JYHAD: Combat Ends/Blur Cost?

In a recent game I bum rushed one of my prey's minions with a brujah that had superior celerity and potence. During the strike phase I played Fists of Death which gave me +2 damage but cost 1 blood from my vampire and Blur which game me 2 addtitional strikes but cost 1. (I thought it was pretty cool, until) I payed the blood and had put the cards in my ash pile, when my opponet played Majesty or some combat ends stike. Now my question is do I get either cards back or either of the blood? It seems that I wouldn't have exerted myself to the point where I would have to pay any blood for either of those skills if I nveer used them. Maybe turning my fists into fists of death would cost me one, but wouldn't that happen during combat...not as I chose my strikes. Well anyway...any feedback is welcome Alex (lanspeed@rain.org) -- Alex Robinson, Corris Cook /\ "Fade to Black" .................../....\..................................... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /~~~~~~~;\::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Every Breath You Take /___________ \;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

LANspeed (lanspeed@coyote.rain.org) wrote: : In a recent game I bum rushed one of my prey's minions with a : brujah that had superior celerity and potence. During the strike phase I : played Fists of Death which gave me +2 damage but cost 1 blood from my : vampire and Blur which game me 2 addtitional strikes but cost 1. (I : thought it was pretty cool, until) I payed the blood and had put the cards : in my ash pile, when my opponet played Majesty or some combat ends stike. : Now my question is do I get either cards back or either of the : blood? It seems that I wouldn't have exerted myself to the point where I : would have to pay any blood for either of those skills if I nveer used : them. Maybe turning my fists into fists of death would cost me one, but : wouldn't that happen during combat...not as I chose my strikes. Well : anyway...any feedback is welcome Well it seems to me that you did everything right except one, which ended up costing you some blood. For combat cards, I've always understood the rules to be that you pay the blood, when they are played--immediately. I think this is the bonus of having combat ends, cards--your opponent pays for a combat card and gets nothing out of it. However, Blur is *not* a strike cards, or you would not have been able to play it as you can only play *one* strike card a strike phase. Blur is an additional strike card and is played on the combat phase after damage resolution. In the situtation stated above, I think you used Blur a little to early. It should have gone like this: 1. Manuver (no manuvers) 2. Strike (Fists of Death , Majesty) if no Majesty had been played 3. Resolve Damage 4. Additional Strikes (Blur) 5. Press By playing the Blur out of turn you lost the extra blood for the Blur. I hope this makes sense. -- /===================================================\ | Paul Jensen | | pjensen@orion.it.luc.edu | | Chicago, IL | +---------------------------------------------------+ | Good advertising space for rent | | (It must be pretty good YOU just read it) | \===================================================/

Paul Jensen (pjensen@orion.it.luc.edu) wrote: : LANspeed (lanspeed@coyote.rain.org) wrote: : : In a recent game I bum rushed one of my prey's minions with a : : brujah that had superior celerity and potence. During the strike phase I : : played Fists of Death which gave me +2 damage but cost 1 blood from my : : vampire and Blur which game me 2 addtitional strikes but cost 1. (I : : thought it was pretty cool, until) I payed the blood and had put the cards : : in my ash pile, when my opponet played Majesty or some combat ends stike. : : Now my question is do I get either cards back or either of the : : blood? It seems that I wouldn't have exerted myself to the point where I : : would have to pay any blood for either of those skills if I nveer used : : them. Maybe turning my fists into fists of death would cost me one, but : : wouldn't that happen during combat...not as I chose my strikes. Well : : anyway...any feedback is welcome : Well it seems to me that you did everything right except one, which ended up : costing you some blood. For combat cards, I've always understood the rules to : be that you pay the blood, when they are played--immediately. I think this : is the bonus of having combat ends, cards--your opponent pays for a combat card : and gets nothing out of it. However, Blur is *not* a strike cards, or you : would not have been able to play it as you can only play *one* strike card : a strike phase. Blur is an additional strike card and is played on the combat : phase after damage resolution. In the situtation stated above, I think you : used Blur a little to early. It should have gone like this: : 1. Manuver (no manuvers) : 2. Strike (Fists of Death , Majesty) : if no Majesty had been played : 3. Resolve Damage : 4. Additional Strikes (Blur) : 5. Press : By playing the Blur out of turn you lost the extra blood for the Blur. : I hope this makes sense. : -- : /===================================================\ : | Paul Jensen | : | pjensen@orion.it.luc.edu | : | Chicago, IL | : +---------------------------------------------------+ : | Good advertising space for rent | : | (It must be pretty good YOU just read it) | : \===================================================/ I was under the impression that strike resolution came after ALL strikes. If you played blur, your additional strikes would all be resolved at the same time as the first one. 1. Manuver 2. Strike 3. Additional strikes 4. Strike resolution 5. Press This way, you can blur your flamethower and get in extra strikes. Makes sense, no? -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Mazarakos pmazarak@eecs.uic.edu University of Illinois at Chicago

