Hello all
If I make an actions which have some sort of cost, and then play an action
modifiere which also have some cost. Do I pay them at the same time, or one
after the other.
E.g. If I get one aggro damage from the action, and then one agro damage
from the action modifere do I the burn, or go to torpor loosing one blood?
Cheers
/Jesper
Jesper wrote:
> Hello all
>
> If I make an actions which have some sort of cost, and then play an action
> modifiere which also have some cost. Do I pay them at the same time, or one
> after the other.
The cost of an action modifier is paid when it is played.
The cost of an action is paid when the action is successful.
> E.g. If I get one aggro damage from the action, and then one agro damage
> from the action modifere do I the burn, or go to torpor loosing one blood?
Actions and action modifiers cost blood or pool.
Damage is not the cost of a card (or action).
If the action or modifier inflicts damage, then that damage is inflicted at
the time indicated by card text. If two effects do damage at the same time,
you can order those effects.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 15:52:26 +0200, Jesper <26984...@mail1.stofanet.dk>
wrote:
> E.g. If I get one aggro damage from the action, and then one agro damage
> from the action modifere do I the burn, or go to torpor loosing one
> blood?
Lets say for example that a vampire bleeds with superior Force of Will. One
of prey's vampires attempts to block and then the acting vampire plays
Daring the Dawn and after that Conditioning to boost the bleed.
This is what happens to the acting vampire:
1st - play FoW and start the action
2nd - play DtD
3rd - play Conditioning and pay 1 blood
4th - reduce prey's pool by amount bled
5th - take 1 agg from FoW and 1 agg from DtD
If the acting vampire started with:
- 1 blood: action fizzles skipping step 4, vampire burns with 2 agg from
FoW and DtD
- 2 blood: action succeeds and after that vampire burns with 2 agg from FoW
and DtD
- 3 blood or more: action succeeds and after that vampire goes to torpor
and burns 1 blood from 2 agg from FoW and DtD
"Jesper" <26984...@mail1.stofanet.dk> wrote in message news:<3f82c49f$0$26165$ba62...@nntp05.dk.telia.net>...
> Hello all
>
> If I make an actions which have some sort of cost, and then play an action
> modifiere which also have some cost. Do I pay them at the same time, or one
> after the other.
You pay when the card is successful.
> E.g. If I get one aggro damage from the action, and then one aggro damage> from the action modifere do I the burn, or go to torpor loosing one blood?
Taking aggravated damage occurs at resolution of the card, after costs
are paid. This may be declared in card text.
Say a vampire you control is forced to hunt going to 1 blood. Then you
decide to bleed at +2 bleed using Force of Will at superior. A vampire
attempts to block so you play Daring the Dawn at superior.
The action succeeds unblocked, so the vampire pays 1 blood going to
zero. The bled Meth takes 3. Then the acting vampire takes 2 points of
aggravated damage, burning in the process.
Here's another example:
A vampire you control has 1 blood and bleeds using Govern the
Unaligned. Depraved Thetmes attempts to block. You don't feel like
taking 2 aggravated damage so you desperately try to fish for stealth,
playing Conditioning, taking your vampire to zero blood. Luckily, you
draw into Lost in Crowds and stealth past Thetmes. Your action is
unblocked so now you pay costs for it to succeed. The vampire burned
his last blood for Conditioning, so the Govern fails (can't pay for
it) but at least your vampire survived for another turn.
Here's where I have a question now:
In the above scenario, was the action considered successful? It sounds
like the action was successful but fails due to non-payment. Suppose
Lucas Halton has 1 blood, a Fortitude skill card and the Ankara
Citadel. Lucas attempts to Clan Impersonate Assamites at +1 stealth.
Tariq Wakes then tries to stop him with +1 intercept since he's
already Draughted Anastazdi's Soul. Lucas further plays Alacrity for
+1 more stealth, paying his last blood in the process. Tariq lets the
action go unblocked.
Can Lucas play Freak Drive (for free) so he can try to hunt while
Tariq is still tapped? The action was successful (unblocked) but
failed due to lack of payment (no blood left).
Jeff
Remind me why people use Daring the Dawn instead of Day Operation again?
You can "Go to torpor" /after/ taking the one aggravated damage, can't you?
-Legendre
On 7 Oct 2003 17:07:39 -0700, mlo...@mail.wesleyan.edu (Legendre)
scrawled:
>Remind me why people use Daring the Dawn instead of Day Operation again?
> You can "Go to torpor" /after/ taking the one aggravated damage, can't you?
At inferior [for], you can play it (Daring) at any time, unlike Day
Op. You can play it if you have no blood. It's easier to get hold of
(printing wise). You might have cards that make you take agg damage as
normal, etc.
salem
domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm
On 7 Oct 2003 13:57:23 -0700, jeff...@hotmail.com (Jeff Kuta)
scrawled:
>Here's where I have a question now:
>In the above scenario, was the action considered successful? It sounds
>like the action was successful but fails due to non-payment. Suppose
>Lucas Halton has 1 blood, a Fortitude skill card and the Ankara
>Citadel. Lucas attempts to Clan Impersonate Assamites at +1 stealth.
>Tariq Wakes then tries to stop him with +1 intercept since he's
>already Draughted Anastazdi's Soul. Lucas further plays Alacrity for
>+1 more stealth, paying his last blood in the process. Tariq lets the
>action go unblocked.
>
>Can Lucas play Freak Drive (for free) so he can try to hunt while
>Tariq is still tapped? The action was successful (unblocked) but
>failed due to lack of payment (no blood left).
I think that's where Freak Drive misses being able to be played. The
action wasn't successful (as it wasn't paid for). Freak Drive is only
playable after a sucessful action (at inferior) or after a block (at
superior). Neither of these is the case here, so freak drive cannot be
played at all.
