Horrid Reality Question for LSJ

I think I know the answer to this, but I want the official ruling ;) Ravnos enters combat and drops horrid reality at superior I reach through my deck and pull out an assult rifle, proceed to manuver to long and blast away with some DBRounds. DBR (Jyhad text, don't have vtes one) states that ... burns the gun after it is used. HR at superior states to return the equipment to the library at the end of combat, then reshuffle. (Hope that qualifies at not full card text.) ;) Thanks! Even if this doesn't work the way I hope it does, it's still nasty. Free 3r +2AG ;) Well, HR costs (2). --David

On Sun, 14 May 2000, Bagheera wrote: > DBR (Jyhad text, don't have vtes one) states that ... burns the gun > after it is used. > > HR at superior states to return the equipment to the library at the end > of combat, then reshuffle. Rulings state that this does not extend to the ash-heap. A friend of mine tried it a long while ago. -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "But I don't have the right to be with you tonight, so please leave me alone with no saviour in sight. I will sleep safe and sound with nobody around me."

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0005141506070.6522- 100...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, [ quoted text not captured ] > You aren't actually saying that the illusionary weapon that was created with Horrid Reality is burned are you?! That would just be insane! Why would it destroy a weapon that doesn't exist? Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > > Bagheera wrote: > > > [Horrid Reality a gun out, use Dragon's Breath Rounds, which > > > burns the gun.] > > > DBR (Jyhad text, don't have vtes one) states that ... burns the gun > > > after it is used. > > > > > > HR at superior states to return the equipment to the library at the > > > end of combat, then reshuffle. > > > > Rulings state that this does not extend to the ash-heap. A friend of > > mine tried it a long while ago. > You aren't actually saying that the illusionary weapon that was > created with Horrid Reality is burned are you?! That would just be > insane! Following card text is insane? >Why would it destroy a weapon that doesn't exist? What is "it"? The Horrid Reality doesn't "destroy" the weapon - DBR does. Since the weapon doesn't exist, there's no real "logic" preventing the card (not the weapon, since it never existed) from remaining in the ash heap. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sun, 14 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > You aren't actually saying that the illusionary weapon that was > created with Horrid Reality is burned are you?! That would just be > insane! Why would it destroy a weapon that doesn't exist? Dragon's Breath Rounds sends the weapon in use to the ash heap. You have a weapon in use - the gun. It goes to the ash heap. "Real world" concerns do not play a part. The cards take precedence. Horrid Reality will not, then, over-ride the ash-heap, or fetch cards back into the library from it. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8fmjk7$mcn$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > > > Bagheera wrote: > > > > [Horrid Reality a gun out, use Dragon's Breath Rounds, which > > > > burns the gun.] > > > > DBR (Jyhad text, don't have vtes one) states that ... burns the gun > > > > after it is used. > > > > > > > > HR at superior states to return the equipment to the library at the > > > > end of combat, then reshuffle. > > > > > > Rulings state that this does not extend to the ash-heap. A friend of > > > mine tried it a long while ago. > > You aren't actually saying that the illusionary weapon that was > > created with Horrid Reality is burned are you?! That would just be > > insane! > > Following card text is insane? It is when you choose to follow card text that doesn't make since. Is it insane to follow the card text to return the piece of equipment to your your deck? Why do you follow one card text and not the other? What makes the DBR override the HR? Because one is more detrimental than the other? The actual weapon never really existed why should it be burned? > > >Why would it destroy a weapon that doesn't exist? > > What is "it"? The Horrid Reality doesn't "destroy" > the weapon - DBR does. Since the weapon doesn't > exist, there's no real "logic" preventing the card (not > the weapon, since it never existed) from remaining > in the ash heap. > Why would DBR destroy a weapon that never really existed? Horrid reality only causes the victim to believe the weapon is there. It really isn't. Therefore, it makes no since to burn the card. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0005141656340.6522- 100...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > On Sun, 14 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > You aren't actually saying that the illusionary weapon that was > > created with Horrid Reality is burned are you?! That would just be > > insane! Why would it destroy a weapon that doesn't exist? > > Dragon's Breath Rounds sends the weapon in use to the ash heap. You have > a weapon in use - the gun. It goes to the ash heap. "Real > world" concerns do not play a part. The cards take precedence. > > Horrid Reality will not, then, over-ride the ash-heap, or fetch cards back > into the library from it. > > -- > James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D > "But I don't have the right to be with you tonight, so please leave me > alone with no saviour in sight. I will sleep safe and sound with nobody > around me." No it won't fetch cards back but why does DBR over-ride HR which at superior states "AS ABOVE, BUT AT THE END OF COMBAT, RETURN THE EQUIPMENT TO THE LIBRARY. RESHUFFLE AFTERWARDS. And technically there is no weapon in use only the illusion of a weapon with DBR. [ quoted text not captured ]

ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > Why would DBR destroy a weapon that never really existed? Horrid > reality only causes the victim to believe the weapon is there. It > really isn't. Therefore, it makes no since to burn the card. But if the gun doesn't really exist, how can you play an ammo card on it? That kind of logic can cut both ways. -- Gary J. Weiner \ "We've got a blind date with Destiny...and webm...@hatrack.net \ it looks like she's ordered the lobster." http://www.hatrack.net \ -The Shoveler, "Mystery Men" "Hang Your Web With Us!"\

