New York PowerBase

Rob LeGood wrote: > > David wrote: > > > > I'm not sure if this is the right card: I mean the one that costs 2 blood, > > put five blood on, taken as D action by sabbat vampires. Can you (the person > > who played the card) take the blood off the powerbase as D action? Who is the > > action directed against? > > From what our group has come to understand... > 1) Yes, you're own vampire can remove all the blood. (This one I'm > positive about) > 2) The directed action is against yourself, and hence unblockable. (Not > as positive, but I believe there are ruling which support this. > > I think the major complaint against this is that the player has just > recieved 3 blood for free! Remember that it is not entirely free. One of > your vampires must take an action to remove this blood. So, this card > is only fair if there are other ways to gain 3 blood with one master > card and one action. > One that quickly comes to mind is to play Ascendance as your master > (gain 1 pool) and then have a vampire vote (hopefully passign with more > than 2 points) and playing superior Voter Capitivation after it. (I'm > sure there are better ways, but this comes to mind quickly) > The complaints against this reasoning would be 'Well, this action can > be blocked whereas the powerbase cannot,' or, 'this is a three card > combo as opposed to a one card.' All true, but the actual vote is > giving you additional bonuses, instead of just getting the additional > blood. > Personally, I play with few of these, as my vampires can cause more > damage with better actions. > Any thoughts? > > rob. I believe it is illegal to take D actions against yoyrself, so no you can't do this (BTW is this Powerbase, Mexico City?) Chris

On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, David wrote: > I'm not sure if this is the right card: I mean the one that costs 2 blood, > put five blood on, taken as D action by sabbat vampires. Can you (the person > who played the card) take the blood off the powerbase as D action? Who is the > action directed against? > Nope, wrong card. Your talking about, Powerbase: Mexico City. But it is exactly the card that you are talking about. Unfortunatly, you cannot take (D) actions against yourself. Instruction book, Advanced Blocking 18.1, page 39. "Directed Actions directly affect another Methuselah or one of his minions." The D action is directed at you. This card sucks. I wouldnt call it broken though. I don't believe that any card should be considered broken, because of the fact that it has been made, and players should deal with it and play with it if they want to or not. Some cards are there because it fit the criteria of fun, in case anyone has forgotten that. Anyone who has played a "fun" malkavian deck(no, not stealth bleed, or hidden weopon, stereo typical deck). But just have fun, (although it might be a new concept to some people... hahaha =p ). Start playing Monacle of Clarity, or Madness of the bard. Or start playing blood games, with malkavian pranks and malkavian game. It shouldnt matter if you lose playing that game, because it is fun. This card is part of a good strategy. You put this card out, to let other people attempt to steal the blood off it as a variant to combat rush. Let them try to steal it then catch them, and send them to torpor. M.

[ quoted text not captured ] From what our group has come to understand... [ quoted text not captured ]

Rob LeGood <rfle...@ix.netcom.com> writes: >David wrote: >> I'm not sure if this is the right card: I mean the one that costs 2 blood, >> put five blood on, taken as D action by sabbat vampires. Can you (the person >> who played the card) take the blood off the powerbase as D action? Who is the >> action directed against? > From what our group has come to understand... >1) Yes, you're own vampire can remove all the blood. (This one I'm >positive about) This is incorrect. You can never, under any circumstances, direct a (D) action at yourself or anything you control. Explicit or implicit card text is needed to overcome this restriction (Rampage has implicit card text). >2) The directed action is against yourself, and hence unblockable. (Not >as positive, but I believe there are ruling which support this. This would be true, if you could direct the (D) action against yourself (and is true in the case of Rampage). -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Voyager: http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | To boldly get lost where no Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. | one has been lost before!

