count in between? I'm still not sure about your question, but if there is an effect that counts damage "successfully inflicted", it clearly will not count the damage that wasn't inflicted because it was reduced by Nephandus's ability. If there's an effect that counts damage even if it was prevented, then it might count the damage you *tried* to do to Nephandus that was then reduced. Though it might still not count it, since Nephandus's text is unusual in this regard: "-{Each strike or damaging effect made against Nephandus by the opposing minion during combat is at -1 damage}-." This could mean that it is the strike/effect that is affected (by having its damage reduced) rather than the damage being prevented. I don't know of situations where that difference might matter, though. :-) > Also, i know that this is not linked to the text interpretation but > the effect of the card is to wallpaperize Ancient Influence as there > is no sense to try to give blood to everyone if you risk losing 10-20 > pool with a single political that will anyway benefit the others. I kind of disagree, I don't think you'll see people playing that many Poison Pills to always have one when Ancient Influence comes up. > Related question...under Charming lobby et similia there is a time > window to play the poison pill (as there is not a votes are cast > moment, maybe there is not a before votes are cast window) No, it can't be played. It's the same as Delaying Tactics with auto-passing votes (ie unplayable). The acting minion is equally unable to play Bribes, Bewitching Oration, etc. Josh moonlighting (daylighting?)

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:yxzqc.2671$fF3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... > andrea wrote: > > and while in HT the text seems to suggest this your answer > > ToGP has a wording give vamp and pay so if i cancel i cancel > > everything from that phrase on.. > > How so? I don't know. Hostile Takeover text: "Choose a vampire with a capacity less than 7. Each Methuselah bids pool for control of that vampire. The highest bid goes to the vampire's controller; the bidder then takes control of the vampire. If the controller wins, half the winning bid (rounded up) goes to the blood bank." The "then takes control" phrasing makes it pretty clear that the control is gained after the bid is paid. Temptation of Greater Power text: "Choose a vampire. Methuselahs may bid pool for control of that vampire. The winning bid is paid to the blood bank. Methuselahs may be credited up to 5 pool on the bid: winner pays 1 pool toward his or her debt during his or her discard phase until the debt is repaid. Only 1 Temptation of Greater Power can be played in a game." This one doesn't specify how the controlling-versus-bidding works, but it is clear that pool has been bid "for control of that vampire". It seems natural that control is gained no *earlier* than when the bid is paid. Probably they are simultaneous; regardless, as Scott wrote, canceling the effect doesn't have to cancel the cost. (It does for most of the canceling effects in VTES, but for all of those, the cost is canceled by card text.) > >>>Or if > >>>there are 10 corruption counters on Arika and Lalitha plays one final > >>>Corruption and Diamond is played, all the corruption counters are gone? > >> > >>They are still burnt, yes. > > > > I would ask a why on this ruling for the same reasons on ToGP above > > The same reasons, yes. This should be pretty clear too, since corruption counters are burnt "to" take control of the vampire in question. That is, you burn the counters and then you get control. Josh gloss-y

> >> Does Wormwood actually reduce the capacity of vampires to X, or are they > >> simply treated as such (as per card text)? (The intent of the question is > >> to see whether blood drains off due to a potential actual lowering of > >> capacity). > > Not having the text of Wormwood handy, I can only wonder how it interacts with Tariq and Jacob's specials.

"Gregory Stuart Pettigrew" <ethe...@sidehack.sat.gweep.net> wrote in message news:2004051916...@sidehack.sat.gweep.net... [ quoted text not captured ] Wormwood. Gehenna. Do noto replace until your next discard phase. Requires at least 1 other Gehenna card in play. Put 10 counters on this card. Burn 1 counter whenever another Gehenna card is put in play. A vampire whose capacity is greater than X is treated as if his or her capacity is X (Minimum of 1), where X is the number of counters on this card. -JTP

