rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Rulings Questions

8 messages from 6 participants · 24 September 2000 – 26 September 2000
original thread on Google Groups

Derek Ray

On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 01:52:00 GMT, lf...@ionet.net (Lee Fent) wrote: >It was bound to happen, a rules question. Sigh. I have two, and if >anyone could give their opinion I would be thankful for it. > >1) A tapped vampire with 3 blood on uses Force of Will to bleed. The >action is blocked (thus cancelling the 1 blood cost of FoW). The >vampire then uses Kiss of Ra (costing 3) to torporize the opposing >vampire. Now, is the action vampire burned by his 1 pt of aggravated >(he has superior fortitude), or does he himself go to torpor with no >blood on him since that's his 1st pt of Agg Damage? He goes to torpor. A healthy vampire who receives a point of agg damage becomes wounded. A wounded vampire who receives a point of agg damage must burn one blood per point to avoid being destroyed. An empty vampire is healthy - he's just empty and must hunt. >2) A Tzimisce is diablerized. The game progresses to the Blood Hunt >vote (called by a player who is not directly involved). As votes are >being cast, the Tzimisce controller decides to use Reform Body. Is >this legal? I feel that it's not since the window for using a >Reaction card is past (i.e. the action is successful). I think that >unless the card overrides, you have to play a reaction to the action, >not after it's completed. But, this makes Reform Body less usefull as >a reaction card. Any idea's/opinion's? A Blood Hunt is called *after* the action is complete. Since you gain equipment and blood from the munched vampire and a skill card from your library (if he was older), and THEN anyone may call a Blood Hunt; the window has, as you say, passed for playing Reform Body. I don't know if it makes it less useful necessarily. It prevents your vampire from being diablerized, and he even gets to gain 2 blood at superior, which he can then use to rescue himself from torpor next turn. Sure, you don't get to burn the diablerist, but still - the Tzimisce can often ill afford to lose a vampire such as Meshenka just because someone went munching. Group Etiquette Check: is it considered polite, when announcing an attempt at diablerie, to point at someone's vampire, make chomping, slurping noises, and say "MMMM... CRUNCHY OZMO"? -- Derek "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." - C. Darwin, 1871

Lee Fent

It was bound to happen, a rules question. Sigh. I have two, and if anyone could give their opinion I would be thankful for it. 1) A tapped vampire with 3 blood on uses Force of Will to bleed. The action is blocked (thus cancelling the 1 blood cost of FoW). The vampire then uses Kiss of Ra (costing 3) to torporize the opposing vampire. Now, is the action vampire burned by his 1 pt of aggravated (he has superior fortitude), or does he himself go to torpor with no blood on him since that's his 1st pt of Agg Damage? 2) A Tzimisce is diablerized. The game progresses to the Blood Hunt vote (called by a player who is not directly involved). As votes are being cast, the Tzimisce controller decides to use Reform Body. Is this legal? I feel that it's not since the window for using a Reaction card is past (i.e. the action is successful). I think that unless the card overrides, you have to play a reaction to the action, not after it's completed. But, this makes Reform Body less usefull as a reaction card. Any idea's/opinion's? Thanks, Lee

stubby

>Group Etiquette Check: is it considered polite, when announcing an >attempt at diablerie, to point at someone's vampire, make chomping, >slurping noises, and say "MMMM... CRUNCHY OZMO"? yeah. ours normally rub their stomachs and do similair. very off putting for by-standers - we play in a pub :)

LSJ

Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: > lf...@ionet.net (Lee Fent) wrote: > >2) A Tzimisce is diablerized. The game progresses to the > >Blood Hunt [referendum] (called by a player who is not directly > >involved). As votes are being cast, the Tzimisce controller > >decides to use Reform Body. Is this legal? I feel that it's > >not since the window for using a Reaction card is past (i.e. > >the action is successful). I think that unless the card > >overrides, you have to play a reaction to the action, not after > >it's completed. But, this makes Reform Body less usefull as > >a reaction card. Any idea's/opinion's? > > A Blood Hunt is called *after* the action is complete. Nah. I had previously overstated the situation in that manner, but was eventually "trapped" by the error. The Blood Hunt *referendum* is not an action (i.e., not a normal political action) - so the effort to call the referendum cannot be blocked and modifiers and reactions cannot be used during the referendum. But the base action is still "on". [LSJ 26-APR-2000]. But, it is true that the Tzimisce cannot play Reform Body after being burned, which includes the time at which a Blood Hunt can be called. -- 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/ Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

cantila

In article <tbdtsso21ci3jc8ua...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 01:52:00 GMT, lf...@ionet.net (Lee Fent) wrote: > > >It was bound to happen, a rules question. Sigh. I have two, and if > >anyone could give their opinion I would be thankful for it. > > > >1) A tapped vampire with 3 blood on uses Force of Will to bleed. The > >action is blocked (thus cancelling the 1 blood cost of FoW). The > >vampire then uses Kiss of Ra (costing 3) to torporize the opposing > >vampire. Now, is the action vampire burned by his 1 pt of aggravated > >(he has superior fortitude), or does he himself go to torpor with no > >blood on him since that's his 1st pt of Agg Damage? > > He goes to torpor. A healthy vampire who receives a point of agg > damage becomes wounded. A wounded vampire who receives a point of agg > damage must burn one blood per point to avoid being destroyed. > > An empty vampire is healthy - he's just empty and must hunt. > > >2) A Tzimisce is diablerized. The game progresses to the Blood Hunt > >vote (called by a player who is not directly involved). As votes are > >being cast, the Tzimisce controller decides to use Reform Body. Is > >this legal? I feel that it's not since the window for using a > >Reaction card is past (i.e. the action is successful). I think that > >unless the card overrides, you have to play a reaction to the action, > >not after it's completed. But, this makes Reform Body less usefull as > >a reaction card. Any idea's/opinion's? > > A Blood Hunt is called *after* the action is complete. Since you gain > equipment and blood from the munched vampire and a skill card from > your library (if he was older), and THEN anyone may call a Blood Hunt; > the window has, as you say, passed for playing Reform Body. > > I don't know if it makes it less useful necessarily. It prevents your > vampire from being diablerized, and he even gets to gain 2 blood at > superior, which he can then use to rescue himself from torpor next > turn. Sure, you don't get to burn the diablerist, but still - the > Tzimisce can often ill afford to lose a vampire such as Meshenka just > because someone went munching. > > Group Etiquette Check: is it considered polite, when announcing an > attempt at diablerie, to point at someone's vampire, make chomping, > slurping noises, and say "MMMM... CRUNCHY OZMO"? I'd say that when it comes ot Ozmo, it's mandatory ;) > > -- Derek > > "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." > - C. Darwin, 1871 > [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray

On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:39:55 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> lf...@ionet.net (Lee Fent) wrote: >> A Blood Hunt is called *after* the action is complete. > >Nah. I had previously overstated the situation in that manner, but >was eventually "trapped" by the error. The Blood Hunt *referendum* >is not an action (i.e., not a normal political action) - so the >effort to call the referendum cannot be blocked and modifiers >and reactions cannot be used during the referendum. But the base >action is still "on". [LSJ 26-APR-2000]. @#*(@. OK. So the Blood Hunt is called at the END of the action, and is the last bit to happen during the whole munchy-munchy? [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ

Derek Ray wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:39:55 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > >Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> lf...@ionet.net (Lee Fent) wrote: > >> A Blood Hunt is called *after* the action is complete. > > > >Nah. I had previously overstated the situation in that manner, but > >was eventually "trapped" by the error. The Blood Hunt *referendum* > >is not an action (i.e., not a normal political action) - so the > >effort to call the referendum cannot be blocked and modifiers > >and reactions cannot be used during the referendum. But the base > >action is still "on". [LSJ 26-APR-2000]. > > @#*(@. > > OK. So the Blood Hunt is called at the END of the action, and is the > last bit to happen during the whole munchy-munchy? The Hunt is called when the diablerie occurs (as the 5th step of diablereie) If the diablerie is the action, then the Blood Hunt occurs as part of the resolution of that action. Freak Drive, for example, could be played after the Hunt was called (if it failed, of course). -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

Reyda

But beside this, how can you imagine a burned vampire (not on the table anymore) playing a reaction card ?! at the point the blood hunt is called, he's in the pile of ashes i presume... reyda "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message news: 39CFB5B3...@white-wolf.com... [ quoted text not captured ]