First, I'll respond to the initial post, then to the response by Rob. : David wrote: : > I'm not sure if this is the right card: I mean the one that costs : > 2 blood, put five blood on, taken as D action by sabbat vampires. : > Can you (the person who played the card) take the blood off the : > powerbase as D action? Who is the action directed against? Yes, it's the right card. No, one of your own vampires may NOT take the blood. This is by rule of directed actions AND card text... I believe that it states that a vampire of ANOTHER Meth. can take the blood as a (D) action. The text (as pulled from the Rulemonger's site) is below. Please correct if necessary. Powerbase: New York Master 1 pool UNIQUE LOCATION. As a master phase action, you may burn 1 pool to move 3 blood counters from the blood bank to this card or move one blood counter from this card to your pool. Any Sabbat vampire controlled by another Methuselah can take a (D) action to move all the blood on the 'base to his or her controller's blood pool. Burn this card when the last blood counter on it is removed. Artist: Ted Naifeh Rarity: Uncommon Rob LeGood (rfle...@ix.netcom.com) wrote: Peace Rob... : From what our group has come to understand... : 1) Yes, you're own vampire can remove all the blood. (This one I'm : positive about) Absolutely incorrect. #1: it has been ruled that you can never take a directed action against yourself. #2: card text (as above) specifically states that "Any Sabbat vampire controlled by ANOTHER Methusaleh can...". : 2) The directed action is against yourself, and hence unblockable. (Not : as positive, but I believe there are ruling which support this. As directed actions against yourself are outlawed by rule, this is a moot point. <snipped discussion of why you should be able to suck off the blood with your own vamp> -spongy

In article <32E79F...@ix.netcom.com>, Rob LeGood <rfle...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >David wrote: >> >> I'm not sure if this is the right card: I mean the one that costs 2 blood, >> put five blood on, taken as D action by sabbat vampires. Can you (the person >> who played the card) take the blood off the powerbase as D action? Who is the >> action directed against? > > From what our group has come to understand... >1) Yes, you're own vampire can remove all the blood. (This one I'm >positive about) >2) The directed action is against yourself, and hence unblockable. (Not >as positive, but I believe there are ruling which support this. You may not take (D) actions against yourself. Perhpas if they had a ruling that said "all (D) actions taken against yourself become undirected," but they don't. --Judy -- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Judith Grunberger * jcoo...@glue.umd.edu http://www.glue.umd.edu/~jcookson "I'll have a twist of lemon"

On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, Rob LeGood wrote: > David wrote: > > > > I'm not sure if this is the right card: I mean the one that costs 2 blood, > > put five blood on, taken as D action by sabbat vampires. Can you (the person > > who played the card) take the blood off the powerbase as D action? Who is the > > action directed against? > > From what our group has come to understand... > 1) Yes, you're own vampire can remove all the blood. (This one I'm > positive about) > 2) The directed action is against yourself, and hence unblockable. (Not > as positive, but I believe there are ruling which support this. Your group passed judgement on his group??? Your quite wrong. 1) No, you cant take a directed action against yourself. (Read my previous reply to this message.) 2) No, there are no rulings for this. Not even in the Sensible Jyhad Rules, (which is a house rule you can find on the net, under search for Jyhad, and I believe under the corrupters home page. > I think the major complaint against this is that the player has just > recieved 3 blood for free! Remember that it is not entirely free. One of > your vampires must take an action to remove this blood. So, this card > is only fair if there are other ways to gain 3 blood with one master > card and one action. Then they should read the rulebook then.

On 23 Jan 1997, James Puzzo wrote: > First, I'll respond to the initial post, then to the response by Rob. > > : David wrote: > : > I'm not sure if this is the right card: I mean the one that costs > : > 2 blood, put five blood on, taken as D action by sabbat vampires. > : > Can you (the person who played the card) take the blood off the > : > powerbase as D action? Who is the action directed against? > > Yes, it's the right card. No, one of your own vampires may NOT take > the blood. This is by rule of directed actions AND card text... I believe > that it states that a vampire of ANOTHER Meth. can take the blood as a (D) > action. The text (as pulled from the Rulemonger's site) is below. Please > correct if necessary. > > Powerbase: New York Master 1 pool > UNIQUE LOCATION. As a master phase action, you may burn 1 pool to > move 3 blood counters from the blood bank to this card or move one > blood counter from this card to your pool. Any Sabbat vampire > controlled by another Methuselah can take a (D) action to move all > the blood on the 'base to his or her controller's blood pool. Burn > this card when the last blood counter on it is removed. > Artist: Ted Naifeh Rarity: Uncommon No, your wrong too. I don't see the anywhere on your text where it says "cost two blood, put five blood on." No, it IS Powerbase Mexico City. Powerbase: Mexico City 2 Master Master unique location Put 5 blood on this card whin it is played. During each of your untap phases, move 1 blood from this card to your pool. Any Sabbat vampire may take a (D) action to move all the blood on the 'base to his or her controller pool. Burn this card whinn the last blood counter on it is removed. Fred Harper Uncommon. But I already answered this message before. I'm just correcting you.

