[LSJ] Intercept cards

Vampire A plays a Bum's Rush targetting vampire B. B attempts to block, and A plays superior Lost in Crowds to get +2 stealth. B plays superior Precognition to get +1 intercept, but does not block the action. Combat occurs, and Precognition reads: [aus] +1 intercept [AUS] As above, and if combat occurs, prevent 1 damage during the first round of combat. So, may B prevent 1 damage during the resulting combat, although this combat is not due to a successful blocking attempt?. Thanks in advance, and greetings. Damnans

[ quoted text not captured ] No. Like the updated Guard Dogs, et al., the card requires a block to grant a maneuver. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

LSJ skrev i meddelandet <3B77C346...@white-wolf.com>... >Damnans wrote: >> >> Vampire A plays a Bum's Rush targetting vampire B. >> B attempts to block, and A plays superior Lost in Crowds to get +2 >> stealth. >> B plays superior Precognition to get +1 intercept, but does not block >> the action. >> Combat occurs, and Precognition reads: >> >> [aus] +1 intercept >> [AUS] As above, and if combat occurs, prevent 1 damage during the first >> round of combat. >> >> So, may B prevent 1 damage during the resulting combat, although this >> combat is not due to a successful blocking attempt?. > >No. Like the updated Guard Dogs, et al., the card requires a block to >grant a maneuver. > Related question: Let's say A intercepts something with a precognition, combat occurs. In first round of combat A prevents a handstrike with the precognition. B blurs and plays form of mist. A wakes and playes more intercept. Does A get to use the precognition again in the new combat? /Henrik

Henrik wrote: > LSJ skrev i meddelandet <3B77C346...@white-wolf.com>... > >No. Like the updated Guard Dogs, et al., the card requires a block to > >grant a maneuver. > > > Let's say A intercepts something with a precognition, combat occurs. In > first round of combat A prevents a handstrike with the precognition. B blurs > and plays form of mist. A wakes and playes more intercept. Does A get to use > the precognition again in the new combat? Yes. It's still block-combat. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:12:01 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Henrik wrote: >> LSJ skrev i meddelandet <3B77C346...@white-wolf.com>... >> >No. Like the updated Guard Dogs, et al., the card requires a block to >> >grant a maneuver. >> > >> Let's say A intercepts something with a precognition, combat occurs. In >> first round of combat A prevents a handstrike with the precognition. B blurs >> and plays form of mist. A wakes and playes more intercept. Does A get to use >> the precognition again in the new combat? > >Yes. It's still block-combat. > Clarification: he doesnt get to use the OLD precognition again does he, for the prevent damage that is? T

[ quoted text not captured ] He does. The action modifier is still in effect. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3B791591...@white-wolf.com>... > Henrik wrote: > > LSJ skrev i meddelandet <3B77C346...@white-wolf.com>... > > >No. Like the updated Guard Dogs, et al., the card requires a block to > > >grant a maneuver. > > > > > Let's say A intercepts something with a precognition, combat occurs. In > > first round of combat A prevents a handstrike with the precognition. B blurs > > and plays form of mist. A wakes and playes more intercept. Does A get to use > > the precognition again in the new combat? > > Yes. It's still block-combat. The current wording of Spirit's Touch on the White Wolf site hasn't been changed to match that template. Should it be taken to work the same way? Also, I see that Precognition's wording is now (I think this is different?) "this vampire can prevent up to 1 damage" - does that mean that the prevention is now optional? Thanks. Josh 'trouble is his middle name kicking buckets that's his game'

