/*
** Rulings which required followups are marked as *CONFIRMED*, *REVERSED*,
** or what have you.
**
** This list accurate as of 8/30/94.
*/
Ritual of the Bitter Rose: People have asked about the clause
"Usable in combat if an enemy is burned", wondering how a vampire could
ever be burned in combat yet still have blood on it. About the only
way we've thought of is to send a vampire to torpor via aggravated
damage but use Amaranth to burn it rather than letting it go to torpor.
Then, assuming it still has blood on it, use RotBR.
Tactical note: If you needed to get a vampire out of torpor but couldn't
afford to tap your vampires to do so, you could bring out a duplicate
vampire (thus bringing it into contention), then on your next untap,
let the vampire in torpor go. Also useful if one of your vampires has
something icky like Nosferatu Putresence on it, that you can't get
rid of any other way.
Confirmed that equipment, Camarilla Exemplaries, and such are played
on a card rather than on a vampire's "name", so if you drop your
contested vampire, equipment on it doesn't transfer to the other copy.
*REWRITTEN* Black Cat automatically reduces the blood cost of any
equipment she has. This can affect the cost paid to bring the equipment
out in the first place. So to equip her with a Deer Rifle would only
cost 1 pool. But the bonus is only for her, so if some other vampire got
that Deer Rifle, it would be treated as a 2-pool weapon again. Conversely,
if she gets a Deer Rifle from somewhere else, it's treated as a 1-pool
weapon as long as she has it. Note that a 1-pool item is treated as not
having a pool cost at all, rather than being a 0-pool item, so if she had
a Saturday Night Special (normally 1-pool) and a Peace Treaty passed, you
wouldn't be able to pay for her to keep the gun.
Confirmed that you get the Edge for bleeding any player, not just for
bleeding your prey (section 12.3.1, "bleed").
Rotschrek does hose the vampire dealing the aggravated damage, not
the vampire receiving it. Unsure what happens if you try to use
it on an ally.
*DISPUTED* Again... definitely FAQ material
Contested equipment and retainers are treated as being entirely out
of play. You can't move contested equipment from one minion to another
via the Equip action. You can't assign ranged damage to a contested
retainer. You probably don't get contested equipment off a diablerized
vampire, but that's being checked on.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
/*
** Rulings which required followups are marked as *CONFIRMED*, *REVERSED*,
** or what have you.
**
** This list accurate as of 8/30/94.
*/
Ritual of the Bitter Rose: People have asked about the clause
"Usable in combat if an enemy is burned", wondering how a vampire could
ever be burned in combat yet still have blood on it. About the only
way we've thought of is to send a vampire to torpor via aggravated
damage but use Amaranth to burn it rather than letting it go to torpor.
Then, assuming it still has blood on it, use RotBR.
Tactical note: If you needed to get a vampire out of torpor but couldn't
afford to tap your vampires to do so, you could bring out a duplicate
vampire (thus bringing it into contention), then on your next untap,
let the vampire in torpor go. Also useful if one of your vampires has
something icky like Nosferatu Putresence on it, that you can't get
rid of any other way.
Confirmed that equipment, Camarilla Exemplaries, and such are played
on a card rather than on a vampire's "name", so if you drop your
contested vampire, equipment on it doesn't transfer to the other copy.
*REWRITTEN* Black Cat automatically reduces the blood cost of any
equipment she has. This can affect the cost paid to bring the equipment
out in the first place. So to equip her with a Deer Rifle would only
cost 1 pool. But the bonus is only for her, so if some other vampire got
that Deer Rifle, it would be treated as a 2-pool weapon again. Conversely,
if she gets a Deer Rifle from somewhere else, it's treated as a 1-pool
weapon as long as she has it. Note that a 1-pool item is treated as not
having a pool cost at all, rather than being a 0-pool item, so if she had
a Saturday Night Special (normally 1-pool) and a Peace Treaty passed, you
wouldn't be able to pay for her to keep the gun.
Confirmed that you get the Edge for bleeding any player, not just for
bleeding your prey (section 12.3.1, "bleed").
Rotschrek does hose the vampire dealing the aggravated damage, not
the vampire receiving it. Unsure what happens if you try to use
it on an ally.
*DISPUTED* Again... definitely FAQ material
Contested equipment and retainers are treated as being entirely out
of play. You can't move contested equipment from one minion to another
via the Equip action. You can't assign ranged damage to a contested
retainer. You probably don't get contested equipment off a diablerized
vampire, but that's being checked on.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <340lhl$lco@perv.hal.COM>, aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:
>Rotschrek does hose the vampire dealing the aggravated damage, not
>the vampire receiving it. Unsure what happens if you try to use
>it on an ally.