Ankur Gupta wrote: >>> Does Wormwood actually reduce the capacity of vampires to X, or are they >>> simply treated as such (as per card text)? (The intent of the >>> question is >>> to see whether blood drains off due to a potential actual lowering of >>> capacity). >> >> >> The two options in the question are the same thing. Blood in excess of >> capacity drains off. > > > Ok, so Skin of Night "treats aggravated damage as normal", but it's Skin of Night doesn't treat damage one way or another. The vampire who played Skin of Night treats (unprevented) aggravated damage as normal damage. Card text: This vampire treats... > still aggravated, so one can't Soak it. And I also understand that if > you have a 7-cap vampire who is treated as a 3-cap vampire, you can't > hold 7 blood, so it drains off. And that you're also affected as if a > 3-cap by "older" and "younger" clauses on cards that reference it. But > for some reason, I'm not attaching this "drains off" aspect of capacity > treatment as the same thing. . . . ? That seems to be a contradiction - you understand that the blood drains off yet do not attach a drain off aspect of capacity treatment as the same thing. > I have a followup question so as to understand this "treated as if" > phrasing properly: > > If there were a theoretical card "Wormwood, The One We Didn't Print" > that only affected a vampire as far as effects that reference age is > concerned, how would that be phrased? Moot, but probably with some convoluted wording along the lines of "with respect to comparing the ages of this vampire with another". [ quoted text not captured ]

Gregory Stuart Pettigrew wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I would believe that their capacity's are figured out (eg, Tariq is a 7 - 4 = 3 cap...) and then the Wormwood effect is applied. Wormwood doesn't say the vampire becomes an X cap, just that they're treated as one. --Colin McGuigan

[ quoted text not captured ] This just potentially screws the corruption/reformation strategy, that become almost useless ... after several turns spent at putting corruption counters, just one card (the diamond) wastes all the actions taken to get the vampire. Why ? Emiliano

On Thu, 20 May 2004 10:35:07 +0200, "Tetragrammaton" <no...@usa.com> scrawled: >Joshua Duffin wrote: [snip] >> This should be pretty clear too, since corruption counters are burnt >> "to" take control of the vampire in question. That is, you burn the >> counters and then you get control. >> > >This just potentially screws the corruption/reformation strategy, that >become almost useless ... >after several turns spent at putting corruption counters, just one >card (the diamond) wastes all the actions taken to get the vampire. >Why ? Because the card is so useless if there are no vampire stealing effects being played in a given game that it's unlikely you'll see many ever even put into a deck, let alone held onto in a hand long enough to get played when you do burn your corruption counters... salem domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm (replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email) "I like to play the field"-LSJ

Tetragrammaton expounded: > This just potentially screws the corruption/reformation strategy, that > become almost useless ... > after several turns spent at putting corruption counters, just one > card (the diamond) wastes all the actions taken to get the vampire. > Why ? because people stealing your vampires is so utterly obnoxious :) You still have to have the DT in hand at the right time and not have played a MOOT previously that round and miss your next MPA all of which is distincly less than trivial.

Colin McGuigan expounded: [ quoted text not captured ] The only distinction is that when Wormwood leaves play the effect is removed.

> Skin of Night doesn't treat damage one way or another. > The vampire who played Skin of Night treats (unprevented) aggravated > damage as normal damage. Card text: This vampire treats... Oh, right. >> still aggravated, so one can't Soak it. And I also understand that if you >> have a 7-cap vampire who is treated as a 3-cap vampire, you can't hold 7 >> blood, so it drains off. And that you're also affected as if a 3-cap by >> "older" and "younger" clauses on cards that reference it. But for some >> reason, I'm not attaching this "drains off" aspect of capacity treatment >> as the same thing. . . . > > ? That seems to be a contradiction - you understand that the blood drains > off yet do not attach a drain off aspect of capacity treatment as the > same thing. For some reason, I'm crazy. ;) >> If there were a theoretical card "Wormwood, The One We Didn't Print" that >> only affected a vampire as far as effects that reference age is concerned, >> how would that be phrased? > > Moot, but probably with some convoluted wording along the lines of > "with respect to comparing the ages of this vampire with another". Ok. Thanks for answering a question that clearly didn't make sense. ;) Ankur

