NRA rule + cards that provide two separate actions

A question came up on IRC today about how the no repeat actions rule applies when you have a card that provides multiple separate actions. I've already received an answer from Scott, but it seemed like I should post here to make sure the answer can be accessed by everybody. Section 6.1.6 of the rulebook, last two paragraphs: To take the action described by a card in play, announce the action and tap the acting minion. If the action is successful, it resolves as indicated on the card (and the cost, if any, is paid). If the action is unsuccessful, there is no effect. A minion cannot perform an action with the same action card or via the same card in play (including from the minion's own card text) more than once each turn, even if he untaps. Any of the following five cards (and perhaps others) could be used as an example of a card in play providing multiple separate actions: Gregory Winter Dauntain Black Magician Kaymakli Fragment Barbaro Lucchese Virstania, The Great Mother Here's Greg Winter's text, since he's my favorite out of that list: During your untap phase, Gregory burns 1 life. He can steal a blood (gaining a life) from a vampire controlled by another Methuselah as a +1 stealth (D) action. He can burn a vampire in torpor to gain 2 life as a (D) action. -- Bob Joseph jos...@cse.ohio-state.edu http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~joseph

On Sep 9, 4:39 pm, robert joseph wrote: > A question came up on IRC today about how the no repeat actions > rule applies when you have a card that provides multiple > separate actions. I've already received an answer from Scott, > but it seemed like I should post here to make sure the > answer can be accessed by everybody. So, what you are saying, is that Gregory Winter cannot take the "burn a vampire in torpor" action if he has already taken the "steal a blood" action on that turn. Is that the correct interpretation? > Section 6.1.6 of the rulebook, last two paragraphs: > A minion cannot perform an action with the same action card or via the > same card in play (including from the minion's own card text) more than > once each turn, even if he untaps. > Here's Greg Winter's text, since he's my favorite out of that list: [ quoted text not captured ]

The Lasombra <thela...@hotmail.com> writes: > On Sep 9, 4:39 pm, robert joseph wrote: >> A question came up on IRC today about how the no repeat actions >> rule applies when you have a card that provides multiple >> separate actions. I've already received an answer from Scott, >> but it seemed like I should post here to make sure the >> answer can be accessed by everybody. > > So, what you are saying, is that Gregory Winter cannot take the "burn > a vampire in torpor" action if he has already taken the "steal a > blood" action on that turn. > > Is that the correct interpretation? That's what we thought, but Scott told me that he can take both actions (assuming you can untap him). [ quoted text not captured ]

On 9 sep, 23:06, robert joseph <jos...@cse.ohio-state.edu> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] That seems a bit contradictory with http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/4d8451bb7fe206c1 (which has been repeated in the rulebook as you quoted). Maybe quoting the reply from Scott could help solving this ambiguity.

