Double Theft with Anathema

This situation actually happened in a game tonight. Virstania is in combat with Lucas Halton. Virstania is Anathema. Both have two blood. Both play Theft of Vitae at superior. In the absence of Anathema, both would still be on 2 blood. With Anathema, is there any window during which Virstania is empty and Anathema is triggered? We played as if the answer were NO, and after thinking about it, I think that's right, but I'd appreciate confirmation. Thx in advance. Pat

[ quoted text not captured ] You are correct as far as the rules 6.4.3, 6.4.5 (Strike Effects) and 6.4.6 are concerned. 6.4.3 indicates that effects from both minions are resolved simultaneously. 6.4.5 indicates that steal blood effects occur before the heal damage step in 6.4.6 And 6.4.6 describes preventing and healing damage. Thus the thefts are simultaneous. Unless LSJ comes along and states that simultaneous is not really simultaneous everything is as you played it. D

quetzalcoatl wrote: > Pat wrote: >>Virstania is in combat with Lucas Halton. Virstania is Anathema. >> >>Both have two blood. Both play Theft of Vitae at superior. In the absence of >>Anathema, both would still be on 2 blood. >> >>With Anathema, is there any window during which Virstania is empty and >>Anathema is triggered? >> >>We played as if the answer were NO, and after thinking about it, I think >>that's right, but I'd appreciate confirmation. >> > You are correct as far as the rules 6.4.3, 6.4.5 (Strike Effects) and > 6.4.6 are concerned. > Thus the thefts are simultaneous. Correct. > Unless LSJ comes along and states that simultaneous is not really > simultaneous everything is as you played it. Correct, but silly. :-) -- LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply) Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

LSJ wrote: > > Unless LSJ comes along and states that simultaneous is not really > > simultaneous everything is as you played it. > > Correct, but silly. :-) > Well what I meant was that unless you stated there was a window where by one steals first then the other (just for sequencing). D

On 24 Jul 2005 17:09:21 -0700, "quetzalcoatl" <da...@vega.id.au> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I'd figure the same would apply if Blythe Candeleria and Masika St. John (both full capacity) played Theft Superior against each other. Both lose at the same time they gain, so no 'bleed off' occurs. Morgan Vening

In message <bq19e1lh7ifbkirig...@4ax.com>, Morgan Vening <mor...@optusnet.com.au> writes: <snip - mutual theft of vitae> >I'd figure the same would apply if Blythe Candeleria and Masika St. >John (both full capacity) played Theft Superior against each other. >Both lose at the same time they gain, so no 'bleed off' occurs. Right. <http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/8 cdfd59787a2d249?hl=en&> LSJ confirms the following sequence is correct, question from Ector, answer from Salem: > > If both combatants declared Theft of Vitae, and both are full, what > > would be the result of this? And how these strikes are resolved - > > both vampires lose blood, then both vampires gain blood, or vice > > versa, or the acting vampire's strike resolves first? > assuming: > neither of the vampires had first strike > both the thefts were played at the same level > result: > both vampires still at full capacity. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

I hereby apologise for posting that other thread. This is what I get for using the word simultaneous when searching instead of Blythe and Masika.

Would first strike work in the scenario?

Would first strike work in this Theft of Vitae scenario?

adam....@gmail.com wrote: > Would first strike work in this Theft of Vitae scenario? If by "work" you mean, "end up screwing over the vampire that has first strike", then yes.

[ quoted text not captured ] Well that's not a terribly helpful response, even if the question wasn't phrased as clearly as it might. Scenario 1: Vamp A is Anathama. Vamp F has First Strike. Both have 2 blood. Both have THA. Both strike Theft of Vitae. F's strike resolves first and empties A. Anathema triggers, and A burns. F's controller gains Anathema pool. Very nice to have first strike here. Scenario 2: Same except Vamp A and Vamp F are both at full capacity. F's strike resolve first. F has 2 blood more than his capacity, excess drains off. A's strike then resolves, stealing 2 blood from full F, filling back up to capacity. Total drag to have first strike here. Jeff

jeff...@pacbell.net wrote: > Chris Berger wrote: > > adam....@gmail.com wrote: > > > Would first strike work in this Theft of Vitae scenario? > > > > If by "work" you mean, "end up screwing over the vampire that has first > > strike", then yes. > > Well that's not a terribly helpful response, even if the question > wasn't phrased as clearly as it might. > > Scenario 1: Vamp A is Anathama. Vamp F has First Strike. Both have 2 > blood. Both have THA. Both strike Theft of Vitae. > > F's strike resolves first and empties A. Anathema triggers, and A > burns. F's controller gains Anathema pool. Very nice to have first > strike here. > Sorry, was ignoring the Anathema in the original scenario, and was just concentrating on double theft. In general, with double theft, the vampire with first strike gets hosed (if double theft of vitae can really be said to have a "general" case). With Anathema on the opposing vamp, yeah, you're absolutely right, it could be very useful.