Peter Mazarakos (pmazarak@snoqualmie.eecs.uic.edu) wrote: >I was under the impression that strike resolution came after ALL strikes. >If you played blur, your additional strikes would all be resolved at the >same time as the first one. >1. Manuver >2. Strike >3. Additional strikes >4. Strike resolution >5. Press >This way, you can blur your flamethower and get in extra strikes. Makes >sense, no? Um, no. The original and corrected rules both list additional strikes as happening after the resolution of the initial strike, and each additional strike also has its own distinct choose strike and resolve strike phases. -- Eric Amick eamick@clark.net Columbia, MD Public key available via finger

Paul Jensen (pjensen@orion.it.luc.edu) wrote: : LANspeed (lanspeed@coyote.rain.org) wrote: : : In a recent game I bum rushed one of my prey's minions with a : : brujah that had superior celerity and potence. During the strike phase I : : played Fists of Death which gave me +2 damage but cost 1 blood from my : : vampire and Blur which game me 2 addtitional strikes but cost 1. (I : : thought it was pretty cool, until) I payed the blood and had put the cards : : in my ash pile, when my opponet played Majesty or some combat ends stike. : : Now my question is do I get either cards back or either of the : : blood? It seems that I wouldn't have exerted myself to the point where I : : would have to pay any blood for either of those skills if I nveer used : : them. Maybe turning my fists into fists of death would cost me one, but : : wouldn't that happen during combat...not as I chose my strikes. Well : : anyway...any feedback is welcome : Well it seems to me that you did everything right except one, which ended up : costing you some blood. For combat cards, I've always understood the rules to : be that you pay the blood, when they are played--immediately. I think this : is the bonus of having combat ends, cards--your opponent pays for a combat card : and gets nothing out of it. However, Blur is *not* a strike cards, or you : would not have been able to play it as you can only play *one* strike card : a strike phase. Blur is an additional strike card and is played on the combat : phase after damage resolution. In the situtation stated above, I think you : used Blur a little to early. It should have gone like this: : 1. Manuver (no manuvers) : 2. Strike (Fists of Death , Majesty) : if no Majesty had been played : 3. Resolve Damage : 4. Additional Strikes (Blur) : 5. Press : By playing the Blur out of turn you lost the extra blood for the Blur. : I hope this makes sense. : -- : /===================================================\ : | Paul Jensen | : | pjensen@orion.it.luc.edu | : | Chicago, IL | : +---------------------------------------------------+ : | Good advertising space for rent | : | (It must be pretty good YOU just read it) | : \===================================================/ I don't remember ever having seen that you pay blood cost (when in combat) when the card is played (specifically in this case) while in all other cases you play the blood only if the card is effective (whether it be a Master card or a minion card, it doesn't matter). Paying combat blood cost right away dows add to the power of Majesty, but I always beleived Majesty was I way to get out of combat and thus avoiding suffering too much damage (for example). More, Majesty Sup. use gives an opportunity to untap the vampire, which is an added bonus. I still beleive (unless I'd be pointed toward the exact rule) that blood is payed only when the card takes effect. -- Karrde "I've found that what people call luck if often little more than raw talent combined with the ability to make the most of opportunities." Talon Karrde to Mara Jade karrde@step.polymtl.ca

Frederic Genest <karrde@step.polymtl.ca> wrote: >I don't remember ever having seen that you pay blood cost (when in >combat) when the card is played (specifically in this case) while in all >other cases you play the blood only if the card is effective (whether it >be a Master card or a minion card, it doesn't matter). You never pay the cost for something unless the playing of the card was successful; since there's no way to directly cancel combat cards, their play will always be effective, you're effectively always going to pay for them. -> If you use Blood Fury and the other minion then Dodges, you still had to pay the 1 blood. -> If you use Blur prematurely and the other minion ends combat during the normal strike phase, you still effectively got additional strike(s), so had to pay the blood, even if you didn't use them. This is just like paying for a Govern the Unaligned if it goes unblocked, even if the victim musters enough Telepathic Counters to stop all the bleed, or cashes in a Boon, or what have you. Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

