ok... this question has more to do with stealth and form of mist than
anything.
#1. Basically as I understand it, you are not allowed to play stealth to
add to an action unless it is required (meaning your opponent has equal
stealth). Does this mean that actions at base stealth(like the basic bleed
action) cannot have stealth added until a block has even been declared or
are you allowed to add before? This seems to be a great defense against a
bleed deck heavy on stealth as it would keep his hand filled with useless
stealth.
#2 I was wondering what the actual errata/ruling is on Form of Mist
superior. As the clarification/errata listed on WotC rules listings, it
states you can't add to the stealth of an action that does not need added to
it. As I see it, the ruling listed there prevents all playing of the
superior by an acting vampire, depending on how question #1 is answered.
For example, if you are not allowed to add stealth to an action before a
blocker is declared, you're sitting in combat and blockers aren't being
declared so you can't add to stealth. This applies if the stealth of the
action was currently 0 when the combat was entered.
If the action had any kind of stealth whatsoever when the action was
blocked, regardless of the ruling on question #1 you couldn't play the card
because the next blocker would have to deal with the stealth that the action
was at before it was blocked, and adding "overkill" stealth is not allowed
by the rules.
#3 I also have a question about Form of Mist in terms of blockers. If the
acting vampire uses a form of mist, and the action continues on, if the
vampire that blocked originally has a way to untap/awaken does he retain the
intercept that he had on that action before the block went into combat?
Am I wrong in the interpretations of this?
Vince Johnson wrote:
>
> ok... this question has more to do with stealth and form of mist than
> anything.
>
> #1. Basically as I understand it, you are not allowed to play stealth to
> add to an action unless it is required (meaning your opponent has equal
> stealth).
"has equal/surpassing intercept and is trying to block", yes.
> Does this mean that actions at base stealth(like the basic bleed
> action) cannot have stealth added until a block has even been declared or
> are you allowed to add before?
Not until a blocker exists.
A basic bleed action is at zero stealth, by default.
You still cannot add stealth to it unless someone is blocking
(and has zero or more intercept).
> This seems to be a great defense against a
> bleed deck heavy on stealth as it would keep his hand filled with useless
> stealth.
Quite so.
> #2 I was wondering what the actual errata/ruling is on Form of Mist
> superior. As the clarification/errata listed on WotC rules listings, it
> states you can't add to the stealth of an action that does not need added to
> it.
The errata prevents you from "continuing" an action that wasn't blocked
in the first place (like a Bum's Rush), and it prevents you from
playing more than one Form of Mist at superior during a single action.
> As I see it, the ruling listed there prevents all playing of the
> superior by an acting vampire, depending on how question #1 is answered.
> For example, if you are not allowed to add stealth to an action before a
> blocker is declared, you're sitting in combat and blockers aren't being
> declared so you can't add to stealth.
No. You can add stealth if the current blocker (the one you are in
combat with) has sufficient intercept (which he probably does, since
he's in combat with you).
> This applies if the stealth of the
> action was currently 0 when the combat was entered.
> If the action had any kind of stealth whatsoever when the action was
> blocked, regardless of the ruling on question #1 you couldn't play the card
> because the next blocker would have to deal with the stealth that the action
> was at before it was blocked, and adding "overkill" stealth is not allowed
> by the rules.
You need the stealth to overcome the current blocker, so it is not
"overkill" stealth (a bad term, I believe).
> #3 I also have a question about Form of Mist in terms of blockers. If the
> acting vampire uses a form of mist, and the action continues on, if the
> vampire that blocked originally has a way to untap/awaken does he retain the
> intercept that he had on that action before the block went into combat?
Yes. All action modifiers/reactions (incl. stealth and intercept)
apply for the duration of the current action, by default.
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and DCI (tournament) rules:
http://www.wizards.com/VTES/VTES_Rules.html
On Mon, 8 Feb 1999 13:35:11 -0500, "Vince Johnson" <john...@tcnj.edu>
wrote:
>ok... this question has more to do with stealth and form of mist than
>anything.
>
>#1. Basically as I understand it, you are not allowed to play stealth to
>add to an action unless it is required (meaning your opponent has equal>stealth). Does this mean that actions at base stealth(like the basic bleed>action) cannot have stealth added until a block has even been declared or>are you allowed to add before? This seems to be a great defense against a>bleed deck heavy on stealth as it would keep his hand filled with useless
>stealth.
All actions may not have stealth added unless it is required. If
nobody is trying to block you, you don't require the stealth, since
the action will be successful anyway.
correct on one part -- this is the "classic" method of surviving a
hard-core sneak and bleed deck... never block it. If he's not
balanced it properly, he'll end up with seven stealth cards in his
hand and no bleed modifiers, and his 3 vamps will bleed for 1 every
turn as he frantically discards.
Of course, that adds to the metagame in that you can build a S&B deck
that's very -light- on stealth... and ensure that you always have
bleed modifiers. But then what if someone decides to block you? =)
>#2 I was wondering what the actual errata/ruling is on Form of Mist
>superior. As the clarification/errata listed on WotC rules listings, it
>states you can't add to the stealth of an action that does not need added to>it. As I see it, the ruling listed there prevents all playing of the>superior by an acting vampire, depending on how question #1 is answered.
>For example, if you are not allowed to add stealth to an action before a
>blocker is declared, you're sitting in combat and blockers aren't being
not quite the right phrase - you aren't allowed to add stealth to an
action until you 'need it'. The semantics here make all the
difference in the world. Also, keep in mind that when you DO need it,
you are allowed to play any one effect/card that generates any amount
of positive stealth. So if I attempted to call a vote, and you
blocked me with a Raven Spy, I could then play Forgotten Labyrinth at
superior (+3 stealth,... i love this card) to make the total stealth
+4 for the action. I could no longer play any additional stealth
cards until you generated +4 intercept though, because I no longer
'need' the stealth.
>declared so you can't add to stealth. This applies if the stealth of the>action was currently 0 when the combat was entered.
Not quite. If I come to bleed you at 0 stealth and you block me, I
suddenly "need" +1 stealth to continue the action. Form of Mist ends
combat and THEN continues the action with +1 stealth, per card text -
and since at the time Form of Mist was played, I -did- need the
stealth, it works. All "continue-combat" cards such as Psyche!,
Hidden Lurker, and Fast Reaction will override a Form of Mist and
begin combat again, however, and I believe the +1 stealth is ignored
in that instance since the action is not yet being continued. (ie if
I want my +1 stealth I have to play ANOTHER at superior.) This is the
way i've always thought of it - and it's definitely the way it's
PLAYED, so.
>If the action had any kind of stealth whatsoever when the action was
>blocked, regardless of the ruling on question #1 you couldn't play the card
>because the next blocker would have to deal with the stealth that the action
>was at before it was blocked, and adding "overkill" stealth is not allowed
>by the rules.
ah, but it is. You may only "overkill" with a single effect though,
and only when you need the stealth to begin with.
>#3 I also have a question about Form of Mist in terms of blockers. If the
>acting vampire uses a form of mist, and the action continues on, if the
>vampire that blocked originally has a way to untap/awaken does he retain the
>intercept that he had on that action before the block went into combat?
Yes. all intercept and stealth that was generated for an action
remain until the action concludes (successfully or unsuccessfully).
So if I bleed you, you attempt to block, I play Earth Control for +2
stealth, you play Enhanced Senses for +2 intercept, and then I play a
Form of Mist during combat to escape, you only need to untap and add
an additional +1 intercept to block again.
I don't believe you can play two Form of Mists at superior on the same
action, also, due to the "no duplicate modifier" rule - so if I wanted
to get +4 stealth, I can't just re-enter combat and play another; I
would have to play Bonding or some other form of stealth -before-
combat.
-- Derek
(replying by email? remove the nospam from my domain :)
In article <36BF4A0F...@wizards.com>, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com>
writes
>> As I see it, the ruling listed there prevents all playing of the
>> superior by an acting vampire, depending on how question #1 is answered.
>> For example, if you are not allowed to add stealth to an action before a
>> blocker is declared, you're sitting in combat and blockers aren't being>> declared so you can't add to stealth.>>No. You can add stealth if the current blocker (the one you are in
>combat with) has sufficient intercept (which he probably does, since
>he's in combat with you).
Hypothetically speaking, if it were possible that you had been blocked
by someone but who didn't have sufficient intercept you, would Form of
Mist be unplayable?
Suggested example: I play Brujah Frenzy on a Brujah with Protean, to
block their action, even though it was at +2 stealth from Earth Control.
They go into combat with one of my minions. Can they now play Form of
Mist, given that they wouldn't normally be able to play a card which
they couldn't use both parts of i.e. since they don't need the stealth,
does that negate them playing the entire card?
--
James Coupe (Prince of Mercia, England)
Vampire: Elder Kindred Network
http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net
James Coupe wrote:
>
> In article <36BF4A0F...@wizards.com>, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com>
> writes
> >> As I see it, the ruling listed there prevents all playing of the
> >> superior by an acting vampire, depending on how question #1 is answered.