Joshua Duffin wrote: > > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3B791591...@white-wolf.com>... > > Henrik wrote: > > > LSJ skrev i meddelandet <3B77C346...@white-wolf.com>... > > > >No. Like the updated Guard Dogs, et al., the card requires a block to > > > >grant a maneuver. > > > > > > > Let's say A intercepts something with a precognition, combat occurs. In > > > first round of combat A prevents a handstrike with the precognition. B blurs > > > and plays form of mist. A wakes and playes more intercept. Does A get to use > > > the precognition again in the new combat? > > > > Yes. It's still block-combat. > > The current wording of Spirit's Touch on the White Wolf site hasn't > been changed to match that template. Should it be taken to work the > same way? Yes. > Also, I see that Precognition's wording is now (I think this is > different?) "this vampire can prevent up to 1 damage" - does that > mean that the prevention is now optional? The prevention is optional. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2001 14:06:14 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Talo...@hotmail.com wrote: >> >> On Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:12:01 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> >> wrote: >> >> >Henrik wrote: >> >> LSJ skrev i meddelandet <3B77C346...@white-wolf.com>... >> >> >No. Like the updated Guard Dogs, et al., the card requires a block to >> >> >grant a maneuver. >> >> > >> >> Let's say A intercepts something with a precognition, combat occurs. In >> >> first round of combat A prevents a handstrike with the precognition. B blurs >> >> and plays form of mist. A wakes and playes more intercept. Does A get to use >> >> the precognition again in the new combat? >> > >> >Yes. It's still block-combat. >> > >> >> Clarification: he doesnt get to use the OLD precognition again does >> he, for the prevent damage that is? > >He does. The action modifier is still in effect. > But...its already been used. T

[ quoted text not captured ] So has the +1 intercept. I don't see a restriction on the number of "resulting" combats. [ quoted text not captured ]

> > >> Clarification: he doesnt get to use the OLD precognition again does > > >> he, for the prevent damage that is? > > > > > >He does. The action modifier is still in effect. > > > > > > > But...its already been used. > > So has the +1 intercept. > I don't see a restriction on the number of "resulting" combats. I don't think that's a fair comparison though. As I see it the intercept is not "used up" when you intercept an action. It's merely provided and sticks to the vampire for the remainder of the action, much like the increased hand damage is provided for the remainder of the combat with Torn Signpost. TS is never used up in the combat. Precognition however lets you prevent 1 damage during the first round of combat (btw there's a typo on the WW site saying "during the firs round"). It's something you "use up" when you make use of it, since there's a number provided for how much damage you may prevent (and implicitly it's understood you may only use this ability once in the first round of combat, thus when you have done that you have used up the ability for that combat). Text doesn't say "_each combat_ during the first round" although it could arguably be interpreted as that. But I don't think it's as clear cut case as the +1 intercept.

In message <3B7E4B15...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white- wolf.com> writes >So has the +1 intercept. >I don't see a restriction on the number of "resulting" combats. The fact that it is worded "the resulting combat" (singular) could be taken as a limitation to 1. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D Close your eyes so you don't feel them EBD690ECD7A1F They don't need to see you cry B457CA213D7E6 I can't promise I will heal you, but if you want to I will try 68C3695D623D5D

James Coupe wrote: > > In message <3B7E4B15...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white- > wolf.com> writes > >So has the +1 intercept. > >I don't see a restriction on the number of "resulting" combats. > > The fact that it is worded "the resulting combat" (singular) could be > taken as a limitation to 1. Singular in that there is only one combat that results from one block. Since there are two blocks while the action modifier is in effect (an oddity in general), the intercept can be used to block twice and the reacting minion gets an optional maneuver in the resulting combats ("the resulting combat" from the first block and "the resulting combat" from the second block). See also Donal, which uses a singular "combat" when referring to being blocked - which also refers to each and every block combat. [ quoted text not captured ]

> > In message <3B7E4B15...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white- > > wolf.com> writes > > >So has the +1 intercept. > > >I don't see a restriction on the number of "resulting" combats. > > > > The fact that it is worded "the resulting combat" (singular) could be > > taken as a limitation to 1. > > Singular in that there is only one combat that results from one block. But with !Psyche there can be two combats from one block, you get to prevent twice? > > Since there are two blocks while the action modifier is in effect (an > oddity in general), the intercept can be used to block twice and the > reacting minion gets an optional maneuver in the resulting combats > ("the resulting combat" from the first block and "the resulting combat" > from the second block). I think you mean prevent 1 damage and not maneuver since we were talking about precognition but I get the idea.

Roger Carhult wrote: > > > > In message <3B7E4B15...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white- > > > wolf.com> writes > > > >So has the +1 intercept. > > > >I don't see a restriction on the number of "resulting" combats. > > > > > > The fact that it is worded "the resulting combat" (singular) could be > > > taken as a limitation to 1. > > > > Singular in that there is only one combat that results from one block. > > But with !Psyche there can be two combats from one block, you get to > prevent twice? No. The combat that results from Psyche! is not the result of a block. [ quoted text not captured ]