(LSJ) Questions about a directed action

Hi Scott, Here's a question about directed actions. Suppose I control a Warsaw Station an untapped Rabbat in torpor. My prey declares an action to diablerize my Rabbat in torpor. I decide to burn the Warsaw Station to move Rabbat back from torpor to my ready region before declaring a block attempt. Is the action still a diablerie action? Is the action a directed action against ready Rabbat? Is the action still a directed action against me? Can ready Rabbat attempt to block it? (the answer to this one should be the same as the answer to the second one) Thanks ~ ~ Rabbat, The Sewer Goddess Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Nosferatu Group: 4 Capacity: 7 Discipline: pot ANI FOR OBF Independent. Red List: Rabbat may send a vampire to torpor or burn an ally as a strike. If she hunts, you may move 1 of the blood she gains to your pool. She cannot take (D) actions or block actions that aren't directed at her or at a card on her. Warsaw Station Cardtype: Master Clan: Nosferatu Cost: 2 pool Master: unique location. You may tap this card when a Nosferatu announces an undirected action. If that action is successful, the acting Nosferatu untaps. You may burn this card (even if it is tapped) to move a Nosferatu in torpor to the ready region.

On 9 oct, 17:04, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is the action still a diablerie action? > Is the action a directed action against ready Rabbat? > Is the action still a directed action against me? > Can ready Rabbat attempt to block it? (the answer to this one should > be the same as the answer to the second one) My guesses are: Yes. No. No. No. I'm adding this one: Since my prey is performing the action and I am the one who can declare a block attempt, if I pass, will any other player receive the opportunity to declare a block attempt ?

On Oct 9, 9:18 am, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> wrote: At the significant risk of being wrong yet again, my thought processes on this are.... > > Is the action still a diablerie action? Yes, the action was properly announced and is attempted diablerie. > > Is the action a directed action against ready Rabbat? Yes, until it reaches resolution at which point it fizzles due to having no valid target on which to resolve. But until that point, the action is valid. Search Harass + untap and look at the 2nd tradition example for precedents. > > Is the action still a directed action against me? Yes, until it fails to resolve - which includes all of the block declaration window. > > Can ready Rabbat attempt to block it? (the answer to this one should > > be the same as the answer to the second one) Yes, again, see the Harass + 2nd Tradition example, in which the responding Prince is forced to block (by card text) in response to untapping in an attempt to avoid the Harass target availability. > I'm adding this one: > Since my prey is performing the action and I am the one who can > declare a block attempt, if I pass, will any other player receive the > opportunity to declare a block attempt ? Yes, but only in specific cases which allow those players to attempt to block D actions after the target player has passed (Eagle's Sight, Falcon's Eye and Anneke).

On Oct 9, 11:18 pm, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9 oct, 17:04, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Is the action still a diablerie action? > > Is the action a directed action against ready Rabbat? > > Is the action still a directed action against me? > > Can ready Rabbat attempt to block it? (the answer to this one should > > be the same as the answer to the second one) > > My guesses are: > Yes. No. No. No. My guesses are: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. I think, also, that the action will "fizzle" upon resolution since it no longer has a legal target. Reference: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/433e336369c14d25 -YY

On 9 oct, 17:54, Darby Keeney <darby.kee...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 9, 9:18 am, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > At the significant risk of being wrong yet again, my thought processes > on this are.... > > > > Is the action still a diablerie action? > > Yes, the action was properly announced and is attempted diablerie. > > > > Is the action a directed action against ready Rabbat? > > Yes, until it reaches resolution at which point it fizzles due to > having no valid target on which to resolve.  But until that point, the > action is valid.  Search Harass + untap and look at the 2nd tradition > example for precedents. > > > > Is the action still a directed action against me? > > Yes, until it fails to resolve - which includes all of the block > declaration window. > > > > Can ready Rabbat attempt to block it? (the answer to this one should > > > be the same as the answer to the second one) > > Yes, again, see the Harass + 2nd Tradition example, in which the > responding Prince is forced to block (by card text) in response to > untapping in an attempt to avoid the Harass target availability. > > > I'm adding this one: > > Since my prey is performing the action and I am the one who can > > declare a block attempt, if I pass, will any other player receive the > > opportunity to declare a block attempt ? > > Yes, but only in specific cases which allow those players to attempt > to block D actions after the target player has passed (Eagle's Sight, > Falcon's Eye and Anneke). Thanks for these, they're probably correct. For some reason, I was trying to compare with the case of a bleed against a player who is ousted before resolution, but the big difference is that, in that case, the target player was precisely ousted, and not in the game any more to try to declare stuff.

On Oct 9, 11:54 am, Darby Keeney <darby.kee...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 9, 9:18 am, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > At the significant risk of being wrong yet again, my thought processes > on this are.... > > > > Is the action still a diablerie action? > > Yes, the action was properly announced and is attempted diablerie. > > > > Is the action a directed action against ready Rabbat? > > Yes, until it reaches resolution at which point it fizzles due to > having no valid target on which to resolve.  But until that point, the > action is valid.  Search Harass + untap and look at the 2nd tradition > example for precedents. > > > > Is the action still a directed action against me? > > Yes, until it fails to resolve - which includes all of the block > declaration window. > > > > Can ready Rabbat attempt to block it? (the answer to this one should > > > be the same as the answer to the second one) > > Yes, again, see the Harass + 2nd Tradition example, in which the > responding Prince is forced to block (by card text) in response to > untapping in an attempt to avoid the Harass target availability. > > > I'm adding this one: > > Since my prey is performing the action and I am the one who can > > declare a block attempt, if I pass, will any other player receive the > > opportunity to declare a block attempt ? > > Yes, but only in specific cases which allow those players to attempt > to block D actions after the target player has passed (Eagle's Sight, > Falcon's Eye and Anneke). Correct.