> >> For example, if you are not allowed to add stealth to an action before a
> >> blocker is declared, you're sitting in combat and blockers aren't being
> >> declared so you can't add to stealth.
> >
> >No. You can add stealth if the current blocker (the one you are in
> >combat with) has sufficient intercept (which he probably does, since
> >he's in combat with you).
>
> Hypothetically speaking, if it were possible that you had been blocked
> by someone but who didn't have sufficient intercept you, would Form of
> Mist be unplayable?
The acting vampire could not play it at superior, correct
(because he doesn't need the stealth).
> Suggested example: I play Brujah Frenzy on a Brujah with Protean, to
> block their action, even though it was at +2 stealth from Earth Control.
> They go into combat with one of my minions. Can they now play Form of
> Mist, given that they wouldn't normally be able to play a card which
> they couldn't use both parts of i.e. since they don't need the stealth,
> does that negate them playing the entire card?
Yes. (Although he could still use the inferior, of course).
[ quoted text not captured ]
Derek S. Ray wrote:
> [snip]> Not quite. If I come to bleed you at 0 stealth and you block me, I
> suddenly "need" +1 stealth to continue the action. Form of Mist ends
> combat and THEN continues the action with +1 stealth, per card text -
> and since at the time Form of Mist was played, I -did- need the
> stealth, it works. All "continue-combat" cards such as Psyche!,
> Hidden Lurker, and Fast Reaction will override a Form of Mist and
> begin combat again, however, and I believe the +1 stealth is ignored
> in that instance since the action is not yet being continued. (ie if
> I want my +1 stealth I have to play ANOTHER at superior.) This is the
> way i've always thought of it - and it's definitely the way it's
> PLAYED, so.
The +1 stealth is still added, regardless of whether the "continue
action" effect is thwarted by another combat. Since the superior
Form of Mist counts as an action modifier when played by the acting
minion (since it modifies the action), you cannot play another (at
superior) in a later combat during the same action. However, if you
manage to play, say, Shadow Body in that later combat, the +1 stealth
that you had received from the Form of Mist would still be in effect.
> [snip]> I don't believe you can play two Form of Mists at superior on the same
> action, also, due to the "no duplicate modifier" rule
Correct.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Ok I got the answer to my first and third question and understand it.
>> This applies if the stealth of the
>> action was currently 0 when the combat was entered.>> If the action had any kind of stealth whatsoever when the action was
>> blocked, regardless of the ruling on question #1 you couldn't play the
card
>> because the next blocker would have to deal with the stealth that the
action
>> was at before it was blocked, and adding "overkill" stealth is not
allowed
>> by the rules.>>You need the stealth to overcome the current blocker, so it is not
>"overkill" stealth (a bad term, I believe).
I'll agree, it is a bad term but that's because I didn't understand the
current stealth & intercept was applied to the current action even though
the blocker was in combat. Didn't make sense at first but now it does. So
does this mean that, if by playing intercept for the blocker, it took the
blocker to 1 more intercept than I had stealth, that both vamps would
re-enter combat if I was unable to add another stealth after playing a
superior Form to get out of combat?
What I essentially mean is, that despite combat just ended, is the blocker
that was in that combat, still considered to be attempting to block that
vampire until the player controlling that vampire relinquishes the attempted
block to allow the action to pass through or to pass on to another blocker,
or does the player need to play an "awaken" type card to continue that
vampire's block. And another question that would seem to stem from this is:
Does the passing through constitute a failed block on the part of the
original blocker, meaning he(the original blocker) would untap?
Vince
[ quoted text not captured ]
If I understand the question, then here's the answer:
Revised Rules, 6.2.2.2:
Stealth can be added during an action only when
needed (that is, only if the action is currently being blocked and the
blocking minion has enough intercept to block the acting minion).
The combat resulting from a successful block is part of the block.
So during that combat, the action is "being blocked". So, if the
blocking minion (the one in combat) has enough intercept (which
he did, or he wouldn't be in combat), then the acting minion can
play Form of Mist.
There is a blocking minion and the blocking minion's intercept matches
or exceeds the acting minion's stealth, therefore he is allowed to add
stealth.
When he plays Form of Mist, however, the action continues but the
(former) blocker is not untapped. Since tapped minions cannot attempt
to block actions, that former blocker would have to untap (or be
Forced Awake, etc.) in order to atempt to block again - even though
his intercpet may be enough to re-block the action.
A minion must be untapped and have intercept equal to or exceeding the
acting minion's stealth in order to successfully block.
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and DCI (tournament) rules:
http://www.wizards.com/VTES/VTES_Rules.html
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own