TOM: theft of vitae vs zipgun > timing

My group hashed this out extremely heatedly last night, perhaps you all can help us out on this timing issue. Here's the scene: Sarah Cobbler (with 3 blood of 4) bleeds prey. Sasha Miklos (DS:ravnos with 2 of 2 blood) blocks. Combat ensues. Sarah does not maneuver. Miklos gets 1 maneuver from ZipGun pulled from hand. Miklos makes it long range. Sarah uses Theft of Vitae as strike, (steal 2 blood) superior. Miklos uses Zip Gun with dragonbreath rounds. Ok. Here are the questions. 1) According to the rulebook, stolen blood can be used by the stealer immediately. Does that mean that miklos went to zero blood and burned before getting off her strike? Stolen being resolved before the blocker's strike? Does Miklos get a strike at all? 2) When is the damage from using the Zip Gun accounted for on Miklos? When the ZipGun card is used for the maneuver before the acting minion's strike? Does it affect the amount of blood that Sarah can steal? We did this: sarah got the blood, but miklos got her strike and sent sarah to topor with the aggravated damage. Miklos then burned. Unfortunately, Sarah's methuselah tried to use Rothsheck (we didn't remove those cards cut from jyhad to make vampire) to prevent the aggravated damage to Sarah. If the cards override the rules, would the rothsheck have saved Miklos from burning as the card specifically states that the vampire who attempted to deal damage goes to topor? We then realized that Sarah's methuselah couldn't have used the master out-of-turn anyway, but then it came up that any third party at the table could have done it. In this case, would the rothsheck prevent the theft of vitae burn? I have read that rothsheck was taken out of vampire and heard that some errata eliminated the theft of V burn, but I still want some clarification of these cards and the timing. playing the "use all the cards you paid for" variant, Graham => g...@kuentos.guam.net -- "You're one of the young ones... you don't want to mess with me, do you?" Jeanette (Forever Knight)

Graham H. Watt wrote: > We did this: > sarah got the blood, but miklos got her strike and sent sarah to topor > with the aggravated damage. Miklos then burned. Why does Sasha Miklos get burned? The Zip Gun does a point of damage to her and Sarah Peach Cobbler steals two blood, so Sasha goes to torpor. Sarah Peach Cobbler successfully steals two blood and then takes 3 damage, 2 of which is aggravated. As to the Rotschreck question, no one knows what the card does... (well, a lot of people _think_ they know what it does, but the issue is far from settled) James -- James Hamblin | jham...@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu -------------------------------------------------------------- "Don't worry; base 8 is just like base 10, if you're missing two fingers." -- Tom Lehrer, "New Math"

James Hamblin (jham...@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu) wrote: : Graham H. Watt wrote: : > We did this: : > sarah got the blood, but miklos got her strike and sent sarah to topor : > with the aggravated damage. Miklos then burned. : Why does Sasha Miklos get burned? The Zip Gun does a point of damage to her : and Sarah Peach Cobbler steals two blood, so Sasha goes to torpor. Sarah : Peach Cobbler successfully steals two blood and then takes 3 damage, 2 of which : is aggravated. James - Sasha Miklos burned because she only had 2 blood. If the Zip gun took one immediately, she only has 1. Then the steal blood (according to the rule book from V:TES) reduces her to zero and that causes her to burn, according to how that section of the rule reads about STOLEN blood, not blood lost due to Damage. [ quoted text not captured ]

Graham H. Watt <g...@saba.kuentos.guam.net> wrote: >Sarah Cobbler (with 3 blood of 4) bleeds prey. >Sasha Miklos (DS:ravnos with 2 of 2 blood) blocks. >Combat ensues. >Sarah does not maneuver. >Miklos gets 1 maneuver from ZipGun pulled from hand. >Miklos makes it long range. >Sarah uses Theft of Vitae as strike, (steal 2 blood) superior. >Miklos uses Zip Gun with dragonbreath rounds. > >Ok. Here are the questions. > >1) According to the rulebook, stolen blood can be used by the stealer >immediately. Does that mean that miklos went to zero blood and burned >before getting off her strike? Stolen being resolved before the >blocker's strike? Does Miklos get a strike at all? Sarah's and Sasha's strikes go off at the same time. Sarah steals the blood before she takes any of the damage. She can then burn this blood to heal the damage inflicted on her, even though she stole more blood than she could hold. >2) When is the damage from using the Zip Gun accounted for on Miklos? > When the ZipGun card is used for the maneuver before the acting > minion's strike? The damage is dealt during strike resolution. > Does it affect the amount of blood that Sarah can steal? No. She gets the blood before he can even try to prevent the damage. >We did this: >sarah got the blood, but miklos got her strike and sent sarah to topor >with the aggravated damage. Miklos then burned. Miklos simply goes into torpor. She would only be burned in the basic game (errata to rulebook). >Unfortunately, Sarah's methuselah tried to use Rothsheck (we didn't >remove those cards cut from jyhad to make vampire) to prevent the >aggravated damage to Sarah. If the cards override the rules, would the >rothsheck have saved Miklos from burning as the card specifically states >that the vampire who attempted to deal damage goes to topor? Rotschreck would have been played when the Rounds were pulled out. I believe this would send Sasha into torpor before any strikes did anything, but will have to check on that. Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

