vitae

I'm a little confused about Tase of Vitae... the text reads that all the blood lost during the current round of combat by the opposing vampire is stolen... but this seems odd. Is this to mean that if my opponent plays blur, thus losing blood, that I gain it, or is "paying" blood different than "losing" it... also, I had seen somewhere else on the net that when played with theft of vitae, taste of vitae would still function effectively, giving the attacker a *lot* of blood.. what's up? thanks, rick

[ quoted text not captured ] It is ruled to count up blood lost by any means, including by paying the cost of cards such as Blur. Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

Richard Reinking (ri...@u.washington.edu) wrote: : I'm a little confused about Tase of Vitae... : the text reads that all the blood lost during the current round of combat : by the opposing vampire is stolen... but this seems odd. Is this to mean : that if my opponent plays blur, thus losing blood, that I gain it, or is : "paying" blood different than "losing" it... also, I had seen somewhere : else on the net that when played with theft of vitae, taste of vitae : would still function effectively, giving the attacker a *lot* of blood.. : what's up? : : thanks, rick : : It may sound/be stupid , but officially you can taste-of-vitae on stolen blood . Its a complete rort and yet another questionable decision by the DT . As a house rule we play that you cant ....... JA Chapman

aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes: >Richard Reinking <ri...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >>I'm a little confused about Tase of Vitae... >>the text reads that all the blood lost during the current round of combat >>by the opposing vampire is stolen... but this seems odd. Is this to mean >>that if my opponent plays blur, thus losing blood, that I gain it, or is >>"paying" blood different than "losing" it... also, I had seen somewhere >>else on the net that when played with theft of vitae, taste of vitae >>would still function effectively, giving the attacker a *lot* of blood.. >>what's up? >It is ruled to count up blood lost by any means, including by paying the >cost of cards such as Blur. That would be a real "puh-leeze" ruling and would definitely put Taste on the list of problem cards. "Lost" isn't defined in the rules, take the chance to define it sensibly. Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)