[LSJ] Double Theft of Vitae sequence

If both combatants declared Theft of Vitae, and both are full, what would be the result of this? And how these strikes are resolved - both vampires lose blood, then both vampires gain blood, or vice versa, or the acting vampire's strike resolves first?

On 27 Oct 2004 00:40:19 -0700, Ec...@mail.ru (Ector) scrawled: [ quoted text not captured ] assuming: neither of the vampires had first strike both the thefts were played at the same level result: both vampires still at full capacity. picture it like picking the blood counters off both vampires at the same time, then moving the counters across the table at the same time to their new owners. strikes are _declared_ acting vampire first, but are resolved simultaneously. (barring first strike, s:ce, dodge, etc) salem domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm (replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)

"salem" <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:q9lun0lv57p8n5jfq...@4ax.com... > On 27 Oct 2004 00:40:19 -0700, Ec...@mail.ru (Ector) scrawled: > > >If both combatants declared Theft of Vitae, and both are full, what > >would be the result of this? And how these strikes are resolved - both > >vampires lose blood, then both vampires gain blood, or vice versa, or > >the acting vampire's strike resolves first? > > assuming: > neither of the vampires had first strike > both the thefts were played at the same level > > result: > both vampires still at full capacity. > > picture it like picking the blood counters off both vampires at the > same time, then moving the counters across the table at the same time > to their new owners. > > strikes are _declared_ acting vampire first, but are resolved > simultaneously. (barring first strike, s:ce, dodge, etc) Correct. And if two four caps, Nob and Marthe, are in combat, and Nob has no blood and Marthe has two, and if both strike to steal two blood, Nob steals Marthe's two and Marthe steal nothing (since Nob has no blood to steal). So Nob ends up with 2 blood and Marthe ends up empty. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<2u9p0eF...@uni-berlin.de>... > "salem" <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:q9lun0lv57p8n5jfq...@4ax.com... > > On 27 Oct 2004 00:40:19 -0700, Ec...@mail.ru (Ector) scrawled: > > > > >If both combatants declared Theft of Vitae, and both are full, what > > >would be the result of this? And how these strikes are resolved - both > > >vampires lose blood, then both vampires gain blood, or vice versa, or > > >the acting vampire's strike resolves first? > > > > assuming: > > neither of the vampires had first strike > > both the thefts were played at the same level > > > > result: > > both vampires still at full capacity. > > > > picture it like picking the blood counters off both vampires at the > > same time, then moving the counters across the table at the same time > > to their new owners. > > > > strikes are _declared_ acting vampire first, but are resolved > > simultaneously. (barring first strike, s:ce, dodge, etc) > > > Correct. > > And if two four caps, Nob and Marthe, are in combat, and Nob > has no blood and Marthe has two, and if both strike to steal > two blood, Nob steals Marthe's two and Marthe steal nothing > (since Nob has no blood to steal). So Nob ends up with 2 > blood and Marthe ends up empty. Ok. But I thought if a vampire who is a full cap thefts the blood gain 'burns' off before damage resolution... meaning if two full cap vampires play sup theft on each other they both would be down 2 blood. Is my interpretation incorrect? If so, why? Andrew

dal...@iinet.net.au (Andrew Daley) wrote in message news:<8821ff0a.04102...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] I guess it is this: Relevant rulboook text: --- Steal Blood: This effect moves blood counters (or life counters) from the target to the striking minion. This does not count as damage, so the effect cannot be prevented with damage prevention effects. This effect occurs before the "heal damage" step of damage resolution, so the stolen blood can be used to heal damage even if the damage is inflicted simultaneously. If the stolen blood causes the striking vampire to have more blood than his capacity, the excess drains off immediately (as usual). --- The stolen blood is simultaneously from both sides removed and added. This effect may happen before the "heal damage" step of damage resolution, but so does the other theft. Take, for instance: Rob and Anthony, both 4caps, at full capacity. Rob has a murder of crows. Rob plays inferior theft of vitae. Anthony plays superior theft of vitae, targetting Rob. Rob loses 2 blood from the theft, and simultaneously gains 1, leaving him at 3 blood. Anthony loses 1 blood from the theft, and simultanously gains 2. 1 Excess drains off, and then he heals the point of damage from the crows, leaving him at 3 blood as well. Hope that clarifies something. -Bram Vink The names in this example are randomly chosen and any similarities to persons in reality are purely coincidental.

dal...@iinet.net.au (Andrew Daley) wrote in message news:<8821ff0a.04102...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] There is no damage to resolve. A thefts B > A+2 and B-2 at the same time B thefts A >> A+2-2=A and B-2+2=B. After theft/steal resolution, no one is above their capacity so it's all good. Jeff > > Andrew

In message <8821ff0a.04102...@posting.google.com>, Andrew Daley <dal...@iinet.net.au> writes: >But I thought if a vampire who is a full cap thefts the blood gain >'burns' off before damage resolution... meaning if two full cap >vampires play sup theft on each other they both would be down 2 blood. > >Is my interpretation incorrect? If so, why? What you're missing is that: - you apply the effects of strikes simultaneously. For damage dealing strikes, this involves working out how much damage has been dealt. *Both* Thefts are handled here at the same time. - Now you burn off excess. - Now you handle (prevent/burn/heal) damage. So, you're not incorrect about burning before damage resolution. It's just that simultaneous strikes really are simultaneous. Take two counters off Vamp A. Take two counters off Vamp B. Move the appropriate counters to the other vampire simultaneously. Note that, when the counters arrive, they both have two "points" of blood left to fill up. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D Who's ever heard of that, though! EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 Designing a deck that just calls votes. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D That's crazy talk, there.

James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:<z7PfAgKC...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>... > In message <8821ff0a.04102...@posting.google.com>, Andrew > Daley <dal...@iinet.net.au> writes: > >But I thought if a vampire who is a full cap thefts the blood gain > >'burns' off before damage resolution... meaning if two full cap > >vampires play sup theft on each other they both would be down 2 blood. > > > >Is my interpretation incorrect? If so, why? > > What you're missing is that: > > - you apply the effects of strikes simultaneously. For damage dealing > strikes, this involves working out how much damage has been dealt. > *Both* Thefts are handled here at the same time. > > - Now you burn off excess. > > - Now you handle (prevent/burn/heal) damage. > > > So, you're not incorrect about burning before damage resolution. It's > just that simultaneous strikes really are simultaneous. > > Take two counters off Vamp A. Take two counters off Vamp B. Move the > appropriate counters to the other vampire simultaneously. Note that, > when the counters arrive, they both have two "points" of blood left to > fill up. Thanks for all who helped me understand by explaining. I have my head around it now. Andrew