gaining blood

What exactly does the term "gain blood" mean for game purposes? i understand the vampire with Blood Clots or Ex Nihilo cannot hunt to gain blood, but what about other phrasings - like the "move blood" on Heidelberg Castle? Also, could someone try to motivate the greatness of Ex Nihilos superior level! To me, it seems totally meaningless... Card texts: Blood Clots, Quitus -Action -+1 stealth -1 blood <i> Put this card on a minion controlled by another Methuselah. This minion cannot gain blood or life; any blood or life this minion gains goes to the blood bank instead. Any minion may burn this card as an action. <S> As above, and the minion with this card burns 1 blood or life when this card is burned. Ex Nihilo, Necromancy -Action -+1 stealth -1 blood <i> Put this card on this vampire. The vampire with this card gets +1 stealth. Damage inflicted by this vampire is reduced to 0, and this vampire is immune to non-aggrevated damage. This vampire cannot gain blood; any blood this vampire gains goes to the blood bank instead. During your master, this vampire burns 1 blood or is burned. You may choose to burn this card during your untap phase. <S> As above, but you may burn this card during any Methuselath's untap phase.

>What exactly does the term "gain blood" mean for game purposes? i understand >the vampire with Blood Clots or Ex Nihilo cannot hunt to gain blood, but >what about other phrasings - like the "move blood" on Heidelberg Castle? I'd guess that "gain blood" would be anything that would result in that vampire having more blood than it currently has. (i.e. if it currently has 4 blood, any effect that would cause him to have more blood would be considered "gaining blood."). >Ex Nihilo, Necromancy >-Action >-+1 stealth >-1 blood > Put this card on this vampire. The vampire with this card gets +1 >stealth. Damage >inflicted by this vampire is reduced to 0, and this vampire is immune to >non-aggrevated >damage. This vampire cannot gain blood; any blood this vampire gains goes to >the >blood bank instead. During your master, this vampire burns 1 blood or is >burned. You >may choose to burn this card during your untap phase. > As above, but you may burn this card during any Methuselath's untap >phase. Yeah Ex Nihilo doesn't look that great right now. Maybe combine it with a Weather Control deck? (Since damage is reduced to 0 not prevented). Maybe if you steal another person's vampire and have it perform Ex Nihilo you can try to get it burned? Anyways, it can also be useful if you *really* need that +1 stealth on all actions... Halcyan 2

"Henke" <d98...@stud.hh.se> escribió en el mensaje news:9g7me7$8ji$1...@taliesin.netcom.net.uk... > What exactly does the term "gain blood" mean for game purposes? i understand > the vampire with Blood Clots or Ex Nihilo cannot hunt to gain blood, but > what about other phrasings - like the "move blood" on Heidelberg Castle? Blood Clots...m a great card against those Fifth Tradition lovers...Per card text, it looks to me that you cannot gain blood in anyway (be it through Taste of Vitae, Theft of Vitae, Hunting Ground or Blood Doll) A Fida'i Deck should kick ass those Bloat deck, if they manage to gather enough intercept... Tom, Mad&Co

On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 14:40:24 +0200, "Henke" <d98...@stud.hh.se> wrote: >What exactly does the term "gain blood" mean for game purposes? i understand >the vampire with Blood Clots or Ex Nihilo cannot hunt to gain blood, but >what about other phrasings - like the "move blood" on Heidelberg Castle? > >Also, could someone try to motivate the greatness of Ex Nihilos superior >level! To me, it seems totally meaningless... Never seen a Bauble deck burn the Bauble and associated equipment to have a surprise blocker before? =) This isn't QUITE a surprise blocker, but if you're going to burn the card during your own untap phase anyway, you can always burn the card on your predator's untap phase, so they can potentially block and fight (damage no longer reduced to 0). >blood bank instead. During your master, this vampire burns 1 blood or is >burned. You >may choose to burn this card during your untap phase. ><S> As above, but you may burn this card during any Methuselath's untap >phase. -- Derek

"Henke" <d98...@stud.hh.se> wrote in message news:<9g7me7$8ji$1...@taliesin.netcom.net.uk>... [ quoted text not captured ] Perhaps you just wanted the stealth & protection from your prey's vamps, but would like to get into combat with your predator's, so you would want to burn the card early? Just a guess... Aramis

halc...@aol.com (Halcyan 2) wrote in message news:<20010613094432...@ng-mi1.aol.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] The reason for Ex Nihilo's superior is easy. At basic you get the always on, +1 stealth, but cannot smash anyone during combat. Having to burn it on your untap, means you will spend that turn without your +1 stealth. If I can burn it on my preys untap, I can still get the stealth on my turn, then intercept and kill someone. On the other hand, if you are using for for prevent damage aspect, it is kind of unnecessary. As you could block, get in combat and take no damage. Then burn it on your untap at basic. Superior just lets you maxamize your time in +1 stealth mode.