On Sun, 14 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > No it won't fetch cards back but why does DBR over-ride HR which at > superior states "AS ABOVE, BUT AT THE END OF COMBAT, RETURN THE > EQUIPMENT TO THE LIBRARY. RESHUFFLE AFTERWARDS. And technically there > is no weapon in use only the illusion of a weapon with DBR. The card is now in the ash-heap. When cards enter the ash-heap, they "forget" everything about themselves. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Why would DBR destroy a weapon that never really existed? Horrid > reality only causes the victim to believe the weapon is there. It > really isn't. Therefore, it makes no since to burn the card. May I recommend you perform a little research into how Horrid Reality works in the World of Darkness? The power of Horrid Reality creates objects which have 'real, physical' effects, which are not limited to just the victim. In Jyhad, burning a library card is clearly one of the 'real physical' effects of Horrid Reality :o) Groovy huh? ----------------------------------------- On the Net nobody can tell you're a Dog Peace & Mung Beans Dog

Whoops, that reply wasn't aimed at James :o)

In article <391EFFD3...@hatrack.net>, "Gary J. Weiner" <webm...@hatrack.net> wrote: > ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > Why would DBR destroy a weapon that never really existed? Horrid > > reality only causes the victim to believe the weapon is there. It > > really isn't. Therefore, it makes no since to burn the card. > > But if the gun doesn't really exist, how can you play an ammo card on > it? That kind of logic can cut both ways. > > -- > Gary J. Weiner \ "We've got a blind date with Destiny...and > webm...@hatrack.net \ it looks like she's ordered the lobster." > http://www.hatrack.net \ -The Shoveler, "Mystery Men" > "Hang Your Web With Us!"\ > I see that that logic as well. However, it takes little more discipline to create the hallucination of a gun firing DBR than it oes to create one of a gun firing regular ammo. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <OBGT4.2594$H2a4.1...@news.xtra.co.nz>, "Dog" <warp...@biosys.net> wrote: > > Why would DBR destroy a weapon that never really existed? Horrid > > reality only causes the victim to believe the weapon is there. It > > really isn't. Therefore, it makes no since to burn the card. > > May I recommend you perform a little research into how Horrid Reality works > in the World of Darkness? > > The power of Horrid Reality creates objects which have 'real, physical' > effects, which are not limited to just the victim. > > In Jyhad, burning a library card is clearly one of the 'real physical' > effects of Horrid Reality :o) > > Groovy huh? > ----------------------------------------- > On the Net nobody can tell you're a Dog > Peace & Mung Beans > Dog > > I Quote: "*****Horrid Reality Rather than creat simple illusions, the vampire can now project HALLUCINATIONS directly into a victim's mind. The target of these ILLUSIONS believes completely that the images are real; a hallucinatory fire can burn him, an imaginary noose can strangle him, and an illusory wall can block him. This power ONLY AFFECTS ONE PERSON AT A TIME;......" Vampire The Masquerade 1998 White Wolf Publishing Care to explain? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0005150023520.16564- 100...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] > So is DBR. Guess it forgot too huh? [ quoted text not captured ]

This is all I wanted to know, thx. ;) The combo stands useful, even if the ash heap over-rides HR. At least in a Chi heavy deck. David James Coupe wrote: > On Sun, 14 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > You aren't actually saying that the illusionary weapon that was > > created with Horrid Reality is burned are you?! That would just be > > insane! Why would it destroy a weapon that doesn't exist? > > Dragon's Breath Rounds sends the weapon in use to the ash heap. You have > a weapon in use - the gun. It goes to the ash heap. "Real > world" concerns do not play a part. The cards take precedence. > > Horrid Reality will not, then, over-ride the ash-heap, or fetch cards back > into the library from it. > [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > I Quote: > "*****Horrid Reality If you are so set on the RPG, would you like us to alter the rules on aggravated damage? Agg damage doesn't send you immediately to torpor in V:tM. Should we include dice rolls to simulate the RPG? The RPG was a base for the game. The game is *not* the RPG. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > So is DBR. Guess it forgot too huh? *shrug* If you're going to be quite so childish, and not listen to answers, why bother asking questions? When DBR is played, the gun is in play. The DBR then goes into the ash-heap, as all transient cards do when played. When combat ends, as per superior Horrid Reality, there is no longer any equipment to return to the library. The card has gone into the ash-heap. Cards in the ash-heap cannot be targetted unless they have specific card text allowing such (e.g. Whispers from the Dead). The default for all cards is that they must target a card which is "in play". [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0005151052240.25278- 100...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > So is DBR. Guess it forgot too huh? > > *shrug* > > If you're going to be quite so childish, and not listen to answers, why > bother asking questions? Why is it you are the only person on this newsgroup I have ever seen resort to name calling and attacking individuals when you don't agree with them? Personality disorder? Don't know don't care. I was simply stating that why do we forget one card and not the other. After all, as I stated it is not a real weapon why does it burn? > > When DBR is played, the gun is in play. The DBR then goes into the > ash-heap, as all transient cards do when played. > > When combat ends, as per superior Horrid Reality, there is no longer any > equipment to return to the library. The card has gone into the > ash-heap. Cards in the ash-heap cannot be targetted unless they have > specific card text allowing such (e.g. Whispers from the Dead). The > default for all cards is that they must target a card which is "in play". > > -- > James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D > "But I don't have the right to be with you tonight, so please leave me > alone with no saviour in sight. I will sleep safe and sound with nobody > around me." > > Now that made sense. Was that so hard? However, I still maintain that the gun never existed and as I go to place my cards in the ash heap I see that Horrid Reality at superior tells me to return it to the Library. No need (or reason I might add)to burn it. Why would you deny some one the use of the weapon later because an illusion of the gun burned? [ quoted text not captured ]

ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > However, I still maintain > that the gun never existed and as I go to place my cards in the ash > heap I see that Horrid Reality at superior tells me to return it to the > Library. Horrid Reality's card text doesn't apply at that time. (See card text) > No need (or reason I might add)to burn it. Why would you > deny some one the use of the weapon later because an illusion of the > gun burned? Because of card text on DBR. There are many combos in the card game that don't make strict sense from a "real world" point of view. But it is better to have a solid foundation for game play (card text/rules text) than a soft one ("real world justification"). -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39202EF7...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > There are many combos in the card game that don't make strict sense > from a "real world" point of view. But it is better to have a solid > foundation for game play (card text/rules text) than a soft one > ("real world justification"). > LSJ, I have trouble with what you said. As a new player I am still learning the mechanics of the game. However I don't see the problem with stating that the "equipment" you are using is illusionary and after use is returned back to your library, when Horrid Reality is played at superior. Even if it burns by the use of an ammo card. If I follow your logic then if the first piece of equipment I would find is the White Phosphorus Grenade, I must take 1 aggravated damage from my own illusion. Is that correct? Paul Cecil [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > Now that made sense. Was that so hard? It already made sense. You apparently would not (rather than could not) understand it. > However, I still maintain > that the gun never existed In V:TES, it did. The card was in play. The card existed. and as I go to place my cards in the ash > heap I see that Horrid Reality at superior tells me to return it to the > Library. No need (or reason I might add)to burn it. Why would you > deny some one the use of the weapon later because an illusion of the > gun burned? Because this is a card game, and not the RPG. The gun was real, as far as the card game is concerned. You appear to be not understanding this point. As regards your tin-pot psychology, you are talking about things you do not understand, and clearly have not read enough of the group if you believe your claims to be true. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 15 May 2000 ceci...@my-deja.com wrote: > superior. Even if it burns by the use of an ammo card. If I follow your > logic then if the first piece of equipment I would find is the White > Phosphorus Grenade, I must take 1 aggravated damage from my own > illusion. Is that correct? Yes. Card text states to take 1 aggravated damage, so you do. Horrid Reality doesn't allow you to pick and choose what you do. Horrid Reality causes *real* effects in Jyhad, and they are just as real for you as for the other vampire. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0005151051050.25278- 100...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > > I Quote: > > "*****Horrid Reality > > If you are so set on the RPG, would you like us to alter the rules on > aggravated damage? Agg damage doesn't send you immediately to torpor in > V:tM. Should we include dice rolls to simulate the RPG? > > The RPG was a base for the game. The game is *not* the RPG. > > -- > James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D > "But I don't have the right to be with you tonight, so please leave me > alone with no saviour in sight. I will sleep safe and sound with nobody > around me." > > Correct. It isn't. However, it is supposed to resemble the game. Isn't it? I won't bother to answer your obviously rhetorical question. When you play the cards you lay them on the table. At least in our group we lay them out as they happen. Therefore, I lay out the Horrid Reality. Then I find the weapon and place that on the HR. Lastly I would lay the DBR on top of that. Then, combat is over I would pick up the cards and start discarding. Since HR states to return the gun to my Library I would. Only makes sense that a hallucinatory gun could not be destroyed by DBR. This is my opinion. While it may not (and most probably won't with rules makers like we have in place)be an accepted method of play, I think it needs to be discussed. Besides, most players like to know the reasoning behind the rules. Not that we agree with all of them but at least then we understand the concept behind it. I voice my opinion you voice yours. LSJ seems to think a lot like you but then again there are some that think like me. Am I right? Maybe. Are you right? Possible. I see no reason for DBR to over-rule HR. LSJ will most probably rule with you as seems to always be the case. I will live with that and play with that. But, I will always be here to voice my disagreement with rules that I feel are wrong. Brent That wasn't too bad was it Carl? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39202EF7...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > However, I still maintain > > that the gun never existed and as I go to place my cards in the ash > > heap I see that Horrid Reality at superior tells me to return it to the > > Library. > > Horrid Reality's card text doesn't apply at that time. > (See card text) > > > No need (or reason I might add)to burn it. Why would you > > deny some one the use of the weapon later because an illusion of the > > gun burned? > > Because of card text on DBR. > > There are many combos in the card game that don't make strict sense > from a "real world" point of view. But it is better to have a solid > foundation for game play (card text/rules text) than a soft one > ("real world justification"). > > -- > 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/ > Again I ask why does the card text on DBR over-rule the card text on HR. It would seem that the discipline cards would be more inclined to over-rule the the non-discipline cards. [ quoted text not captured ]

> LSJ, > I have trouble with what you said. As a new player I am still learning > the mechanics of the game. However I don't see the problem with stating > that the "equipment" you are using is illusionary and after use is > returned back to your library, when Horrid Reality is played at > superior. Even if it burns by the use of an ammo card. If I follow your > logic then if the first piece of equipment I would find is the White > Phosphorus Grenade, I must take 1 aggravated damage from my own > illusion. Is that correct? > > Paul Cecil > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy. > A valid point. And on that note you might also ask: 1. If a minion does Strike: Destroy equipment Do I burn the card then? 2. If a minion does Strike: Steal equipment first strike then blur do I take damage from an illusion that I created? By your reasoning the answer to both would be yes. And that just doesn't hold water. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.000515...@red.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 15 May 2000 ceci...@my-deja.com wrote: > > superior. Even if it burns by the use of an ammo card. If I follow your > > logic then if the first piece of equipment I would find is the White > > Phosphorus Grenade, I must take 1 aggravated damage from my own > > illusion. Is that correct? > > Yes. > > Card text states to take 1 aggravated damage, so you do. > > Horrid Reality doesn't allow you to pick and choose what you do. > > Horrid Reality causes *real* effects in Jyhad, and they are just as real > for you as for the other vampire. > > -- > James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D > > Okay. I disagree but let me ask part two. If I used Horrid Reality at Superior do I ash heap the WPG or do I return it to my Library? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.000515...@red.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > Now that made sense. Was that so hard? > > It already made sense. You apparently would not (rather than could > not) understand it. > No it didn't. I did understand where you were trying to go; however you just didn't want to get there. > > However, I still maintain > > that the gun never existed > > In V:TES, it did. The card was in play. The card existed. > > and as I go to place my cards in the ash > > heap I see that Horrid Reality at superior tells me to return it to the > > Library. No need (or reason I might add)to burn it. Why would you > > deny some one the use of the weapon later because an illusion of the > > gun burned? > > Because this is a card game, and not the RPG. The gun was real, as far as > the card game is concerned. You appear to be not understanding this > point. > If the gun is real then why do you not pay the cost and why at normal do you burn it and at superior you return it to the library? If it really existed then you are talking about Disguised or concealed weapon. Don't start me on the later because for the record I agree with Mr Eichler. > As regards your tin-pot psychology, you are talking about things you do > not understand, and clearly have not read enough of the group if you > believe your claims to be true. > I stand corrected it is quite prevelent. However, other do tend to do it on an irregular bases and often return with an apoligy either to the newsgroup or the individual they insulted. Where I admit I am a sporadic reader, I must confess I have seen you do neither. > -- > James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D > "But I don't have the right to be with you tonight, so please leave me > alone with no saviour in sight. I will sleep safe and sound with nobody > around me." > > [ quoted text not captured ]

ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > [...] I lay out the > Horrid Reality. Then I find the weapon and place that on the HR. > Lastly I would lay the DBR on top of that. Then, combat is over I Before combat is over, you would have to resolve the weapon strike. When that happens, DBR burns the weapon. Before Horrid Reality can return it to the library. > would pick up the cards and start discarding. Since HR states to > return the gun to my Library I would. Only makes sense that a > hallucinatory gun could not be destroyed by DBR. This is my opinion. > While it may not (and most probably won't with rules makers like we > have in place)be an accepted method of play, I think it needs to be > discussed. Besides, most players like to know the reasoning behind the > rules. In this case: card text. [ quoted text not captured ]

ceci...@my-deja.com wrote: > > In article <39202EF7...@white-wolf.com>, > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > There are many combos in the card game that don't make strict sense > > from a "real world" point of view. But it is better to have a solid > > foundation for game play (card text/rules text) than a soft one > > ("real world justification"). > > > > LSJ, > I have trouble with what you said. As a new player I am still learning > the mechanics of the game. However I don't see the problem with stating > that the "equipment" you are using is illusionary and after use is > returned back to your library, when Horrid Reality is played at > superior. Because it is in the ash heap - it is no longer in play to be returned to your library. Cards in the ash heap cannot be affected by things except as explicitly declared in card text - Horrid Reality lacks such a specification. > Even if it burns by the use of an ammo card. If I follow your > logic then if the first piece of equipment I would find is the White > Phosphorus Grenade, I must take 1 aggravated damage from my own > illusion. Is that correct? Yes. Horrid Reality says nothing about protecting you (or the other minion, or the weapon itself) from the effects of the weapon (or of ammo or anything else). [ quoted text not captured ]

ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > Now that made sense. Was that so hard? However, I still maintain > that the gun never existed and as I go to place my cards in the ash > heap I see that Horrid Reality at superior tells me to return it to the > Library. No need (or reason I might add)to burn it. Why would you > deny some one the use of the weapon later because an illusion of the > gun burned? Ok, here's what I think the problem is. Mr. Ravnos-Shadow, you are frankly too fixated on real life reasons. Jyhad is a game, which implies it is a group activity performed for recreation governed by *certain rules*. In games, even games which seek to mimic real life to some degree, the rules will often not make real world sense so that they are as uniform as possible. This is one of these cases. You don't seem to dispute that the rules say that the gun is burned- due to the fact that cards forget things once they hit the asp heap. If you like, look at it this way. Horrid Reality is played, and you put the gun into play. Because Horrid Reality is a transient, it goes to the ash heap, and the gun is tagged with a "return to library at end of combat" effect. Then Dragon's Breath Rounds is played, tagging the gun with a "burn after use" effect. The damage resolves, the gun goes to the ash heap due to DBR, and it forgets the effect of Horrid Reality. End of Story. It may not make real world sense, but it is exactly what the cards say. Sorry. -- S'io credesse che mia risposta fosse a persona che mai tornasse al mondo, questa fiamma staria senza piu scosse. Ma per ciò che giammai di questo fondo non tornò vivo alcun, s'i' odo il vero, senza tema d'infamia ti rispondo. T.S. Eliot- "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock"

ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > If I used Horrid Reality > at Superior do I ash heap the WPG or do I return it to my Library? WPG is burned (card text on WPG). This happens before the end of combat, so it cannot be circumvented by Horrid Reality's "return to library" effect. [ quoted text not captured ]

ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > A valid point. And on that note you might also ask: > 1. If a minion does Strike: Destroy equipment Do I burn the card then? Yes. The weapon is burned during strike resolution, which is before the end of combat. > 2. If a minion does Strike: Steal equipment first strike then blur do > I take damage from an illusion that I created? No, since this tactic is illegal, illusion or not - you cannot strike with a stolen weapon in the round in which you steal it. [6.4.5] If someone presses and then he uses it to strike with in the second round, then of course you'd take damage. > By your reasoning the answer to both would be yes. And that just > doesn't hold water. IMO these answers hold water. [ quoted text not captured ]

ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > However, I still maintain > > > that the gun never existed and as I go to place my cards in the ash > > > heap I see that Horrid Reality at superior tells me to return it to > the > > > Library. > > > > Horrid Reality's card text doesn't apply at that time. > > (See card text) > > > > > No need (or reason I might add)to burn it. Why would you > > > deny some one the use of the weapon later because an illusion of the > > > gun burned? > > > > Because of card text on DBR. > > Again I ask why does the card text on DBR over-rule the card text on > HR. It would seem that the discipline cards would be more inclined to > over-rule the the non-discipline cards. The presence of a discipline symbol or lack thereof has no bearing on the "strength" or staying power of an effect. DBR "wins out" here because it burns the weapon before Horrid Reality can return it to the library - simple timing. Once in the ash heap, the card cannot be affected by general effects - the effect must explicitly state that cards in the ash heap are affected. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39205BC3...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > [...] I lay out the > > Horrid Reality. Then I find the weapon and place that on the HR. > > Lastly I would lay the DBR on top of that. Then, combat is over I > > Before combat is over, you would have to resolve the weapon strike. > When that happens, DBR burns the weapon. Before Horrid Reality can > return it to the library. > > > would pick up the cards and start discarding. Since HR states to > > return the gun to my Library I would. Only makes sense that a > > hallucinatory gun could not be destroyed by DBR. This is my opinion. > > While it may not (and most probably won't with rules makers like we > > have in place)be an accepted method of play, I think it needs to be > > discussed. Besides, most players like to know the reasoning behind the > > rules. > > In this case: 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/ > Card Text? HR says return to Library. And yes DBR says this burns the gun. Like I said, I didn't for one brief moment believe that my opinion or others that were posted would be listened to or given any merit. I would say I was just playing devil's advocate; but, I honestly believe this is a misinterpretation of card texts. I have voiced my opinion. I still disagree. However, as our group always plays with and by the rules (when we know them) I will play this way. I will end my argument on this as the only answers forth coming are the same as have been stated. Brent [ quoted text not captured ]

ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > In article <39205BC3...@white-wolf.com>, > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > would pick up the cards and start discarding. Since HR states to > > > return the gun to my Library I would. Only makes sense that a > > > hallucinatory gun could not be destroyed by DBR. This is my > opinion. > > > While it may not (and most probably won't with rules makers like we > > > have in place)be an accepted method of play, I think it needs to be > > > discussed. Besides, most players like to know the reasoning behind > the > > > rules. > > > > In this case: card text. > > > Card Text? HR says return to Library. And yes DBR says this burns the > gun. The DBR text is the text to which Scott refers. It burns the weapon because it says "Burn the gun after the card is used". Since this argument is apparently causing confusion, I will attempt an anology to help: Consider the case where you rent something, say a car. When you drive the rented car you create the illusion that you actually own the car. The car functions exactly like the car would if you actually owned it. Now if you destroyed the car (say in a car wreck) before you were through renting the car, you will be unable to return it to the place you rented it. Furthermore, you will be unable to rent that exact same car from the dealership the next time you go to rent or buy a car. The horrid reality "rents" the weapon from your deck. You haven't really taken the time to equip the weapon, but it still works as if you had. If you do something to the weapon (burn, break, steal) before the combat is over you will be unable to put it back in your deck. The whole thing is just a timing issue. If you're having troubles separating the timing of the strike and the end of combat, consider what would happen if the opposing minion played skin of steel and prevented the strike.... The weapon would burn and the combat would continue. > Like I said, I didn't for one brief moment believe that my > opinion or others that were posted would be listened to or given any > merit. Are you reading this? I listened to your opinion and considered your question. You obviously saw LSJ's reply, he read and responded to your question. If the response was confusing, just say so. Some (I'd guess many) of us read all the posts and do care about your opinion/questions... I don't know where you got the impression that we didn't. Rob Grau rfg...@eos.ncsu.edu

On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > The RPG was a base for the game. The game is *not* the RPG. > > Correct. It isn't. Bingo. > However, it is supposed to resemble the game. > Isn't it? In the same way that Rage resembles Werewolf, perhaps. Or the same way Spellfire represents AD&D. Terms, ideas and so forth were taken, adapted and used. They no longer are the RPG. The Ravnos still work. The Tremere Antitribu are still around. they didn't just suddenly disappear. > I won't bother to answer your obviously rhetorical > question. When you play the cards you lay them on the table. Most people do, since it's easiest. In a few cases, I might just play it straight into the ash-heap, though clearly flag it up for people. (Something highly transient, like Ascendance, would rank for playing straight into the ash-heap, where it works *now*. Something like Fake Out wouldn't, because I have to kee ptrack of what range we're at.) > At least > in our group we lay them out as they happen. Therefore, I lay out the > Horrid Reality. Then I find the weapon and place that on the HR. > Lastly I would lay the DBR on top of that. Then, combat is over I > would pick up the cards and start discarding. Ah... no. This is where your problem comes from. When the strike with the DBR resolves, the gun burns. There and then. No waiting around for anything else. It sends it into the ash-heap now. This might or might not turn out to be a big problem. If you're just having combat ending anyway, it doesn't really make a whole lot of difference. However, if a vampire is diablerised in combat it does. Let's say we do the following: 1) Kostantin goes into combat with your copy of Gitane St Clair 2) I play Horrid Reality and go and fetch a .44 Magnum. 3) I maneuver to long range and shoot with the .44 Magnum 4) Gitane plays Body Flare 5) I play Dragon's Breath Rounds -- Strikes resolve here -- Burn the gun -- 6) Gitane play's Skin of Rock twice (preventing all 4 of my damage) Currently, I'm going to torpor. So Gitane plays Amaranth. Oh yeah, she was also clan impersonated to Gangrel Antitribu and stop the blood hunt with Gangrel Conspiracy. ;) But as a result of the diablerie, she can steal my equipment. Except my gun (which as far as V:TES is concerned is as real as any other) has gone anyway. So she can't. Timing issues aren't often that big a deal. But when they do come up,, you need to follow what happens as it happens. > Since HR states to > return the gun to my Library I would. Only makes sense that a > hallucinatory gun could not be destroyed by DBR. If the gun wasn't destroyed by DBR, the other vampire would be given a chance to see through the illusion and take no damage, were I your Storyteller. Any damage done would be solely shock based. > This is my opinion. > While it may not (and most probably won't with rules makers like we > have in place)be an accepted method of play, I think it needs to be > discussed. You're advocating playing the RPG. This isn't the RPG. Horrid Reality *in V:TES* uses real cards, real guns, real Ivory Bows and real Sengir Daggers. Were it to be wanted, the card would have been worded something like: "Go through your library and find the first piece of equipment in it. This vampire may, for the rest of combat, act as though they possessed that piece of equipment." Look at the inferior, too. It goes into the ash-heap, not into the Library. It's shown > Besides, most players like to know the reasoning behind the > rules. Not that we agree with all of them but at least then we > understand the concept behind it. I voice my opinion you voice yours. > LSJ seems to think a lot like you Both LSJ and I are rules-lawyers, to different degrees. He is official, I am not. Sometimes, we think alike. Sometimes, we do not. Sometimes, the rules are ambiguous, sometimes they are not. In cases where the rules are there > but then again there are some that > think like me. Am I right? Maybe. Are you right? Possible. I see > no reason for DBR to over-rule HR. There are two ways of looking at it: 1) Horrid Reality, when combat ends, tries to send the card back into the library. However, as it is in the ash heap, Horrid Reality's effect cannot reach it. All cards *unless they state otherwise* must affect a card which is in play - controlled and uncontested. 2) Horrid Reality places an effect on the gun. When combat ends,, the gun will go back into the library. However, *all* effects are forgotten when a card enters the ash-heap. When, say, my copy of Carlotta Giovanni enters the ash-heap, she forgets that you ever played Bonecraft, Disarm, Seeds of Corruption and Fleshcraft on me. If I Possession her back, she comes back as good as new. This extends to *all* effects. The gun is already in the ash-heap. The effect has been ended. > LSJ will most probably rule with > you as seems to always be the case. Not at all. I have on a number of occasions very vociferously disagreed with LSJ, either on the group or in private e-mail. I strongly disagree with the current ruling on Terror Frenzy. I am dis-satisfied with the lengths to which Life Boon has been neutered. If there is a legitimate rules query which allows an argument to be had, I will have it. I will quite happily try and force the rules to try and be consistent so far as is possible, and will argue over the finer points of pretty much any card in the game, should a situation warrant it. Thing is, in V:TES, I argue about *this* game, not another one. I occassionally used "real world" concerns as memory aids for people - they don't actually force the rules to go like that, though. I remember getting very, very confused by the handling of aggravated damage between V:TES and V:tM (I started on V:TES before V:tM). [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > Again I ask why does the card text on DBR over-rule the card text on > HR. The effect "fizzles" at that point, because the card cannot be reached. > It would seem that the discipline cards would be more inclined to > over-rule the the non-discipline cards. So far as the rules are concerned they are both cards, and the latter effect takes precedence. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > A valid point. And on that note you might also ask: > 1. If a minion does Strike: Destroy equipment Do I burn the card then? Yes, when the strikes resolve. From a "real life" perspective, if that didn't happen, I'd just see through your illusion anyway. > 2. If a minion does Strike: Steal equipment first strike then blur do > I take damage from an illusion that I created? No, unless you press. You cannot use stolen equipment on the round you steal it. In V:TES, you fetched a card and put it in play. I stole control of it. Matter ends. It doesn't matter a damn *how* you fetched it, merely that you did. > By your reasoning the answer to both would be yes. And that just > doesn't hold water. It holds plenty of water. This is a card game, not any form of V:TM based real life. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > Okay. I disagree but let me ask part two. If I used Horrid Reality > at Superior do I ash heap the WPG or do I return it to my Library? Ash-heap it. It burns when the strike resolves. This is before the end of combat, when Horrid Reality would act. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > If the gun is real then why do you not pay the cost and why at normal > do you burn it and at superior you return it to the library? Because you did not get it via an "equip" action, or via an "equip" effect, which required you to pay for it. Check the card text. > If it > really existed then you are talking about Disguised or concealed > weapon. No, I'm talking about Horrid Reality, because that is the card in question. > Don't start me on the later because for the record I agree > with Mr Eichler. Oh - fire and forget comments. Quick, I'm allowed to make a statement, and you're not allowed to respond! Hurrah. If you don't want an argument dear, don't state your opinion. The Rules Team has stated a preference for not bolstering weak cards. Bolstering weak cards is an endless cycle, because as soon as you bolster the weakest card, another one becomes the weakest card. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 15 May 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > Card Text? HR says return to Library. The card is no longer around to return to the library. DBR burned it, and HR does not have wording allow it to reach into the ash-heap, which it would need a la Whispers from the Dead. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39206341...@midway.uchicago.edu>, Tom Longwell <trlo...@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote: > > > ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > > Now that made sense. Was that so hard? However, I still maintain > > that the gun never existed and as I go to place my cards in the ash > > heap I see that Horrid Reality at superior tells me to return it to the > > Library. No need (or reason I might add)to burn it. Why would you > > deny some one the use of the weapon later because an illusion of the > > gun burned? [ quoted text not captured ] As I mentioned in another thread ravnos_shadow and I are just trying to develope a greater understanding of the game. All we really want to know is what was the idea behind this card. The people who developed this game had specific ideas behind each card and how they fit into the game as a whole. But, I see the "card" is not important just what it does. So I see our Friday night card games will go something like this: Player A: My vamp plays this card at pre-range. Player B: So what does the card say you do? Player A: Who cares... My vamp has the skill and the card lets me do what I want so who cares about what the card says except how it fits into the mechanics of timing and effects Player B: Oh, your right. We might as a well throw away the art work on the card, any store line behind the cards, or concepts of the card as part of some greater whole called the "Game". To me that takes away the fun of playing a game like VTES/Jyhad. Well ravnos_shadow and I will go on asking questions, but we will try to not make too many waves. But will you all take time out and try look at this game from a novice's view point, and realize that aside from this news group and what comes with the starter deck there is very little available. So us newcomers are going to ask and pick at your brains trying to understand what the heck these cards are about and where they fit into the greater concept called V:TES/Jyhad. Because that is the game I play, not a generic card game with no artwork or storyline. Paul Cecil [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8frtll$gau$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, ceci...@my-deja.com wrote: > As I mentioned in another thread ravnos_shadow and I are just trying > to develope a greater understanding of the game. That's why most people ask questions. :) > All we really want to > know is what was the idea behind this card. I don't think this point was clear to everyone. People tried to answer "Why does the gun burn with DBR?" because that seemed to be the question. If you haven't read it elsewhere, the idea is that you borrow a weapon from your library and use it. > The people who developed > this game had specific ideas behind each card and how they fit into > the game as a whole. From my perspective, the idea was to make weapons more useful. > But, I see the "card" is not important just what it > does. So I see our Friday night card games will go something like this: The card is important, but the story behind the card doesn't have bearing on the rules text that comes printed on the the card. The idea is to match these up so the game is fun and the cards are memorable (by making sense) but if there is a conflict between real world logic and rules text, the rules win *every time* That is why people say "don't bother with real world logic" and LSJ called [earlier] it a "soft foundation" > > We might as a well throw away the art work on the card, any store line > behind the cards, or concepts of the card as part of some greater whole > called the "Game". To me that takes away the fun of playing a game like > VTES/Jyhad. Concepts are important. This is related to what I just said. > > Well ravnos_shadow and I will go on asking questions, but we will try > to not make too many waves. Please continue to ask questions. Don't worry about the "waves" if you have something meaningful to say or ask, people will listen. > But will you all take time out and try look > at this game from a novice's view point, and realize that aside from > this news group and what comes with the starter deck there is very > little available. Certainly. As long as you're willing to consider our point of view. We've probably heard your question before, so there may be a lot of what you perceive as "LSJ ruling in your favor" because it is not a you versus me situation, but just explaining the rules. If you start to get the same answers again and again like this thread, perhaps it isn't that we don't want to answer your question but we think we are answering your question, and you might need to ask it differently. For instance, "Why does the HR weapon burn with DBR?" is not equal to "What is the purpose of HR in the VTES card set?" And actually, we've tried to put a lot of resources out on the 'net. Check out WW's V:TES page http://www.white-wolf.com/VTES/ along with their stuff they've got links to some of the more useful resources out there. > So us newcomers are going to ask and pick at your > brains trying to understand what the heck these cards are about and > where they fit into the greater concept called V:TES/Jyhad. Because > that is the game I play, not a generic card game with no artwork or > storyline. Please do. It wouldn't hurt if you looked at the newsgroup archive or FAQ as well. If you stick around long enough you'll see that we enjoy the story and concept behind V:TES, too. It shows up in Clan newsletters, Deck ideas, and other posts like Matt Green's recent Vampire Noir posting. Rob Grau rfg...@eos.ncsu.edu [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39205D7E...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > DBR "wins out" here because it burns the weapon before Horrid Reality > can return it to the library - simple timing. Once in the ash heap, > the card cannot be affected by general effects - the effect must > explicitly state that cards in the ash heap are affected. > > -- > 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/ > OK, this raises another question. I think I know the answer, but I'd like confirmation. I use HR at (inferior or supior) and get an Ivory Bow. But what if there is already another Ivory Bow in play? Following the above logic, here's my understanding of what happens: 1) The Bows immediately contest. 2) After strike resolution, HR tries to put the IB in the (ash heap or library), but since it is out of play, that effect fizzles. 3) If the owner of the other IB subsequently yields, I'd get to keep the IB that I got with the HR. Is this correct? [ quoted text not captured ]

steven...@my-deja.com wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > DBR "wins out" here because it burns the weapon before Horrid > > Reality > > can return it to the library - simple timing. Once in the ash heap, > > the card cannot be affected by general effects - the effect must > > explicitly state that cards in the ash heap are affected. > > OK, this raises another question. I think I know the answer, but I'd > like confirmation. I use HR at (inferior or supior) and get an Ivory > Bow. But what if there is already another Ivory Bow in play? > > Following the above logic, here's my understanding of what happens: > > 1) The Bows immediately contest. > 2) After strike resolution, HR tries to put the IB in the (ash heap > or library), but since it is out of play, that effect fizzles. > 3) If the owner of the other IB subsequently yields, I'd get to keep > the IB that I got with the HR. > > Is this correct? Hm. The current official answer is that the Bow is contested, but that the contested illusionary Bow is burned (or returned to the library) at the end of combat (and the other then becomes uncontested at the "controller's" next untap phase). [TOM 12-DEC-1995]. But that's inconsistent with the handling of the burned-in-combat weapon case (at least as I've been explaining it), as you note. Both rulings seemed logical enough at the time (and up until now). I'll put this on the list for RT review. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8fuc6i$8j8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] HURRAY!!!! [ quoted text not captured ]

> > Are you reading this? I listened to your opinion and considered your > question. You obviously saw LSJ's reply, he read and responded to your > question. If the response was confusing, just say so. Some (I'd guess many) > of us read all the posts and do care about your opinion/questions... I > don't know where you got the impression that we didn't. > > Rob Grau > rfg...@eos.ncsu.edu > > Yes I read this and Yes you are correct that some people did seem to read and listen. I was and still am not confused. I understood all their points. I did not agree with them. My comments on the opinions and questions were directed more at someone else. Don't care to start that though. Timing is an important part. I guess I am more inclined to believe that the creators of the game wanted it to be more like the RPG than say a lot of other people and LSJ. But, like I said, this will not change my enjoyment of the game. Sorry if I soap boxed. Didn't mean it that way. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.00051...@red.csi.cam.ac.uk>, [ quoted text not captured ] Okay. How to say this without sounding like a smart ass? This was actually the best response I had ever read from you. And this is the resposnse I was looking for. I didn't think that every question had to be an attack and counter attack. I appreciate the answer. I still have problems saying the weapon is real but that is "my problem". I look forward to the RT ruling on the HR Ivory bow be contested. Argue with you more later. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 1 Jun 2000 ravnos...@my-deja.com wrote: <a whole lot of stuff that I had already written - the entire quote was not necessary, and some people are on dial-up modems, rather than free access of whatever type> > be an attack and counter attack. I appreciate the answer. I still > have problems saying the weapon is real but that is "my problem". Why? What, *in V:TES*, makes the card illusory? If you're having problems with it, just call it something else. There are *huge* numbers of points on which the card game and the RPG vary: Why does Cloak the Gathering give me +1 stealth? If a vampire has superior Auspex, why can't they see through all my inferior obfuscate cards? (Higher level of Auspex beating lower level of Obfuscate.) Why does 1 point of aggravated damage, when I still have lots of blood send me to torpor? Why does pulling the fangs of a Giovanni stop them from hunting? Couldn't they just go and slit the throat of one of their family of retainers? Why does Dominate get me +x bleed? All it does is allow me to influence people. Are we to assume that all vampires with Dominate know people in high positions? The Giovanni and the Ventrue probably do, but the Malkavians? They could just as easily be trying to Dominate a puppet. Why, if I steal a piece of equipment, Why does Skin of Steel only stop attacks from strikes? Wouldn't steel skin stop birds just as easily as a sword? Why does Possession allow me to ressurect vampires who have suffered final death? Why does Realm of the Black Sun only allow me to steal your resources during your master phase? Wouldn't it work just as nicely on an Art Scam resource as on one I get from a Short Term Investment? Why woudl a vampire know how to use a Laptop Computer, especially given that some of the older ones don't know *anything* about IT? It goes on. Ignore V:tM. This is V:TES. > I > look forward to the RT ruling on the HR Ivory bow be contested. Argue Which may, of course, retain the current ruling. Were I to be submitting a piece to LSJ, who would presumably allow the Rules Team to look at it, it would probably read: # Horrid Reality is a card that is clearly intended to allow equipment to # take a far more functional role in the game, and it seems clear that the # Ravnos were also supposed to be able to play about with equipment. # However, it also seems clear to me that the intent of Horrid Reality, # based on its card text, is to make the card solely transient. It # entering the ash-heap, or burning, seems consistent with not wanting the # card to stick around in play. As such, I would be tempted to rule that, # on original intent of the card, the ruling from TOM should stand. -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "I know my ex-boyfriend lies. Oh, he does it every time. It's just his permanent disguise, yeah, yeah, but he's drop dead gorgeous."