> *DISPUTED* Again... definitely FAQ material
My thought on this-
Rotschrek refers to a vampire's terror when faced with the threat of
certain things that cause aggravated damage and hence possible death (eg,
fire, sunlight). Imagine this scenario:
Vampire A and Vampire B are in combat in A's haven, both weak and in bad
shape. Vampire A, cackling, grabs a flamethrower from a hiding niche and
points it at B. In terror for the imminent end of his undead existance -
The vampire HOLDING the flamethrower flees to hide in the earth (torpor
and tapped)!
The vampire facing the business end of the flamethrower is apparently
unfazed.
I knew that Vampire: The Masquerade borrowed from theater, but I didn't
know it was absurdist theater.
As a side comment, Tom and I both have a bias on this, as during the
tournament I bled him with a vampire that did aggravated damage. At the
time he was very close to being ousted. He blocked (with his last
untapped vampire) and pitched Rotschrek. The tournament directors ruled
as per above, although apparently there had been some dispute previously.
In article <340lhl$lco@perv.hal.COM> aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:
> Rotschrek does hose the vampire dealing the aggravated damage, not
> the vampire receiving it. Unsure what happens if you try to use
> it on an ally.
> *DISPUTED* Again... definitely FAQ material
In the White Wolf game, Rotschrek is a kind of 'super-fear' that only
Vampire experience. It stems from the fact that, being immortal (almost)
there's not much that can cause the the Final Death (burning a Vampire card)
and when they're faced by (or, I guess, in the case of this card - use) such
a thing, they sometimes go into utter terror, more than any human could know.
I don't know the card effects, which is a big minus on making a suggestion
for a ruling, but in Vampire: the Masquerade only Vampires experience it
and, as such, I would suggest that it only affect Kindred.
Sasquatch
===============================================================================
bigfoot@akeake.its.vuw.ac.nz vV^^Vv Vampire for Hire
==I=N=S=E=R=T===S=U=B=L=I=M=I=N=A=L===M=E=S=S=A=G=E===H=E=R=E==================
In article <340lhl$lco@perv.hal.COM> aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:
> Rotschrek does hose the vampire dealing the aggravated damage, not
> the vampire receiving it. Unsure what happens if you try to use
> it on an ally.
> *DISPUTED* Again... definitely FAQ material
In the White Wolf game, Rotschrek is a kind of 'super-fear' that only
Vampire experience. It stems from the fact that, being immortal (almost)
there's not much that can cause the the Final Death (burning a Vampire card)
and when they're faced by (or, I guess, in the case of this card - use) such
a thing, they sometimes go into utter terror, more than any human could know.
I don't know the card effects, which is a big minus on making a suggestion
for a ruling, but in Vampire: the Masquerade only Vampires experience it
and, as such, I would suggest that it only affect Kindred.
Sasquatch
===============================================================================
bigfoot@akeake.its.vuw.ac.nz vV^^Vv Vampire for Hire
==I=N=S=E=R=T===S=U=B=L=I=M=I=N=A=L===M=E=S=S=A=G=E===H=E=R=E==================
In article <343e7j$hnm@search01.news.aol.com>,
CurtAdams <curtadams@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <340lhl$lco@perv.hal.COM>, aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:
>>>Rotschrek does hose the vampire dealing the aggravated damage, not
>>the vampire receiving it. Unsure what happens if you try to use
>>it on an ally.
>> *DISPUTED* Again... definitely FAQ material>
>My thought on this-
>
>Rotschrek refers to a vampire's terror when faced with the threat of
>certain things that cause aggravated damage and hence possible death (eg,
>fire, sunlight). Imagine this scenario:
>
>Vampire A and Vampire B are in combat in A's haven, both weak and in bad
>shape. Vampire A, cackling, grabs a flamethrower from a hiding niche and
>points it at B. In terror for the imminent end of his undead existance -
>
>The vampire HOLDING the flamethrower flees to hide in the earth (torpor
>and tapped)!
>
>The vampire facing the business end of the flamethrower is apparently
>unfazed.
If you know the original game, this could make sense. The mere
presence of flames *could* send *ANY* Vampire into roetscheck. Ditto
for sunlight. This is not absurd. Hell, if you light a cigarette in
the presence of a vampire in the original game, they might go into
roetscheck.
What does *NOT* make sense is a Vampire going into roetscheck because
it sprouted claws. Vampire A sprouts claws and attacks Vampire B, by
the original game that's going to cause Roetscheck in Vampire B, not
Vampire A. *THIS* sort of thing is what makes the "vampire using agg
damage runs away" side of the argument a bit more absurd.
I had forgotten this possibility when I said both sides of the
argument sounded reasonable. Now, I think only the "target of agg
damage runs like hell" side is reasonable, if we're trying to be
consistant with the original game. And, this makes more sense given
the exact wording of the card.
--
Doug DeJulio
ddj+@pitt.edu