Some questions about the counterspell twins, Direct Intervention and
Sudden Reversal:
1. If I DI a player's Lost in Crowds, can s/he play another Lost in
Crowds during the same action??
2. Similarly, if I play a Direct Intervention to burn a Conditioning,
can the active player play another Conditioning or bleed modifier??
2. If I SR a Giant's Blood, can another one be played during the
game??
3. If my Master card is SR'ed, do I get to play another Master card
that turn, or is my master card action used up??
Thanks in advance,
Madman
In message <7d8b1942.01071...@posting.google.com>, Madman2001
<4fis...@compuserve.com> writes
>1. If I DI a player's Lost in Crowds, can s/he play another Lost in
>Crowds during the same action??
No. The card was played, even if its effects were cancelled.
>2. Similarly, if I play a Direct Intervention to burn a Conditioning,
>can the active player play another Conditioning
No. 1 named action modifier per minion per action.
> or bleed modifier??
Yes. The no more modifiers section of the Conditioning didn't kick in
(cancelled effect by DI), so you could play Threats (say).
>2. If I SR a Giant's Blood, can another one be played during the
>game??
No. The GB was played (and cancelled) and the card text from the second
copy will prevent it being played.
>3. If my Master card is SR'ed, do I get to play another Master card
>that turn
No. The card was played. Its effects were cancelled, but its non-pool
cost (one master phase action) was not. (Card text.)
>, or is my master card action used up??
Yup.
--
James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D
EBD690ECD7A1F
She twirled a lock of hair around her forefinger and smiled B457CA213D7E6
faintly. "Actually, I'd settle for a small Greek." 68C3695D623D5D
"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote
> >2. If I SR a Giant's Blood, can another one be played during the
> >game??
>
> No. The GB was played (and cancelled) and the card text from the second
> copy will prevent it being played.
Is this correct? I assumed that any number of Giant's Blood
could be played during a game, but only the first played could
ever produce the blood gain.
- Jason Bell
"Jason Bell" <Jason...@mail.com> wrote in message news:<TSv47.90532$ih.18...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
I beleive the Jyhad version had text to this effect. However, it was
changed when VTES got printed, to say only one may be played in a
game. And, as cards are played as per their latest print run (or
errata..), then it can only be played once per game.
salem.
In message <a36647e2.01071...@posting.google.com>, salem
christ <salem_...@my-deja.com> writes
>> Is this correct? I assumed that any number of Giant's Blood
>> could be played during a game, but only the first played could
>> ever produce the blood gain.>
>I beleive the Jyhad version had text to this effect. However, it was
>changed when VTES got printed, to say only one may be played in a
>game. And, as cards are played as per their latest print run (or
>errata..), then it can only be played once per game.
Correct.
[ quoted text not captured ]
"Jason Bell" <Jason...@mail.com> wrote:
>I assumed that any number of Giant's Blood
>could be played during a game, but only the first played could
>ever produce the blood gain.
The Jyhad version indicated as much. But the V:TES version (the most
recent printing - from 1995) indicates otherwise. See the online card
text.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
------------------------------------------------------------
Get your FREE web-based e-mail and newsgroup access at:
http://MailAndNews.com
DIRECT INTERVENTION
Out-of-Turn. Burn a minion card as it is played. Any blood or pool
cost burned for that card is retrieved from the blood bank by the
vampire or Methusaleh who played it. If the burned card was an action
card, the acting minion remains untapped. If the card was a strike
card, the minion chooses another strike.
Clarifications and Rulings
1)If Direct Intervention is used to cancel a card during a political
action, neither card is replaced until the political action is ended.
[LSJ 19970224]
2)Since the NRA rule is applied to the acting minion when the action
resolves (is blocked or is successful), the minion whose action card
is canceled by Direct Intervention is free to attempt the same type of
action again, even with (another copy of) the same card. [LSJ
19980212]
3)Can only burn minion cards played from the hand in the normal
fashion (not weapons played via Disguised Weapon or equipment played
via Pier 13, for example). [RTR 20001020]
James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:<GRBhp3m0...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>...
> In message <7d8b1942.01071...@posting.google.com>, Madman2001
> <4fis...@compuserve.com> writes
> >1. If I DI a player's Lost in Crowds, can s/he play another Lost in
> >Crowds during the same action??
>
> No. The card was played, even if its effects were cancelled.
>
> >2. Similarly, if I play a Direct Intervention to burn a Conditioning,
> >can the active player play another Conditioning
>
> No. 1 named action modifier per minion per action.
>
> > or bleed modifier??
>
> Yes. The no more modifiers section of the Conditioning didn't kick in
> (cancelled effect by DI), so you could play Threats (say).