floppyzedolfin <floppyz...@gmail.com> writes: [ quoted text not captured ] Yes, it does seem to contradict that post, which we for some reason didn't find during the discussion. I'm interested in seeing Scott's response. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sep 9, 4:39 pm, robert joseph <jos...@cse.ohio-state.edu> wrote: > A question came up on IRC today about how the no repeat actions > rule applies when you have a card that provides multiple > separate actions. I've already received an answer from Scott, > but it seemed like I should post here to make sure the > answer can be accessed by everybody. If text provides two "X as an action", then those aren't cross- restricting. "Minions may X1 as an action. Minions may X2 as an action". A minion could only do X1 once each turn, likewise X2 once each turn, but could do both X1 and X2 on the same turn. > Section 6.1.6 of the rulebook, last two paragraphs: > > To take the action described by a card in play, announce the action and > tap the acting minion. If the action is successful, it resolves as > indicated on the card (and the cost, if any, is paid). If the action is > unsuccessful, there is no effect. > > A minion cannot perform an action with the same action card or via the > same card in play (including from the minion's own card text) more than > once each turn, even if he untaps. > > Any of the following five cards (and perhaps others) could be used as > an example of a card in play providing multiple separate actions: > > Gregory Winter > Dauntain Black Magician > Kaymakli Fragment > Barbaro Lucchese > Virstania, The Great Mother Amam Lunatic Eruption Open War Virgil And for those minions inclined to burn helpful cards: Archon Covenant of Blood Dogs of War Joseph Pander Lazarene Inquisitor Some powerbases Sabbat Inquistor Templar Zoning Board [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sep 9, 5:19 pm, robert joseph <jos...@cse.ohio-state.edu> wrote: > floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> writes: > > On 9 sep, 23:06, robert joseph <jos...@cse.ohio-state.edu> wrote: > >> The Lasombra <thelasom...@hotmail.com> writes: > >> > On Sep 9, 4:39 pm, robert joseph wrote: > >> >> A question came up on IRC today about how the no repeat actions > >> >> rule applies when you have a card that provides multiple > >> >> separate actions. I've already received an answer from Scott, > >> >> but it seemed like I should post here to make sure the > >> >> answer can be accessed by everybody. > > >> > So, what you are saying, is that Gregory Winter cannot take the "burn > >> > a vampire in torpor" action if he has already taken the "steal a > >> > blood" action on that turn. > > >> > Is that the correct interpretation? > > >> That's what we thought, but Scott told me that he can take both > >> actions (assuming you can untap him). > > >> -- > >> Bob Joseph jos...@cse.ohio-state.eduhttp://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~joseph > > > That seems a bit contradictory with > >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/4d84... > > (which has been repeated in the rulebook as you quoted). > > Maybe quoting the reply from Scott could help solving this ambiguity. > > Yes, it does seem to contradict that post, which we for some reason > didn't find during the discussion. I'm interested in seeing Scott's > response. Reversal of that answer, yes.

[ quoted text not captured ] "If text provides two "X as an action", then those aren't cross- restricting. " Are you saying this specifically for allies? Or does this count for action cards too now? e..g bleed with a govern at dom then do the DOM action to move blood to uncontrolled region. As far as I am aware that is currently not legit, but with this new reversal does that make it legal to do both with the same minion in the same turn? simcof

[ quoted text not captured ] It is cards in played, as described.

[ quoted text not captured ] > simcof- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Only for things "in play on the table" not "cards from hand". But I'm assuming you'd also hit the NRA for cards in play by stating that one action on card XYZ cannot be attempted by multiple vampires (without text to the contrary).

Juggernaut1981 <brassc...@gmail.com> wrote: >But I'm >assuming you'd also hit the NRA for cards in play by stating that one >action on card XYZ cannot be attempted by multiple vampires (without >text to the contrary). What are you basing this on? The various repeat action rules prevent one minion from taking multiple actions of particular types (bleed, vote, card in hand, card in play etc.) in the same turn. Which rule are you seeing that prevents Dre using a Haven Uncovered and then Duck using the same Haven Uncovered? -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

[ quoted text not captured ] I think this is one of those cases where Scott's concise answers are causing people to extrapolate or misunderstand things he's not saying. Here's a speed-summary of the NRA rule as I understand it, which hasn't changed at all, except in the case regarding a card in play that provides two different actions: Each minion may only do the following per turn: - One political action - One bleed action - Any number of actions granted by cards-from-hand, but only once per card name (ie, no Govern to Bleed then Govern Down) - Any number of actions granted by cards-in-play, but only once per action per copy of the card in play. (Previously, it had been one action per card in play, not one of each action. This is the reversal - just this part - ie, Gregory can now steal a blood, get untapped, and burn a vampire in torpor, or a !Brujah can rush someone via Dogs of War, untap, then call the referendum to burn Dogs of War). - Any number of other table actions provided by the rules, not limited at all (ie, you can keep untapping and moving equipment, or keep untapping and trying to diablerize the same vampire, as far as I know) NRA's only apply to the minion who's taken the action - if the source of the action allows another minion to take it, xe can. Assuming I've got that right (I'm only about 95% sure of the last one - rule-based repeats at the same target), is that clearer? - D.J. - D.J.