: > 1) Yes, you're own vampire can remove all the blood. (This one I'm : > positive about) : > 2) The directed action is against yourself, and hence unblockable. (Not : > as positive, but I believe there are ruling which support this. : > : I believe it is illegal to take D actions against yoyrself, so no you : can't do this (BTW is this Powerbase, Mexico City?) : Chris Is this illegality (no D actions against yourself) the official ruling, and the "D actions against yourself are considered undirected" simply a common house rule, or vice versa? -Wallpaper Paste for all those useless cards

On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dave Green wrote: ... > > Is this illegality (no D actions against yourself) the official > ruling, and the "D actions against yourself are considered > undirected" simply a common house rule, or vice versa? > Try looking the Jan 23 reply from me to the original message. Oh, sorry, it might have been erased already. It's in the little rule book, page 39, section 18.1. "Directed actions directly affect another Methuselah or one of his minions." I remember this rule when i had to look it up when I tried moving blood off my Secret Horde onto the Grand Temple of Set using my Goth Band in a Presence Bleed/steal stuff deck. "Another" is synonymous in saying, "everyone, but you." Goth band would rule if it didnt say (d) action, then again, anyone can block it. Oh well, thats a paradox for you. As far as I can tell, even in the updated DCI tourney rules, and on wizards.com homepage, I found the errata, but there was non for section 18. But anyway, it could be interpreted as a house rule, but its not. Thanx all =) M.

In article <5c851s$1...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, "L. Scott Johnson" <sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu> writes >This is incorrect. You can never, under any circumstances, direct >a (D) action at yourself or anything you control. >Explicit or implicit card text is needed to overcome this restriction >(Rampage has implicit card text). What card text does Darius Styx have? I know it's been ruled for the old tournament rules that he couldn't pull cards from his controller's hand, but these tournament rules don't affect how we play. Also, the card text is very iffy and seems to imply that you can direct the action at yourself ('any Methuselah' *does* include the controller, since he/she *is* a Methuselah...) This has probably been covered before, so I won't drone on about it and sorry for all the irrelevent articles. -- Pax Vobiscum Justin Grace

Justin Grace wrote: > > In article <5c851s$1...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, "L. Scott Johnson" > <sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu> writes > >This is incorrect. You can never, under any circumstances, direct > >a (D) action at yourself or anything you control. > >Explicit or implicit card text is needed to overcome this restriction > >(Rampage has implicit card text). > > What card text does Darius Styx have? As a (D) action, Darius may pick one card at random from a Methuselah's hand... (Note that it says "a", not "any" - this card text is available from WotC's web page.) Not that it would make any difference either way, officially, but the distinction should help clear up the supposed "implied" self-directability. > I know it's been ruled for the old > tournament rules that he couldn't pull cards from his controller's hand, > but these tournament rules don't affect how we play. The ruling is not a "for tournament play" rule any more than the ruling that you can bleed any Methuselah with Computer Hacking (by virtue of the (D) symbol) is only "for tournament play". These are the official rulings. For all play. The only "for tournament play" rulings are: * No repeat actions * PAs burned for votes are not replaced until the end of the current turn. * Libraries may not include cards from the banned list * <Some time limit stuff> > Also, the card text is very iffy and seems to imply that you can direct > the action at yourself ('any Methuselah' *does* include the controller, > since he/she *is* a Methuselah...) Note the similarity of form with Ambush: (D) Enter combat with a tapped minion. Now, are you saying that Ambush implies that you can attack your own minions? If so, allow me to clear up that point as well: You can't. Also, Arson: (D) Burn a location. (Jyhad adds: "Can be directed at any Methuselah.") Neither of these actually overrides the restriction against directing a (D) action at yourself, so they cannot be used to burn a location that you control. -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@regency.wizards.com) Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team

Justin Grace wrote: > What card text does Darius Styx have? I know it's been ruled for the old > tournament rules that he couldn't pull cards from his controller's hand, > but these tournament rules don't affect how we play. At no time, past or present, have the DCI's tournament rules for VTES ever made statments about Darius Styx's special ability. Up until this most recent release of tournament rules, the DCI never made any statements that altered in any way the _rules_ of the game. They have never made any specific card rulings. Robert -- ...................................................................... :The opinions expressed here are strictly my own delusional ramblings: :and do not reflect the opinions of The Walt Disney Company. : : : :Robert Goudie robert...@studio.disney.com: :LA Tourny Info -> http://www.cs.ucr.edu/~ezix/other/rg/vtourn_1.html: :....................................................................: :Da pony run, he jump he pitch. He t'row my master in da ditch. : :He died and da jury wondered why. Da verdict was the blue tail fly.: :....................................................................: