Blood trade and conmsanguineous boon

Plain and simple: Is consanguineous boon no longer playable when blood trade enters play??? Smiling Tom, alarmed

On Mon, 31 May 2004 10:43:46 +0200, "Smiling Tom" <tma...@almadrava.net> scrawled: >Plain and simple: Is consanguineous boon no longer playable when blood trade >enters play??? presumably it still is playable when Blood Trade is in play. it would need to have 'boon' in it's text box, not merely it's name, to become unplayable. (Based on the "Ventrue Investment is not an Investment card" precedent). 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

salem wrote: > On Mon, 31 May 2004 10:43:46 +0200, "Smiling Tom" >>Plain and simple: Is consanguineous boon no longer playable when blood trade >>enters play??? > > presumably it still is playable when Blood Trade is in play. it would > need to have 'boon' in it's text box, not merely it's name, to become > unplayable. (Based on the "Ventrue Investment is not an Investment > card" precedent). It is a Boon, but it is still playable, since Blood Trade only prevents Boons from being put into play, not from being played to the ash heap, as Consanguineous Boon is. -- 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/

LSJ wrote: > It is a Boon, but it is still playable, since Blood Trade only prevents > Boons from being put into play, not from being played to the ash heap, > as Consanguineous Boon is. So has Consanguineous Boon been errated to be a "Boon"? Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6 "Mr. President, ask not what your rest home can do for you. Ask what you can do for your rest home." -Elvis

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> writes: > [Consanguineous Boon] is a Boon, but it is still playable, since Blood > Trade only prevents Boons from being put into play, not from being played > to the ash heap, as Consanguineous Boon is. So if Blood Trade is in play, can Life Boon still be played to prevent the ousting of a player? (There would of course be no VP debt nor collecting pool from the metuselah saved, due to Blood Trade.) Life Boon [Jyhad:U, VTES:U, SW:PV, CE:PTo] Cardtype: Master Master: out-of-turn. {Boon} Give pool to a Methuselah with no pool to keep him or her in the game; put this card in play. During each of his or her untap phases, you can collect 1 pool from that Methuselah. The first victory point that the Methuselah wins is given to you (unless you are ousted by then). This Life Boon is then burned. (Seems like our fiendishly isolationist Master/Anarch Revolt decks would still have far too much bite...) -- hg@ "If you can't offend part of your audience, iki.fi there is no point in being an artist at all." -Hakim Bey

Peter D Bakija wrote: > LSJ wrote: > > >>It is a Boon, but it is still playable, since Blood Trade only prevents >>Boons from being put into play, not from being played to the ash heap, >>as Consanguineous Boon is. > > > So has Consanguineous Boon been errated to be a "Boon"? http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/Cardlist_C.html#Consanguineous_Boon [ quoted text not captured ]

Janne Hägglund wrote: > So if Blood Trade is in play, can Life Boon still be played to prevent the > ousting of a player? (There would of course be no VP debt nor collecting > pool from the metuselah saved, due to Blood Trade.) No. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:Q2Zuc.107930$hH.18...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... > Janne Hägglund wrote: > > So if Blood Trade is in play, can Life Boon still be played to prevent the > > ousting of a player? (There would of course be no VP debt nor collecting > > pool from the metuselah saved, due to Blood Trade.) > > No. Is that because, with Blood Trade's text of "No more boons may be put in play", it becomes impossible to try to play Life Boon, Major Boon, and Minor Boon, because playing the card would put them in play (even though Life Boon's use of "put in play" implies that it goes into play simultaneously with the gift of pool)? Is Extremis Boon still playable under Blood Trade (to some effect, or no effect) because it says "Other Methuselahs may bid pool to keep you in the game. If one does, put this card in play"? It seems like it might be playable but fail to go into play under the "if one does" clause. I guess it might have been simpler to word Blood Trade "no more boons may be played", unless leaving Consanguineous Boon playable was an important part of the desired effect. Josh can't seem to face up to the facts

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:Q2Zuc.107930$hH.18...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... > Janne Hägglund wrote: > > So if Blood Trade is in play, can Life Boon still be played to prevent the > > ousting of a player? (There would of course be no VP debt nor collecting > > pool from the metuselah saved, due to Blood Trade.) > > No. can we have a longer explanation ?