"Tetragrammaton" <no...@usa.com> wrote in message news:2h3843F...@uni-berlin.de... > This just potentially screws the corruption/reformation strategy, that > become almost useless ... > after several turns spent at putting corruption counters, just one > card (the diamond) wastes all the actions taken to get the vampire. > Why ? Oh, THAT I agree about, and I have no real answer for why the card was made. Vampire-stealing is undeniably obnoxious, sure. And it's also quite true that the Diamond Thunderbolt's effect is so narrowly applicable that it probably won't actually get played much, so it won't have that much of an effect on actual games most of the time. But I don't know why Corruption, Form of Corruption, etc needed to get a hoser. I don't think they were exactly tearing up the tournament scene nowadays. It's kind of a cute effect, I guess, but still too narrowly hoserish to be, in my opinion, a good card design. Josh doesn't like hosers

Joshua Duffin expounded: > Josh > > doesn't like hosers I like hosers in principle but I don't like completely cornercase cards. DTB is a vere powerful hoser (for a very powerful effect) with a small alternative effect to make it at least playable when you're not getting hit by minion stealing. Minion stealing has a sufficiently big impact when it happens to be worth making the card imo. Whether the alternative effect is powerful enough I'm not sure. (I think 2 blood would have been much better but then you would think it was far too powerful) When the corruption counters get hosed by the DTb, remember that there is a considerable opportunity cost involved in playing that DTb.

"Joshua Duffin" <duff...@bls.gov> wrote in message news:<2h4df8F...@uni-berlin.de>... [ quoted text not captured ] I suspect that the fact that it hoses Corruption/Form was a secondary consideration to weakening the power of Baltimore Purge/Graverobbing decks (and to a lesser extent Spirit Marionette/Heidleburg/Daring the Dawn decks) - because BP/Graverob decks, unlike Corruption decks, have been consistently able to win tournaments for a while now. That's just a guess, though - I'm not actually arguing that the card is good, or necessary. Just pointing out that there are more potent and more tournament-played vampire-steal strategies than Corruption in the current environment. > Josh > > doesn't like hosers -John Flournoy

flou...@rcn.com (John Flournoy) wrote in message news:<57327a82.04052...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] Well.. that doesn´t change the fact that it DOES hose Form/Corruption decks, even Temptation e little. They could have made the card hose only Dominate vampire stealing, which is the real trouble. And this is the type of card that although it won´t see play in many trounament decks, it will SURELY be used in casual play, where Form/Cprruption decks stand a chance. Now they become pretty much useless deck types against that card. Let´s not forget that the card won´t be jammed in your hand if you think there won´t be any control change effects in any given game, since you can use it when a vampire enters combat to give it a blood. And it´s free, and common. Whatever happened to the "rare cards wil be the ones that you either want very few in any deck or do not go into many deck types"? Daniel.

On 21 May 2004 12:52:06 -0700, om...@uol.com.br (Daniel Figueiredo) scrawled: >flou...@rcn.com (John Flournoy) wrote in message news:<57327a82.04052...@posting.google.com>... [snip] >> That's just a guess, though - I'm not actually arguing that the card >> is good, or necessary. Just pointing out that there are more potent >> and more tournament-played vampire-steal strategies than Corruption in >> the current environment. >> >> > Josh >> > >> > doesn't like hosers >> >> -John Flournoy > > >Well.. that doesn´t change the fact that it DOES hose Form/Corruption >decks, even Temptation e little. i think there is a difference between _does_ hose a deck and _could_ hose a deck. I think Corruption's Purge would hose a Form/Corruption deck far more than Diamond Thunderbolt would. Yet, it's never played often enough, even in casual games, to _actually_ be a problem. [ quoted text not captured ]