In article <37jdf7$aue@clarknet.clark.net>, eamick@clark.net (Eric Amick) writes: >Peter Mazarakos (pmazarak@snoqualmie.eecs.uic.edu) wrote: >>I was under the impression that strike resolution came after ALL strikes. >>If you played blur, your additional strikes would all be resolved at the >>same time as the first one. >>1. Manuver >>2. Strike >>3. Additional strikes >>4. Strike resolution >>5. Press >>This way, you can blur your flamethower and get in extra strikes. Makes >>sense, no? >Um, no. The original and corrected rules both list additional strikes as >happening after the resolution of the initial strike, and each additional >strike also has its own distinct choose strike and resolve strike phases. So what's the point of having an aggravated-damage weapon that hits each strike? The only usefulness would be if they prevented the damage or dodged the first strike. Are you telling me that the first time they get nicked by an aggravated strike, they fall over so you can't do it to them again?! >:-D Granted, that IS the way it states in the rules, I guess - but how are you supposed to burn people in combat? :-( (My favourite!) Yours aggravatedly; -- \/\"Well, that concludes my victory dance..." - Susano Orbatos, Orion/\/ ====\/\ Winner of Ian's Competition Summer Edition 1993/4! /\/==== =====\/\ Want any manga-style art done? EMail me at... /\/===== \/\ cjudd@lawson.its.utas.edu.au a.k.a. KURO Shiro /\/

Craig Thomas Judd <cjudd@lawson.its.utas.edu.au> wrote: >So what's the point of having an aggravated-damage weapon that hits each >strike?... The usefulness is that you don't have to keep playing aggravation cards like Wolf Claws over and over again. The other players know that if they get into combat with that minion and can't avoid or prevent the damage, their minion *will* be going to torpor. >Are you telling me that the first time they get nicked by >an aggravated strike, they fall over so you can't do it to them again?! >:-D Not until they get back out of torpor again, no. >Granted, that IS the way it states in the rules, I guess - but how are you >supposed to burn people in combat? :-( (My favourite!) Doing lots and lots of aggravated damage all at once. Torn Signpost/Growing Fury/Wolf Claws, for example :) Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

Before I could do anything to stop it, Craig Thomas Judd wrote: > So what's the point of having an aggravated-damage weapon that hits each > strike? The only usefulness would be if they prevented the damage or dodged > the first strike. Are you telling me that the first time they get nicked by > an aggravated strike, they fall over so you can't do it to them again?! >:-D Use regular damage and presses to lower that pesky opponent to an exceptable level, than blast 'em with the flamethrower. Just because you *have* a flamethrower doesn't mean you have to *use* the flamethrower for your strike. Sleeve that Sengir Dagger until you have them on the ropes. -- There be that can pack the cards and yet cannot play | a-Henh! well; so there are some that are good in canvasses and | Brian Wilson factions, that are otherwise weak men. | Francis Bacon |

I thought the rules state: (Summarized) The first point of aggravated damage shocks the vampires system and sends him to torpor. This is not healed by spending the vampires blood. Each additional point of aggravated damage is then healed within torpor so the vampire spends blood to heal that. if the vampire has no blood to heal the excess aggravated damage it is burned and placed in the ash heap. That's what it says, and seems reasonable to play that way. ************************************************************ * The above views are considered (ir)relevant by the * * Cyber-Siegal /\/\ ---------------------------* * | When the Siegal flies * * siegal@rintintin.colorado.edu | the net, don't look up. * ************************************************************

> >Are you telling me that the first time they get nicked by > >an aggravated strike, they fall over so you can't do it to them again?! >:-D > Not until they get back out of torpor again, no. ? So a vampire in combat who takes aggravated damage is not subject to additional strikes or presses? I understand that the rules don't necessarily reflect anyone's ideas of the way things are "supposed" to work, but this is very strange. I know that a balance is needed - that you can't make aggravated damage devastating. But I think a different mechanism could be derived that wouldn't be so nonsensical. papillo the rederived