In message <20010613094432...@ng-mi1.aol.com>, Halcyan 2 <halc...@aol.com> writes >Yeah Ex Nihilo doesn't look that great right now. Maybe combine it with a >Weather Control deck? (Since damage is reduced to 0 not prevented). No, the vampire is immune to non-agg dam. Damage done *by* this vampire is reduced to 0. (Of course, Weather Control is environmental.) The difference could be important. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D "You reinstall Dial-Up Networking. The Elf screams and becomes EBD690ECD7A1F an icon. *** CONGRATULATIONS! *** You completed the BT Internet B457CA213D7E6 Helpdesk training course in 15 out of a possible 9000 moves." 68C3695D623D5D

halc...@aol.com (Halcyan 2) wrote in message news:<20010613094432...@ng-mi1.aol.com>... > Ex Nihilo doesn't look that great right now. Don't forget that Ex Nihilo makes the vamp Talbot-proof for a time, just like Ambrosius. Rushing with Talbot’s Chainsaw, she can prevent a point of Agg and can play non-damaging effects like Thin Blood and Blood to Water in combat. I say "she" so we don't forget the much maligned Patricia Giovanni, who might be willing to impersonate an Assamite to get the benefit of Path of Blood and stay Ex'ed longer despite strikes. Those Zombies she’s got following her around will do damage too. Get the Sargon Fragment, and you could combine Ex Nihilo with Tzimice (Trap/Carrion Crows, Fleshcraft and Bonecraft), Lasombra (Entombment), and !Malkavians (Coma), not to mention some of the vicious new Assamite strikes. The card has potential.

In article <Ykv2EQX6...@obeah.demon.co.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: >In message <20010613094432...@ng-mi1.aol.com>, Halcyan 2 ><halc...@aol.com> writes >>Yeah Ex Nihilo doesn't look that great right now. Maybe combine it with a >>Weather Control deck? (Since damage is reduced to 0 not prevented). >No, the vampire is immune to non-agg dam. Which will work with Weather Control, natch. >Damage done *by* this vampire is reduced to 0. (Of course, Weather >Control is environmental.) As is Carrion Crows and Ghoul Retainer. >The difference could be important. It could be indeed. Hm... Who's got ani/tha/nec? Enzo! He's got ani/NEC/tha. And, of course, everyone's favorite Uncle, with the fakey ani/nec to go with his THA. That could be entertainingly stupid. gomi -- Yes, I believe but I'd rather not pray What I believe in I'd rather not say, baby

Halcyan 2 wrote: > > >What exactly does the term "gain blood" mean for game purposes? i understand > >the vampire with Blood Clots or Ex Nihilo cannot hunt to gain blood, but > >what about other phrasings - like the "move blood" on Heidelberg Castle? > > I'd guess that "gain blood" would be anything that would result in that vampire > having more blood than it currently has. (i.e. if it currently has 4 blood, any > effect that would cause him to have more blood would be considered "gaining > blood."). Correct. > Yeah Ex Nihilo doesn't look that great right now. Maybe combine it with a > Weather Control deck? (Since damage is reduced to 0 not prevented). Maybe if The vampire is immune to the WC damage, yes. Stated differently than "reduced to 0", but it amounts to the same thing usually. > you steal another person's vampire and have it perform Ex Nihilo you can try to > get it burned? Anyways, it can also be useful if you *really* need that +1 > stealth on all actions... -- 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/

Henke The Superior will allow you to prevent your vampire being burned when they untap with 0 blood (and you cannot get any more to them) by burning the card the vampire can hunt or use a hunting ground/blood doll (exist even..) and not be burned. What ability could you suggest would be more appropriate as the superioir Ex Nihilo? Works for me. Henke <d98...@stud.hh.se> wrote in message news:9g7me7$8ji$1...@taliesin.netcom.net.uk... [ quoted text not captured ]

