Hey, can I do this?

Here's a warped rules question. Suppose I have 2 vampires out with Superior Obfuscate. Agrippina plays Night Moves, then modifies with Spying Mission at superior. Grendel then takes over the action with Mask of 1000 faces. Can Grendel do this, or was the action complete after the Spying Mission? If allowed.... Can Grendel then also play Spying Mission at Superior? (I imagine not) Another question.... Agrippina bleeds. Grendel takes over the bleed with Mask of 1000 Faces. Can Agrippina now bleed, or is it forbidden by "no repeat actions" rule? (Arguably, she never completed the action, so the no-repeat rule would not apply). One more... Panagos Levidis plays Ritual Challenge. Sebastian Marley takes over with Mask of 1000 Faces. What happens? Does the action merely fizzle because card text grants the benefit to "the acting Gangrel"? Yet another.... Agrippina has a Spying Mission on her. Dimple bleeds. Prey declares "I'm not blocking." I pull out Mask of 1000 Faces, and say: "Hah, it's REALLY Agrippina." Can my prey now declare a block? Still more... Lucretia bleeds (at +1 stealth due to special ability) Prey plays +1 intercept. Agrippina plays Mask of 1000 Faces (at Superior, granting +1 stealth). Is the bleed now at +2 stealth, or was the benefit of Lucretia's special ability lost when the acting vampire changed? I can't stop... Agrippina bleeds; prey blocks. Agrippina plays Lost in Crowds for +2 stealth. Prey throws down +2 intercept. Dimple takes over bleed with Mask of 1000 Faces at inferior. The +2 stealth still applies, right? And can Dimple now play another Lost in Crowds for +3 stealth? My guess is that benefits gained from action modifiers are kept when the acting minion changes, but that benefits from cards that are on the former acting minion are lost. That seems consistent with the rule that you can't take over actions that are inherent special abilities of acting minion. (That is a rule, right?) John Whelan

jbwh...@dorsai.org (John Whelan) writes: >Agrippina plays Night Moves, then modifies with Spying Mission at superior. >Grendel then takes over the action with Mask of 1000 faces. >Can Grendel do this, or was the action complete after the Spying Mission? Sure. The action isn't over until all players have stopped playing effects. >If allowed.... >Can Grendel then also play Spying Mission at Superior? (I imagine not) No. After the first Spying Mission, the bleed will have been reduced to zero, so the second spying mission isn't useful (card text). >Another question.... Agrippina bleeds. Grendel takes over the bleed with >Mask of 1000 Faces. Can Agrippina now bleed, or is it forbidden by "no >repeat actions" rule? (Arguably, she never completed the action, so the >no-repeat rule would not apply). That argument assumes that the restriction is on completed actions. It is not. The restriction is on attempted actions. Aggripina could not attempt another bleed this turn. >One more... >Panagos Levidis plays Ritual Challenge. >Sebastian Marley takes over with Mask of 1000 Faces. >What happens? >Does the action merely fizzle because card text grants the benefit to >"the acting Gangrel"? Hmm. Probably. This is similar to the point that the Sword of Judgment is worthless to a non BrujahAnti. >Yet another.... >Agrippina has a Spying Mission on her. >Dimple bleeds. >Prey declares "I'm not blocking." >I pull out Mask of 1000 Faces, and say: "Hah, it's REALLY Agrippina." >Can my prey now declare a block? No. The decision to block or not is final. >Still more... >Lucretia bleeds (at +1 stealth due to special ability) >Prey plays +1 intercept. >Agrippina plays Mask of 1000 Faces (at Superior, granting +1 stealth). >Is the bleed now at +2 stealth, or was the benefit of Lucretia's special > ability lost when the acting vampire changed? Lost. The bleed is now at +1 stealth (from sup. Mask1K) >I can't stop... >Agrippina bleeds; prey blocks. >Agrippina plays Lost in Crowds for +2 stealth. >Prey throws down +2 intercept. >Dimple takes over bleed with Mask of 1000 Faces at inferior. >The +2 stealth still applies, right? >And can Dimple now play another Lost in Crowds for +3 stealth? Yes and yes. >My guess is that benefits gained from action modifiers are kept when the >acting minion changes, but that benefits from cards that are on the former >acting minion are lost. Benefits applied to minions are lost (stealth from Backways or the Labyrinth would not apply to any subsequent acting minion, for example). Most action modifiers modify the action, not the minion, so are passed on to the new acting minion. >That seems consistent with the rule that you can't take over actions that >are inherent special abilities of acting minion. (That is a rule, right?) Correct. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | He who laughs last http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | thinks slowest Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |

L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: : jbwh...@dorsai.org (John Whelan) writes: [question about Masking a Ritual Challenge deleted] : Hmm. Probably. : This is similar to the point that the Sword of Judgment is worthless to : a non BrujahAnti. I think all the rest of your answers are right, but I think that the Sword of Judgment is not usable by non BrujahAnti's by card text. I don't think Mask causes actions to fizzle unless they are actions actually inherent in the minion, like the Muddled Vampire Hunter's rush action. I think Tom (or at least someone) actually ruled on this once, though I haven't actually looked it up to use it in backing my position. Josh "and a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"

[ quoted text not captured ] Ritual Challenge's card text suffers from as much elitism as the Sword. "The acting Gangrel gets..." Sure, you can mask this action (is isn't an inherent action). Tom did rule on the non-Maskability of inherent actions). But, when the action resolves, there is no acting Gangrel, so the action has no effect. [ quoted text not captured ]

L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: : du...@newton.ruph.cornell.edu (Joshua Duffin) writes: : >[question about Masking a Ritual Challenge deleted] : >I think all the rest of your answers are right, but I think that the Sword : >of Judgment is not usable by non BrujahAnti's by card text. I don't think : >Mask causes actions to fizzle unless they are actions actually inherent in : >the minion, like the Muddled Vampire Hunter's rush action. I think Tom : >(or at least someone) actually ruled on this once, though I haven't actually : >looked it up to use it in backing my position. : Ritual Challenge's card text suffers from as much elitism as the Sword. : "The acting Gangrel gets..." : Sure, you can mask this action (is isn't an inherent action). Tom : did rule on the non-Maskability of inherent actions). : But, when the action resolves, there is no acting Gangrel, so : the action has no effect. Ah yes, I missed that very important bit of card text. Quite right then, the Masked non-Gangrel can't get anything out of a Ritual Challenge. Josh

Hi. Could someone please re-post or email me LSJ's original response to my post in this thread. It never reached me. This is the first response I've seen. Thanks John Whelan (jbwh...@amanda.dorsai.org) L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: : du...@newton.ruph.cornell.edu (Joshua Duffin) writes: : >L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: : >[question about Masking a Ritual Challenge deleted] : >: Hmm. Probably. : >: This is similar to the point that the Sword of Judgment is worthless to : >: a non BrujahAnti. : >I think all the rest of your answers are right, but I think that the Sword : >of Judgment is not usable by non BrujahAnti's by card text. I don't think : >Mask causes actions to fizzle unless they are actions actually inherent in : >the minion, like the Muddled Vampire Hunter's rush action. I think Tom : >(or at least someone) actually ruled on this once, though I haven't actually : >looked it up to use it in backing my position. : Ritual Challenge's card text suffers from as much elitism as the Sword. : "The acting Gangrel gets..." : Sure, you can mask this action (is isn't an inherent action). Tom : did rule on the non-Maskability of inherent actions). : But, when the action resolves, there is no acting Gangrel, so : the action has no effect. : -- [ quoted text not captured ]