====
so clarification 2 only affects action cards? if i computer hack you
with conditioning, then 2 methuselahs DI me, only the conditioning
cannot be re-played, i could re-use another copy of computer hack?
also, "If the burned card was an action card, the acting minion
remains untapped." i take it that this only affects action cards (and
by definition, political actions.) if i recruit an ally, hire a
retainer, or equip, and the subject card is burned by DI, my minion
remains tapped? this seems like an odd variation on how the card
works, ie, it's better vs. equip/hire/recruit...
thanks in advance
-spinney
"i don't live today; maybe tomorrow, i just can't say..." -j.hendrix
[Please use a more standard form of quoting, involving more white space
to aid readability. It is not necessary to quote a whole card text
unless you are explicitly referring to the text. It is also useful to
quote them as and when it becomes relevant - not just in one big go -
for the sanity of everyone trying to follow a thread.]
In message <27f52a52.01071...@posting.google.com>, spinney99
<spore...@hotmail.com> writes
>so clarification 2 only affects action cards?>2)Since the NRA rule is applied to the acting minion when the action>resolves (is blocked or is successful), the minion whose action card
>is canceled by Direct Intervention is free to attempt the same type of
>action again, even with (another copy of) the same card. [LSJ
>19980212]>if i computer hack you>with conditioning, then 2 methuselahs DI me, only the conditioning
>cannot be re-played, i could re-use another copy of computer hack?
That's not how it works. There is a gap after the playing of Computer
Hacking and before the playing of Conditioning for a DI to be played.
If Methuselahs do not play it then, they cannot go back in time and
cancel the Computer Hacking.
However, you are not entitled to rush through the playing of cards in
order that they don't get a proper chance to play.
>also, "If the burned card was an action card, the acting minion
>remains untapped." i take it that this only affects action cards (and
>by definition, political actions.) if i recruit an ally, hire a
>retainer, or equip, and the subject card is burned by DI, my minion
>remains tapped?
By strict interpretation of "action card", yes. (Since "action card" is
defined in the rulesbook, and ally/equipment/retainer card is defined
separately.)
I would expect, however, to see this over-ruled by LSJ and/or the Rules
Team, ruling that since an ally card (or whatever) provides an action
and is considered an action card for this purpose.
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, James Coupe wrote:
> >also, "If the burned card was an action card, the acting minion
> >remains untapped." i take it that this only affects action cards (and
> >by definition, political actions.) if i recruit an ally, hire a
> >retainer, or equip, and the subject card is burned by DI, my minion
> >remains tapped?
>
> By strict interpretation of "action card", yes. (Since "action card" is
> defined in the rulesbook, and ally/equipment/retainer card is defined
> separately.)
>
> I would expect, however, to see this over-ruled by LSJ and/or the Rules
> Team, ruling that since an ally card (or whatever) provides an action
> and is considered an action card for this purpose.
>
Would the same ruling (whichever way it goes) apply to Red
Herring, as it uses similar text?
Marc G.
In message
<Pine.SUN.3.96L.101071...@alycia.dementia.org>, Marc
Gabriele <goo...@dementia.org> writes
>> By strict interpretation of "action card", yes. (Since "action card" is
>> defined in the rulesbook, and ally/equipment/retainer card is defined
>> separately.)
>>
>> I would expect, however, to see this over-ruled by LSJ and/or the Rules
>> Team, ruling that since an ally card (or whatever) provides an action
>> and is considered an action card for this purpose.
>>> Would the same ruling (whichever way it goes) apply to Red
>Herring, as it uses similar text?
No. It refers to an "action" and a "card used to perform the action".
That is not the same as the explicit text "action card".
[ quoted text not captured ]
spore...@hotmail.com (spinney99) wrote:
>DIRECT INTERVENTION
>Out-of-Turn. Burn a minion card as it is played. Any blood or pool
>cost burned for that card is retrieved from the blood bank by the
>vampire or Methusaleh who played it. If the burned card was an action
>card, the acting minion remains untapped. If the card was a strike
>card, the minion chooses another strike.
Official card text (from the online list):
Direct Intervention
Master: out-of-turn.
Burn a minion card as it is played. <That card has no effect, and> any blood
or pool cost burned for that card is retrieved from the blood bank by the
vampire or Methuselah who played it. If the burned card was an action card,
the acting minion remains untapped. If the card was a strike card, the
minion
chooses another strike.
>Clarifications and Rulings
>1)If Direct Intervention is used to cancel a card during a political
>action, neither card is replaced until the political action is ended.
