Okay, I've got 3 questions that have come up during play:
1) The rules are explicit that a vampire performing a "leave torpor"
action loses the two blood if the action is blocked. If a "rescue
vampire from torpor" action is blocked, are the two blood lost?
2) According to Tom Wylie, you can play a strike that you know is
going to fail (Undead strength at range). How general is this? Can I
play a "Illegal Search and Seizure" if there are no weapons in play
that fit the description?
3) The Curse of Nitocris says that the curse can be transferred when
the Edge is given to a new Methuselah. If a Meth burns the Edge to
the center of the table, and is the first to reacquire it, does the
curse move?
Thanks for puzzling over these!
---
Eric Pettersen
pe...@cgl.ucsf.edu (NeXTmail capable)
Eric Pettersen <pe...@homer.ucsf.edu> wrote:
>1) The rules are explicit that a vampire performing a "leave torpor"
>action loses the two blood if the action is blocked. If a "rescue
>vampire from torpor" action is blocked, are the two blood lost?
No.
>2) According to Tom Wylie, you can play a strike that you know is
>going to fail (Undead strength at range). How general is this? Can I
>play a "Illegal Search and Seizure" if there are no weapons in play
>that fit the description?
The rule about failing strikes does not apply to using master cards
or action cards. You can only Seize a weapon as described on the card.
>3) The Curse of Nitocris says that the curse can be transferred when
>the Edge is given to a new Methuselah. If a Meth burns the Edge to
>the center of the table, and is the first to reacquire it, does the
>curse move?
My answer would be yes (someone is getting the edge who didn't have it
a second ago), but I will have to check on that.
Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <3pu4k6$n...@darkstar.ucsc.edu>,
Thomas R Wylie <aa...@cats.ucsc.edu> wrote:
>>2) According to Tom Wylie, you can play a strike that you know is
>>going to fail (Undead strength at range). How general is this? Can I
>>play a "Illegal Search and Seizure" if there are no weapons in play
>>that fit the description?>The rule about failing strikes does not apply to using master cards
>or action cards. You can only Seize a weapon as described on the card.
Is this a reversal?
FAQ 19.4.95 says:
GENERAL RULINGS
First an important overall ruling: A card can be played, even if
only part of its requirements are covered. For example Anarch
Troublemaker can be played even if your prey only has one vampire
in play.
Therefore one could play an "Illegal Search and Seizure" even, when the
vampire has no weapon. Just roughing it up in the 'unsuccessful' search.
Yours Sincerely Lutz Hofmann
l...@cs.tu-berlin.de
--
Happiness? - - - Roger Taylor
In article <3pvbfg$7...@news.cs.tu-berlin.de>,
Lutz Hofmann <l...@cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote:
>In article <3pu4k6$n...@darkstar.ucsc.edu>,
>Thomas R Wylie <aa...@cats.ucsc.edu> wrote:>>>2) According to Tom Wylie, you can play a strike that you know is
>>>going to fail (Undead strength at range). How general is this? Can I
>>>play a "Illegal Search and Seizure" if there are no weapons in play
>>>that fit the description?>>>The rule about failing strikes does not apply to using master cards
>>or action cards. You can only Seize a weapon as described on the card.>
>Is this a reversal?
>FAQ 19.4.95 says:
>GENERAL RULINGS
>
>First an important overall ruling: A card can be played, even if
>only part of its requirements are covered. For example Anarch
>Troublemaker can be played even if your prey only has one vampire
>in play.
No, it is not a reversal, nor does it contradict the above ruling.
There is only one requirement for IS&Seizure: a weapon of suitable
description. The only way you can meet "part" of this is to meet all of
this.
If you got to destroy two weapons held by such a minion, then you could
play it on a minion who only had one.
--
-----
L. Scott Johnson (lsc...@crl.com) | The opinions expressed are mine
Graphics Specialist and Jyhad Rulemonger | and subject to card text
L. Scott Johnson <lsc...@crl.com> wrote:
>>>The rule about failing strikes does not apply to using master cards
>>>or action cards. You can only Seize a weapon as described on the card.>>Is this a reversal?
>>FAQ 19.4.95 says:
>>GENERAL RULINGS
>>
>>First an important overall ruling: A card can be played, even if
>>only part of its requirements are covered. For example Anarch
>>Troublemaker can be played even if your prey only has one vampire
>>in play.>
>No, it is not a reversal, nor does it contradict the above ruling.
>There is only one requirement for IS&Seizure: a weapon of suitable
>description. The only way you can meet "part" of this is to meet all of
>this.
On the other hand, it says later in the FAQ that you can use Troublemaker
if your prey has no vampires.
Maybe I have too much Magic on the brain, but it seems to me that if you're
playing an action or master card, the effect should be able to do *something*
(can you use Disputed Location if there are no locations in play?). Taking
a straw poll among the design team, we're sure you can use an effect if only
some of the effect will fail, but are divided on what to do if all of the
effect will fail. This will have to be taken up at a design team meeting.
Also, it was confirmed that you can play a useless strike card.
[ quoted text not captured ]
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote:
>Maybe I have too much Magic on the brain, but it seems to me that if you're
>playing an action or master card, the effect should be able to do *something*
>(can you use Disputed Location if there are no locations in play?). Taking
>a straw poll among the design team, we're sure you can use an effect if only
>some of the effect will fail, but are divided on what to do if all of the
>effect will fail. This will have to be taken up at a design team meeting.
Peace Tom,
My $0.02: I don't think that you should be able to burn cards like that.
Playing a card should have /some/ effect.
>Also, it was confirmed that you can play a useless strike card.
But not in response to S:CE, which is inconsistant.
Nil carborundum illigitimi,
James R. McClure Jr.
The OS/2 Apostle
<insert disclaimer here>