[ quoted text not captured ]
>At inferior [for], you can play it (Daring) at any time, unlike Day
>Op. You can play it if you have no blood. It's easier to get hold of
>(printing wise). You might have cards that make you take agg damage as
>normal, etc.
Yes. In my personal experience, Daring the Dawn seems to be the preferred
choice over Day Operation.
Of course, before CE it was a slightly different story since back then, Day Op
had the distinction of making the action entirely unblockable, instead of just
unblockable by vamps like it is now.
Halcyan 2
Okay, I see I failed to make my question clear, mixing things together.
I am aware of when you play and Action modifere you pay the cost, and for
the action if its succesfull, this gets me to my question.
What if there as a part of an Action Modifere is that you have to take one
aggro damage.
And as part of the action you get one aggro damage.
Dose that mean that you get one from the action modifere and then is
wounded, then you get one aggro damage from the action and since your
wounded is burned?
Cheers
/Jesper
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3F82DA89...@white-wolf.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 09:49:46 +0200, Jesper <26984...@mail1.stofanet.dk>
wrote:
> Dose that mean that you get one from the action modifere and then is
> wounded, then you get one aggro damage from the action and since your
> wounded is burned?
If a vampire is wounded and gets aggravated damage he must burn one blood
for every point of damage to avoid being burned. For example if a vampire
is going to torpor and in addition gets one aggravated damage he either
burns a blood or is burned.
As an answer to your question: yes if he had no blood, otherwise he can
burn blood equal to damage received to avoid being burned.
quote from Anarch rulebook, last paragraph on page 44:
"Aggravated damage done to a wuonded vampire can burn the
vampire outright. A wounded vampire is one that has taken
damage that he failed to heal or one that is in torpor or
on his way to torpor. For each point of aggravated damage
that is successfully inflicted on a wounded vampire, he must
burn a blood to prevent his destruction. If he doesn't have
enough blood, he is burned. Destruction by this method does
not constitute diablerie."
[ quoted text not captured ]
Correct. If the action doesn't resolve (as in the case when the cost
cannot be paid), then Freak Drive cannot be played (since it can only
be played after resolution).
Normally this doesn't matter, since a fizzled action normally fizzles
because of lack of blood, and a lack of blood itself would preclude
Freak Drive.
But, for cases when an empty vampire could play Freak Drive, as above,
it still cannot be played if the action didn't get resolved (that is,
if the effects of the successful action weren't applied).
Google: "freak fizzled author:LSJ"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3CBAAC8D.7A19FF4C%40white-wolf.com[ quoted text not captured ]
so in the first case with GtU and conditioning -u bleed for 0 since
the action u modified fail (i would say yes) but still like to get
things cleared up.
thx :D
salem <salem_ch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<qn07ovcfarek21eie...@4ax.com>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
[ quoted text not captured ]
u dn't beed 4 0. u dn't beed atall cuz u cn't pai 4 d axion, zo the
beed axion fzzles b4 d beed okurz. If u bed, u'd beed 4 6 (GtU+C).
[ quoted text not captured ]
LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3F84467F...@white-wolf.com>...
> TunFiskeMad wrote:
> u dn't beed 4 0. u dn't beed atall cuz u cn't pai 4 d axion, zo the
> beed axion fzzles b4 d beed okurz. If u bed, u'd beed 4 6 (GtU+C).
lololololololololololollololololololololololollololololololololololollololololololololololol
l$j H4$ MA5t3R3D L33+ H4X0R 5P34k!
On 8 Oct 2003 19:31:45 -0700, jeff...@hotmail.com (Jeff Kuta)
scrawled:
>LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3F84467F...@white-wolf.com>...[ quoted text not captured ]
it wasn't 1337 h4X0r speak, it was 'i have owned a mobile phone for
too long' speak.
but it _was_ LOL'able, indeed. ;)
[ quoted text not captured ]
"Jeff Kuta" <jeff...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:621dd332.03100...@posting.google.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Oh no ! you've broken our LSJ-Robot !
who's going to make smart rulings now ?
"Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> writes:
> Oh no ! you've broken our LSJ-Robot !
> who's going to make smart rulings now ?
You mean rulings like:
=> D00dz! H3r3z th3 n3w roo1z!
=> Th33z uzt t0 SUXX0R, but n0w th3m R t0tl _PWN4G3_!!!!!!!!11!!!1!!!
=>
=> - G14NTZ BL00D iz n0w TR1FL3 N can b3 pl4yd AZ M4NY T1M3Z U L1K3!!!1!!!
=> 1z th1z K3WL r \/\/!-!/-\~!~ ??!!?"?!?!!!? LOL, Bl00d, bl00d, bl00d,
=> BL00000000000000000000DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!"!!"1!!!!!!!!!!!!!
=>
=> - Azz-mit3z SUXXX0R!!!!11!!! 0lny N00BS N L00z3rz pl4y 'hem! Th3yr
=> n00b bl33d suxx0r t0 th3 m4xx0r. 4ll 4zz-mit3z R *******1NF3RN4L*****
=> n0w!!!1!!! M4XX0R K3WL1Z3R!!!! H41L S4T4N!!!!
=>
=> - M4lkz PWN!!! 4ll M4lkz N 4nt1-M4Lkz n0w h4f +3 BL33D!!!!!!! Y34H!!!
=> U R PWND, N00B!!!!!!!!!!
=>
=>
=> *****<<<<<<<<L5J TH3 R00LZ D00D PWNZ U>>>>>>>******
--
hg@ It's better to open your mouth and appear stupid,
iki.fi than to hold it shut and keep thinking you know it all.