>[LSJ 19970224]>2)Since the NRA rule is applied to the acting minion when the action
>resolves (is blocked or is successful), the minion whose action card
>is canceled by Direct Intervention is free to attempt the same type of
>action again, even with (another copy of) the same card. [LSJ
>19980212]>3)Can only burn minion cards played from the hand in the normal
>fashion (not weapons played via Disguised Weapon or equipment played
>via Pier 13, for example). [RTR 20001020]>====
>so clarification 2 only affects action cards? if i computer hack you
Only to cards that can be used to take actions (action cards, ally cards,
equipment cards, etc.), yes.
>with conditioning, then 2 methuselahs DI me, only the conditioning
>cannot be re-played, i could re-use another copy of computer hack?
If you Computer Hack me, then as the card is played (before you can
modify the action with Conditioning), I can DI the Computer Hacking.
DI must be played as the card is played, by card text.
>also, "If the burned card was an action card, the acting minion
>remains untapped." i take it that this only affects action cards (and
>by definition, political actions.) if i recruit an ally, hire a
>retainer, or equip, and the subject card is burned by DI, my minion>remains tapped? this seems like an odd variation on how the card
>works, ie, it's better vs. equip/hire/recruit...
No. That's just an unfortunate phrasing.
Note the "remains" untapped bit - indicating that the play of the card
didn't tap the acting minion because the card is canceled. This applies
equally to action cards and to equipment cards.
[ quoted text not captured ]
"LSJ" <vte...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:3B56...@MailAndNews.com...
> "Jason Bell" <Jason...@mail.com> wrote:
> >I assumed that any number of Giant's Blood
> >could be played during a game, but only the first played could
> >ever produce the blood gain.
>
> The Jyhad version indicated as much. But the V:TES version (the most
> recent printing - from 1995) indicates otherwise. See the online card
> text.
Thanks, this is helpful, but a bit frustrating.
I'm coming to share the opinion of a poster a few weeks
ago, who suggested keeping a list of cards that have had
their texts changed from their original version (or at least
those that changed functionality as a result).
The problem is that I had no reason to suspect the card
had changed, and clearly don't spend enough of my free
time poring over online card texts.
It's a bit of a blind spot for being able to keep up with
the rules.
- Jason Bell
In message <WqH47.159066$Md.35...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com>, Jason
Bell <Jason...@mail.com> writes
>I'm coming to share the opinion of a poster a few weeks
>ago, who suggested keeping a list of cards that have had
>their texts changed from their original version (or at least
>those that changed functionality as a result).
There is one, which has been pointed out.
Alternatively, just read the card texts on the site. Downloading a copy
of them is not terribly difficult.
[ quoted text not captured ]
James Coupe wrote:
>
> In message <WqH47.159066$Md.35...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com>, Jason
> Bell <Jason...@mail.com> writes
> >I'm coming to share the opinion of a poster a few weeks
> >ago, who suggested keeping a list of cards that have had
> >their texts changed from their original version (or at least
> >those that changed functionality as a result).
>
> There is one, which has been pointed out.
I'm not sure what you mean. If you mean the one posted on Usenet in
December, it's hard for people who don't know it exists and where
it might be to find.
> Alternatively, just read the card texts on the site. Downloading a copy
> of them is not terribly difficult.
Oh, you can't be serious?!? Where do I start?
There's hundreds of cards. How is one supposed to be alerted to the fact that
an updated version of the card exists to be aware that you even need to download
a copy? An alphabetized list of only the ones that have updates is a huge
improvement in this respect.
The episode at the tournament I attended was a perfect example of why this
suggestion doesn't work. Even when a player was aware something was wrong, he
couldn't prove it. Admittedly everyone involved will know to look at this
in future instead of just checking the errata list. But the process you suggest
is mistake-prone and dependent on someone present having knowledge and excellent
recall.
The update list is only going to longer - especially as LSJ tames his errata
list by reprinting more and more modified cards in new expansions. How many mistakes
are players and judges going to make; how much confusion is this going to have to
cause before someone takes the simple step of creating a place for a neatly maintained
list of cards that have been modified by reprinting?
Fred
"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote
>, Jason Bell <Jason...@mail.com> writes
> >I'm coming to share the opinion of a poster a few weeks
> >ago, who suggested keeping a list of cards that have had
> >their texts changed from their original version (or at least
> >those that changed functionality as a result).
>
> There is one, which has been pointed out.
Must have missed it.
> Alternatively, just read the card texts on the site. Downloading a copy
> of them is not terribly difficult.
But not terribly helpful, since I only know I need to read
the new card text after I've been alerted that the card text
has changed. If I don't know the text has changed, I either
have to pore over every card's text (not my favorite leisure
time activity) to discover this, or continue to be blissfully
ignorant of changes.
- Jason Bell