Brendan Even though you adress me in a very polite way, I still must deny you the pleasure of being correct. If you have zero blood in your untap, you still can burn Ex Nihilo in your untapphase, as you're not burned until your master phase. My opinion is that the superior level of a card always should be more than a marginal improvement of the inferior level. Therefore I would suggest that the inferior version would not have the "+1 stealth on all actions", and that the superior would get the +1 stealth part. Works for me! Brendan skrev i meddelandet ... [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote > Halcyan 2 wrote: > > > > >What exactly does the term "gain blood" mean for game purposes? i understand > > >the vampire with Blood Clots or Ex Nihilo cannot hunt to gain blood, but > > >what about other phrasings - like the "move blood" on Heidelberg Castle? > > > > I'd guess that "gain blood" would be anything that would result in that vampire > > having more blood than it currently has. (i.e. if it currently has 4 blood, any > > effect that would cause him to have more blood would be considered "gaining > > blood."). > > Correct. What about Heidelberg Castle? Does moving blood to the vampire count as "gain blood?" - Jason Bell

In article <GkZV6.40605$ru2.10...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] Yes. So does blood moved to the vampire via Theft of Vitae. Or hunting. Or with Gird Minions. Or using Sabine Laffite's special ability. Or via Blood Doll. Or burning Blood Tears of Kephran. Or Taste of Vitae. Or Restoration. Or Summon Soul. In short, any effect that would place blood on the vampire. As was (rather clearly) stated above. gomi yeesh [ quoted text not captured ]

"Gomi no Sensei" <go...@best.com> wrote > In short, any effect that would place blood on the vampire. > > As was (rather clearly) stated above. > > gomi > yeesh Sorry, I didn't see the Castle in the comments among the poorly spaced, non-left justified jumble of previously quoted material in the post. It had occurred to me that the Castle was worded differently than these other cards, so there might be another ruling for it. - Jason Bell

In article <kI8W6.104745$e34.14...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com>, Jason Bell <Jason...@mail.com> wrote: >Sorry, I didn't see the Castle in the comments among >the poorly spaced, non-left justified jumble of previously >quoted material in the post. Your vision might improve if you saw a doctor about that bad case of cranio-rectal inversion. >It had occurred to me that the Castle was worded >differently than these other cards, so there might >be another ruling for it. Well HOT DAMN, something occurred to you. Have a piece of SMARTY MAN CAKE. It occurs to me that, since Force of Will is 'worded differently' than other action cards (only usable by a tapped vampire), I can use it with a Sensorily Deprived vampire that's tapped. I know, there's a blanket prohibition, but hey -- it's WORDED DIFFERENTLY, and things just OCCURRED TO ME! HOORAY! Now I, too, am SMARTY LIEK JAS0N B3LL!!11!1!!! YAASA. STFU. gomi [ quoted text not captured ]

"Gomi no Sensei" <go...@best.com> (snip) > > >It had occurred to me that the Castle was worded > >differently than these other cards, so there might > >be another ruling for it. > > Well HOT DAMN, something occurred to you. Have a piece > of SMARTY MAN CAKE. i can see that Jason is making new friends here... be careful, Gomi, he may threaten you to "never reply to your posts"....

"Gomi no Sensei" <go...@best.com> wrote > Jason Bell <Jason...@mail.com> wrote: > > >Sorry, I didn't see the Castle in the comments among > >the poorly spaced, non-left justified jumble of previously > >quoted material in the post. > > Your vision might improve if you saw a doctor about that > bad case of cranio-rectal inversion. > > >It had occurred to me that the Castle was worded > >differently than these other cards, so there might > >be another ruling for it. > > Well HOT DA*N, something occurred to you. Have a piece > of SMARTY MAN CAKE. > > It occurs to me that, since Force of Will is 'worded > differently' than other action cards (only usable > by a tapped vampire), I can use it with a Sensorily > Deprived vampire that's tapped. I know, there's a blanket > prohibition, but hey -- it's WORDED DIFFERENTLY, and > things just OCCURRED TO ME! HOORAY! Of course, if you took your brain out of your pants every once in awhile, you'd read the errata list, and come to understand that the wording of cards leads to all flavors of "smarty man cake" like... ...Heidelberg, the card I enquired about, already has 3 separate errata, in 3 separate years (not all at once), probably because Wile E. Coyotes such as yourself played them incorrectly for years (or maybe you're just so amazing that you, of course, were playing them right all along, because that's just the intuitive way). ...there are well over 200 separate cards with errata on the official V:TES list, many of which have multiple erratas, and many of those issued at different times. Many use the specific (and often ineleagnt) wording on the cards to determine the way the card is played, and many others ignore inelegant text when so doing. And finally, perhaps if you weren't quite so interested in being a pile, you'd realize that LSJ seems to be the only available representative who can say what the official rules are, and if he were to decide today that "gain" and "add" were the only wordings affected by the gains blood restriction, it would be so, and the only way to know would be to ask him. So, when it comes right down to it, the only reason for your extremely unpleasant post was because I missed the reference to H.Castle in the post I responded to. I'll leave it to the reader to decide if that warranted the steaming heap you dropped into this forum. - Jason Bell

Jason Bell wrote: > ...Heidelberg, the card I enquired about, already has > 3 separate errata, in 3 separate years (not all at once), > probably because Wile E. Coyotes such as yourself > played them incorrectly for years (or maybe you're > just so amazing that you, of course, were playing > them right all along, because that's just the intuitive > way). Heidelberg has 1 errata and 2 rulings/clarification. Only the "cannot be tapped during an action" actually changed the functionality of the card. [ quoted text not captured ]

> ...Heidelberg, the card I enquired about, already has > 3 separate errata, in 3 separate years (not all at once), > probably because Wile E. Coyotes such as yourself > played them incorrectly for years (or maybe you're > just so amazing that you, of course, were playing > them right all along, because that's just the intuitive > way). > Heidelberg doesn't have any errata anymore because it has been reprinted. Every card has the same text as the latest version. Jeroen

In message <g2iW6.105729$e34.15...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com>, Jason Bell <Jason...@mail.com> writes >...there are well over 200 separate cards with errata >on the official V:TES list, Much of this forms clarifications and rulings. Many players don't need to know all of these (judges need to, at least, be familiar with it all and have an inkling as to what's there etc.) because they don't actually *change* the card, just make it crystal clear how it interacts. There isn't that much real errata - where the card text is significantly or heavily changed. [ quoted text not captured ]

go...@best.com (Gomi no Sensei) wrote in message news:<9gb9ab$2geb$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com>... > It occurs to me that, since Force of Will is 'worded > differently' than other action cards (only usable > by a tapped vampire), I can use it with a Sensorily > Deprived vampire that's tapped. I know, there's a blanket > prohibition, but hey -- it's WORDED DIFFERENTLY, and > things just OCCURRED TO ME! HOORAY! hey Gomi - you *can* play Force of Will with a tapped Sensorily Deprived vampire. The only thing Sense Dep keeps you from doing is untapping as normal during your untap phase. If you were Pentextually Subverted, on the other hand... > Now I, too, am SMARTY LIEK JAS0N B3LL!!11!1!!! You certainly are. :-) (Unless you were being doubly ironic and it went over my head.) Josh d0nt b3 st00pid b3 a smarty c0m3 and j01n th3 naz1 party

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote > Jason Bell wrote: > > ...Heidelberg, the card I enquired about, already has > > 3 separate errata, in 3 separate years (not all at once), > > probably because Wile E. Coyotes such as yourself > > played them incorrectly for years (or maybe you're > > just so amazing that you, of course, were playing > > them right all along, because that's just the intuitive > > way). > > Heidelberg has 1 errata and 2 rulings/clarification. > Only the "cannot be tapped during an action" actually > changed the functionality of the card. I find this to be a distintion without much of a difference. I use "errata" to refer to any official ruling necessary to ensure correct play of a card (encompassing all three clarification, rulings, and errata, as well as the supplanted card text when new printings of a card happen). I suppose that's a bit lazy of me, sorry for the confusion. - Jason Bell

Gomi no Sensei wrote: > > In article <Ykv2EQX6...@obeah.demon.co.uk>, > > Who's got ani/tha/nec? > > Enzo! He's got ani/NEC/tha. > And, of course, everyone's favorite Uncle, with the fakey ani/nec to > go with his THA. And he can employ a Masquer, who would also be immune to the parliament of rooks, and the vagaries of the climate. Is there really a deck here? Chris > > That could be entertainingly stupid. > > gomi > -- > Yes, I believe but I'd rather not pray > What I believe in I'd rather not say, baby -- chris shorb <www.vtesinla.org> (A V:TES site in development) prince of torrance, california Ultimate Disc - Hockey - Vampire the Eternal Struggle Ebay page <http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/vtessingles/>