Bob Ellison <papillo@fc.hp.com> wrote: >? So a vampire in combat who takes aggravated damage is not subject >to additional strikes or presses? The basic idea behind aggravated damage is that the first point sends the vampire to torpor, rather than the last point. This happens to trip up additional strikes and such, but consider that a game balancing thing :) Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

> >? So a vampire in combat who takes aggravated damage is not subject > >to additional strikes or presses? > The basic idea behind aggravated damage is that the first point sends > the vampire to torpor, rather than the last point. This happens to > trip up additional strikes and such, but consider that a game balancing > thing :) I can understand that much. Now, what about the flip side? Two vampires are in hand-to-hand combat; one delivers aggravated damage (one of the benefits of being Protean), which will send the target to torpor, while the other delivers multiple strikes (as a benefit of Celerity). We've been playing that torpor is not entered until the end of the combat round, so that multiple strikes may still be made, even if the striker will be going to torpor, unless the aggravated damage was done with First Strike. This avoids a common argument ("I have superior Celerity - why should my multiple strikes all be considered to come *after* his?"). It also, more importantly, keeps one discipline from being inferior to the other: if torpor were entered at the first strike and prevented the other strikes, then Protean is superior to Celerity; yet if the faster Celerity-inspired strikes came first, before the Protean strike, and one sent the Protean vampire to torpor and prevented his or her strike, then Celerity is superior to Protean. If all strikes are played in a combat round, then it doesn't matter which is "first" or not, and both sides are equally effective. With the "no strikes after torpor" rule, that's even better; multiple strikes above the one that sends the vampire to torpor are ignored (perhaps "unrealistically", but mechanically soundly). Is our interpretation correct? It seems to work very well, and seems to be very balanced. Two combat-oriented decks, one focussed on Proteans and the other on Celerians, fought a very hard battle, all the way down to the end... papillo the regimented

papillo@fc.hp.com (Bob Ellison) writes: >> >Are you telling me that the first time they get nicked by >> >an aggravated strike, they fall over so you can't do it to them again?! >:-D > >> Not until they get back out of torpor again, no. > >? So a vampire in combat who takes aggravated damage is not subject >to additional strikes or presses? > >I understand that the rules don't necessarily reflect anyone's ideas of >the way things are "supposed" to work, but this is very strange. I >know that a balance is needed - that you can't make aggravated damage >devastating. But I think a different mechanism could be derived that >wouldn't be so nonsensical. Yep. In addition to the game balance thing, it makes some kind of sense WRT the vampire genre. In most vampire movies, the vampire takes a big shot of (holy water/fire/sunlight), turns into a bat or a puff of mist, and zips right back to his coffin, only to come back after The Good Guys later on, until they can manage the stake through the heart. Think of aggravated damage as something that sends the target vampire running screaming for mommy rather than something that drops him in an unconscious heap at your feet. Alec -- Alec Habig, Indiana University High Energy Astrophysics ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu http://astrowww.astro.indiana.edu/personnel/ahabig/ Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns.

Well, if you notice, damage from one strike is applied before either additional strikes or presses. As a result, a single hit doing aggravated damage ends the entire combat. So, go up against a vampire with a flamethrower, go to torpor before he can finish you off. Again, run the combat round sequence rules past the other players. It's in there. If they whine about it being to hard to kill vampires then,

> Think of aggravated damage as something that sends the target vampire running > screaming for mommy rather than something that drops him in an unconscious heap > at your feet. Hmmm. That's a good model. Thanks - that helps a lot with my idea of game consistency... papillo the grateful

In article <38954u$6h9@perv.hal.com>, Tom Wylie <aahz@hal.COM> wrote: >Craig Thomas Judd <cjudd@lawson.its.utas.edu.au> wrote: > >>Granted, that IS the way it states in the rules, I guess - but how are you >>supposed to burn people in combat? :-( (My favourite!) > >Doing lots and lots of aggravated damage all at once. >Torn Signpost/Growing Fury/Wolf Claws, for example :) > Or, another example: Torn Signpost(optional), blur, strike with hand, strike with hand, strike with aggravated damage, hand or otherwise. (This IS legal, yes?) or, for style points, blur, strike(for more than the other vampire hopefully), pulled fangs, taste of vitae, strike combat ends pay a blood to untap vampire. Or: Strike to 0 then pulled fangs. I also like acrobatics + pulled fangs and prevent damage + pulled fangs for sending things into torpor. Sang -- Magic or Jyhad?