Joshua Duffin wrote: > ...unless leaving Consanguineous Boon playable was an > important part of the desired effect. Come to think of it, if Blood Trade made Consang Boons also unplayable, it might actually be worth playing. At least sometimes. --CV

"Joshua Duffin" <duff...@bls.gov> wrote: > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > Janne Hägglund wrote: > > > So if Blood Trade is in play, can Life Boon still be played to > prevent the > > > ousting of a player? (There would of course be no VP debt nor > collecting > > > pool from the metuselah saved, due to Blood Trade.) > > > > No. > > Is that because, with Blood Trade's text of "No more boons may be put in > play", it becomes impossible to try to play Life Boon, Major Boon, and > Minor Boon, because playing the card would put them in play (even though > Life Boon's use of "put in play" implies that it goes into play > simultaneously with the gift of pool)? Yes. > Is Extremis Boon still playable under Blood Trade (to some effect, or no > effect) because it says "Other Methuselahs may bid pool to keep you in > the game. If one does, put this card in play"? It seems like it might > be playable but fail to go into play under the "if one does" clause. Yes. > I guess it might have been simpler to word Blood Trade "no more boons > may be played", unless leaving Consanguineous Boon playable was an > important part of the desired effect. The wording was changed from "may be played" to the current during playtest, yes. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<40bc9849$0$1363$79c1...@nan-newsreader-06.noos.net>... [ quoted text not captured ] Yes. Blood Trade's card text prevents Life Boon from being played, since the effect of Life Boon's being played is prohibited by card text on Blood Trade. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:eb4eb7f8.04060...@posting.google.com... > "Joshua Duffin" <duff...@bls.gov> wrote: > > Is Extremis Boon still playable under Blood Trade (to some effect, or no > > effect) because it says "Other Methuselahs may bid pool to keep you in > > the game. If one does, put this card in play"? It seems like it might > > be playable but fail to go into play under the "if one does" clause. > > Yes. So in that situation, the bidding would still take place, the Extremis Boon player would still receive the pool and stay in the game, but the winning bidder wouldn't get any Boon benefits out of it since the Extremis Boon would not actually go into play? > The wording was changed from "may be played" to the current during playtest, yes. Hmm, I had forgotten about that. Looking back, I don't remember seeing any particular reason for that change. (I mean, the wording seemed at least as intuitive the other way, and I wouldn't think allowing Blood Trade to prohibit Consanguineous Boon would have been a problem.) Josh tense and nervous and can't relax

Joshua Duffin wrote: > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message > news:eb4eb7f8.04060...@posting.google.com... > >>"Joshua Duffin" <duff...@bls.gov> wrote: > > >>>Is Extremis Boon still playable under Blood Trade (to some effect, > > or no > >>>effect) because it says "Other Methuselahs may bid pool to keep you > > in > >>>the game. If one does, put this card in play"? It seems like it > > might > >>>be playable but fail to go into play under the "if one does" clause. >> >>Yes. > > So in that situation, the bidding would still take place, the Extremis > Boon player would still receive the pool and stay in the game, but the > winning bidder wouldn't get any Boon benefits out of it since the > Extremis Boon would not actually go into play? If anyone cared to bid, yes. >>The wording was changed from "may be played" to the current during > > playtest, yes. > > Hmm, I had forgotten about that. Looking back, I don't remember seeing > any particular reason for that change. (I mean, the wording seemed at > least as intuitive the other way, and I wouldn't think allowing Blood > Trade to prohibit Consanguineous Boon would have been a problem.) Don't let me lure you out into the open, BTW. Playtesters are still under NDA. :-) It was changed when the problem of the incidental and unwanted and unwarranted prohibition on Con Boon was brought to my attention during playtest. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:6I8vc.111358$hH.19...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... > Don't let me lure you out into the open, BTW. > Playtesters are still under NDA. :-) Oh, of course. I was thinking this fell (after you brought it up) under the clause that the NDA doesn't cover "information that now or later, through no act of Recipient, becomes generally known or available to the public, as demonstrated through written records". In other words, that as the developer, you were free to make public any aspect of playtest versions of cards that you choose, and that if you do so, what you write is no longer secret and becomes fair game for discussion. :-) > It was changed when the problem of the incidental and unwanted and > unwarranted prohibition on Con Boon was brought to my attention during > playtest. Heh, too bad about that, I guess. :-) (Or at least, it seems to me that using a wording that makes Extremis Boon unplayable "makes sense" for the card at least enough to make up for it also prohibiting Consanguineous Boon.) Josh the first rule of secrecy is, don't tell anyone you have a secret?