1) What happens to a vampire with 0 blood that takes 1 aggravated damage?
2) I had been playing that the Hawg gave 1 mandatory press per combat - after
thinking about it I realized I don't think you have to use equipment at all
if you don't want to - so is the Hawg basically one optional press per combat
or are you forced to press if you have one?
3) After re-reading the rules I noticed that it implies that you can rescue
other methuselah's vamps from torpor - it doesn't specifically say, but I
assume that this does not change the owner of the rescued vampire. Correct?
Scott
storm@tamsun.tamu.edu
Edward S Shaw <storm@tamsun.tamu.edu> wrote:
>1) What happens to a vampire with 0 blood that takes 1 aggravated damage?
The first point of aggravated damage always sends the vampire to torpor
instead of doing damage. Only if more than 1 point of aggravated damage
is done can the vampire be flat-out burned.
>2) I had been playing that the Hawg gave 1 mandatory press per combat - after
>thinking about it I realized I don't think you have to use equipment at all
>if you don't want to - so is the Hawg basically one optional press per combat
>or are you forced to press if you have one?
It's optional whether a vampire makes use of a piece of equipment or not.
The vampire can simply opt not to make use of the Hawg, in which case
it doesn't press.
>3) After re-reading the rules I noticed that it implies that you can rescue
>other methuselah's vamps from torpor - it doesn't specifically say, but I
>assume that this does not change the owner of the rescued vampire. Correct?
I don't see anything in the rules indicating you'd get control of
their vampire, so i'd say that's correct. I'll double check that.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <33ll5h$ars@tamsun.tamu.edu>,
Edward S Shaw <storm@tamsun.tamu.edu> wrote:
>1) What happens to a vampire with 0 blood that takes 1 aggravated damage?
It goes to torpor with no blood on it. Remember that the first point
of aggravated damage sends the vamprye to torpor, but does NOT take from
its blood. However, if the vampire with 0 blood had taken 2 aggravated
damage (in one shot, of course), the first would send it to torpor, the
second would burn the vampyre.
>2) I had been playing that the Hawg gave 1 mandatory press per combat - after
>thinking about it I realized I don't think you have to use equipment at all
>if you don't want to - so is the Hawg basically one optional press per combat
>or are you forced to press if you have one?
Dunno, I don't own one. I thought I noticed the card say that it offered
an optional press once per combat?
>3) After re-reading the rules I noticed that it implies that you can rescue
>other methuselah's vamps from torpor - it doesn't specifically say, but I
>assume that this does not change the owner of the rescued vampire. Correct?
Yep. Don't forget that visiting another Methuselah's vampyres in torpor is
a +0 stealth action, regardless of whether the intent is to commit
Diablerie or rescue a vampyre.
...Paul (BTW, my answers aren't official)
--
+ + + + + + + + + + +
Paul, cleggp@rpi.edu. yIlImQo'qu' Don't Panic! alt.galactic-guide yIlaD
"When doth life leave the weary?
'Tis not death I fear, but the end of living." -- Paul
Tom Wylie (aahz@hal.COM) wrote:
: Edward S Shaw <storm@tamsun.tamu.edu> wrote:
: >1) What happens to a vampire with 0 blood that takes 1 aggravated damage?: The first point of aggravated damage always sends the vampire to torpor
: instead of doing damage. Only if more than 1 point of aggravated damage
: is done can the vampire be flat-out burned.
Does that mean that If it takes a second point of aggravated damage it is
killed? No matter how much blood was on it?
: >2) I had been playing that the Hawg gave 1 mandatory press per combat - after
: >thinking about it I realized I don't think you have to use equipment at all
: >if you don't want to - so is the Hawg basically one optional press per combat
: >or are you forced to press if you have one?: It's optional whether a vampire makes use of a piece of equipment or not.
: The vampire can simply opt not to make use of the Hawg, in which case
: it doesn't press.: >3) After re-reading the rules I noticed that it implies that you can rescue
: >other methuselah's vamps from torpor - it doesn't specifically say, but I
: >assume that this does not change the owner of the rescued vampire. Correct?: I don't see anything in the rules indicating you'd get control of
: their vampire, so i'd say that's correct. I'll double check that.: Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
: aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
--
csims@netcom.com
In article <csimsCv86xn.FqE@netcom.com>,
Charles S. Sims Jr <csims@netcom.com> wrote:
>Tom Wylie (aahz@hal.COM) wrote:
>: Edward S Shaw <storm@tamsun.tamu.edu> wrote:
>: >1) What happens to a vampire with 0 blood that takes 1 aggravated damage?
>
>: The first point of aggravated damage always sends the vampire to torpor
>: instead of doing damage. Only if more than 1 point of aggravated damage
>: is done can the vampire be flat-out burned.
>
>Does that mean that If it takes a second point of aggravated damage it is
>killed? No matter how much blood was on it?
No. The rule is this:
The first point of aggravated damage sends the vampyre into Torpor.
Any damage beyond the first point is removed from the Vampyre's Blood.
If the Vampyre doesn't have enough Blood to deal with this damage, it
is immediately burned.
So, in the example above, because the Vampyre had zero Blood, it would
take 1 point of Aggravated damage to send it to Torpor, plus 1 point
of damage to burn it.
If there was a Vampyre with 8 Blood on it, and somehow it took 10 points
of Aggravated damage (ow!) it would be burned: The first point (leaving
9 points of damage) would send it to Torpor, the next 8 would remove
all the Blood from the Vampyre, leaving one damage. Because the Vampyre
couldn't deal with this damage, it is burned.
Not only that, but burning a Vampyre in this way is NOT Diablerie, and
does not set up a Bloodhunt vote.
...Paul
--
+ + + + + + + + + + +
Paul, cleggp@rpi.edu. yIlImQo'qu' Don't Panic! alt.galactic-guide yIlaD
"When doth life leave the weary?
'Tis not death I fear, but the end of living." -- Paul
aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:
>Edward S Shaw <storm@tamsun.tamu.edu> wrote:>>1) What happens to a vampire with 0 blood that takes 1 aggravated damage?>The first point of aggravated damage always sends the vampire to torpor
>instead of doing damage. Only if more than 1 point of aggravated damage
>is done can the vampire be flat-out burned.
This isn't what the rules say. Section 15.1 unbder resolve strike:If the
vampire does not have the blood to heal excess aggrevated damage, then it
is considered destroyed and the card is burned.
So you have to do additional aggrevated damage that would drop the vampire
below 0 blood to destroy it, not just two aggrevated strikes.
--
| 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 \My way's not very sportsman like - Andre the Giant|
| [303/777-2911] Data \ Shut up, Cerebus has to think |
In article <33loq9$l4r@perv.hal.com>, Tom Wylie <aahz@hal.COM> wrote:
>Edward S Shaw <storm@tamsun.tamu.edu> wrote:>>2) I had been playing that the Hawg gave 1 mandatory press per combat - after
>>thinking about it I realized I don't think you have to use equipment at all
>>if you don't want to - so is the Hawg basically one optional press per combat
>>or are you forced to press if you have one?>
>It's optional whether a vampire makes use of a piece of equipment or not.
>The vampire can simply opt not to make use of the Hawg, in which case
>it doesn't press.
>
Thanks for clearing those questions up for me - even though the more I
think about it, I can't believe that I ever played with the Hawg's
press not being optional. It makes much more sense when you can
opt to not power up your Hawg at all instead of only being able to use it
to drive away from combat if someone else presses to continue first. :)
Scott
storm@tamsun.tamu.edu
Charles S. Sims Jr <csims@netcom.com> wrote:
>: The first point of aggravated damage always sends the vampire to torpor
>: instead of doing damage. Only if more than 1 point of aggravated damage
>: is done can the vampire be flat-out burned.
>Does that mean that If it takes a second point of aggravated damage it is
>killed? No matter how much blood was on it?
No, you still have to overload the vampire's blood supply. For example,
if the vampire had 2 blood on it you'd have to do 4 aggravated damage
to flat-out burn it; the first to "send it to torpor", two more to make
it run out of blood, and then one more damage that it can't heal.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In a previous article, aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) says:
>>Does that mean that If it takes a second point of aggravated damage it is
>>killed? No matter how much blood was on it?>
>No, you still have to overload the vampire's blood supply. For example,
>if the vampire had 2 blood on it you'd have to do 4 aggravated damage
>to flat-out burn it; the first to "send it to torpor", two more to make
>it run out of blood, and then one more damage that it can't heal.
Ok.. how about this:
I have a Vampire who does two Aggravated damage, as well as a Murder of Crows
(retainer, 1R). The opposng vampire in combat has 1 blood left. Will this
burn the opposing vampire (one ag. to torpor, one to leak blood, one to burn)
or will the vampire just be in torpor with 0 blood (as the Crow's dmg was not
ag.)???
Kieto/Kraven
--
Keith Arner <aa706@cleveland.Freenet.Edu> wrote:
>I have a Vampire who does two Aggravated damage, as well as a Murder of Crows
>(retainer, 1R). The opposng vampire in combat has 1 blood left. Will this
>burn the opposing vampire (one ag. to torpor, one to leak blood, one to burn)
>or will the vampire just be in torpor with 0 blood (as the Crow's dmg was not
>ag.)???
If a vampire takes a mix of aggravated and non-aggravated damage, then
non-ag damage is applied first (to maximize the chance of being burned).
In this case, the non-ag is applies first (knocking the vampire down to
1 blood), then the aggravated damage (burning the vampire).
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <34ns28$hmm@perv.hal.com>, Tom Wylie <aahz@hal.COM> wrote:
>If a vampire takes a mix of aggravated and non-aggravated damage, then
>non-ag damage is applied first (to maximize the chance of being burned).
>In this case, the non-ag is applies first (knocking the vampire down to
>1 blood), then the aggravated damage (burning the vampire).
>
Hmm... What would happen if someone played a card (skin of rock, for example)
which prevented part of the damage? Which damage would it prevent first,
the aggravated or normal?
Scott
storm@tamsun.tamu.edu
In <3528ag$mdm@tamsun.tamu.edu>, storm@tamsun.tamu.edu (Edward S Shaw) writes:
>In article <34ns28$hmm@perv.hal.com>, Tom Wylie <aahz@hal.COM> wrote:>>If a vampire takes a mix of aggravated and non-aggravated damage, then
>>non-ag damage is applied first (to maximize the chance of being burned).
>>In this case, the non-ag is applies first (knocking the vampire down to
>>1 blood), then the aggravated damage (burning the vampire).
>>>Hmm... What would happen if someone played a card (skin of rock, for example)
>which prevented part of the damage? Which damage would it prevent first,
>the aggravated or normal?
>
Whoever plays the card soaks whatever damage they want.
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------!
Rick Mc Leod - Systems Wizard, Court Jester, Guardian of the Galaxy Environment
MDA P/L PO Box 1692 N Sydney NSW 2058 Australia (02) 956-7966
rxm@mda.com.au/NIC:RM25/There can be only one...fortunately.