In article <4f8cmk$r...@gw.dgii.com>, jam...@gw.digibd.com (James Puzzo) wrote: : Question. In the case above, Sarah had 3 of 4. She steals two, then takes : three points of damage. I assume that she ends up with 1, not 2 blood, : because the steal is resolved before she can absorb damage, and she must : throw away one of the two she stole because she was full. Comments? : : She could have two blood if I read your comment literally: : : "She can then burn this blood to heal the damage inflicted on her, even : though she stole more blood than she could hold." : : This indicates to me that she can use the stolen blood to absorb damage : despite the fact that she has no capacity for it (i.e. steal takes place, : she gets two... she is temporarily at 5 now... she takes three points of : damage, she is now at 2. If she hadn't taken damage, she'd be at 4 (because) : after strike resolution she would toss excess). : : -James The last ruling I was aware of (while it was still Jyhad) stated that stolen blood over the vamp's capacity is kept on the vampire until the end of the combat, and may be used to heal damage immediately. So if Sarah was at 4 blood of four, stole two blood, and was shot with a .44 Magnum, she would break even. If she were at 3 of four, stole two blood, and simply hit for 1 point, she would come out of the combat full. I hope this helps stephen beaulieu hi...@mail.utexas.edu

On Sun, 4 Feb 1996, James Hamblin wrote: > Graham H. Watt wrote: > > We did this: > > sarah got the blood, but miklos got her strike and sent sarah to topor > > with the aggravated damage. Miklos then burned. > > Why does Sasha Miklos get burned? The rules state that if a strike that steals blood manages to remove all blood counters from a vampire, that vampire is burnt. I do not know why they did this, for as far as the root system (V.:The Masquerade) goes, the thing that should happen would be pure & simple diablerie; if the vampire was brought _below_ 0, the vampire delivering the blow should be considered to having commited Diablerie upon the other, gaining all the benefits/problems thereoff. I'd like to see that errata... > The Zip Gun does a point of damage to her > and Sarah Peach Cobbler steals two blood, so Sasha goes to torpor. I do not know the 'Zip Gun' card, but I imagine it is a Chimestry card that conjures a weapon out of thin air for the current combat only. If this is so, I'd have some doubts about allowing it to be equipped with Dragon Breath's ... Nevertheless, if the player used the card to make the maneuver, the vampire *did* lose the blood needed to play the card. So, Sarah Cobbler could not have stolen 2 blood, but only one (but this is an irrelevant detail, since that was the maximum amount of blood she could use anyway...) > Sarah > Peach Cobbler successfully steals two blood and then takes 3 damage, 2 of which > is aggravated. Casualty report: Sasha Miklos -> Ash Pile Sarah Cobbler -> Torpor region, 1 blood. But do not take this for granted :) David Pontes 8[

In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.960208...@alfa.ist.utl.pt>, David Pontes <l41...@alfa.ist.utl.pt> wrote: >On Sun, 4 Feb 1996, James Hamblin wrote: > >> Graham H. Watt wrote: >> > We did this: >> > sarah got the blood, but miklos got her strike and sent sarah to topor >> > with the aggravated damage. Miklos then burned. >> >> Why does Sasha Miklos get burned? > > The rules state that if a strike that steals blood manages to >remove all blood counters from a vampire, that vampire is burnt. I do not >know why they did this, for as far as the root system (V.:The Masquerade) >goes, the thing that should happen would be pure & simple diablerie; if the >vampire was brought _below_ 0, the vampire delivering the blow should be >considered to having commited Diablerie upon the other, gaining all the >benefits/problems thereoff. I'd like to see that errata... I believe this is just in the Basic version of the rules. In the Basic game, Stealing more blood than the vampire has burns her, as does doing more damage than the vampire has. This is because there is no torpor in the Basic game. In the Advanced game (the one we all play), torpor is introduced, and the rules are changed. -Elfholme -- ****************************************************************************** This bit of wisdom has been brought to you by: Mark Havener Lord of elfh...@netcom.com Wood Elf King (and Jyhad player extraordinaire!) ******************************************************************************

David Pontes <l41...@alfa.ist.utl.pt> wrote: >On Sun, 4 Feb 1996, James Hamblin wrote: >> Graham H. Watt wrote: >> > We did this: >> > sarah got the blood, but miklos got her strike and sent sarah to topor >> > with the aggravated damage. Miklos then burned. >> >> Why does Sasha Miklos get burned? > The rules state that if a strike that steals blood manages to >remove all blood counters from a vampire, that vampire is burnt. I do not >know why they did this, for as far as the root system (V.:The Masquerade) >goes, the thing that should happen would be pure & simple diablerie; if the >vampire was brought _below_ 0, the vampire delivering the blow should be >considered to having commited Diablerie upon the other, gaining all the >benefits/problems thereoff. I'd like to see that errata... >> The Zip Gun does a point of damage to her >> and Sarah Peach Cobbler steals two blood, so Sasha goes to torpor. > I do not know the 'Zip Gun' card, but I imagine it is a Chimestry >card that conjures a weapon out of thin air for the current combat only. >If this is so, I'd have some doubts about allowing it to be equipped with >Dragon Breath's ... > Nevertheless, if the player used the card to make the maneuver, >the vampire *did* lose the blood needed to play the card. So, Sarah >Cobbler could not have stolen 2 blood, but only one (but this is an >irrelevant detail, since that was the maximum amount of blood she could >use anyway...) >> Sarah >> Peach Cobbler successfully steals two blood and then takes 3 damage, 2 of which >> is aggravated. > Casualty report: Sasha Miklos -> Ash Pile > Sarah Cobbler -> Torpor region, 1 blood. > But do not take this for granted :) >David Pontes > 8[ Zip gun is a Jhyad card that represents a small concealable gun.

James Puzzo <jam...@gw.digibd.com> wrote: >Question. In the case above, Sarah had 3 of 4. She steals two, then takes >three points of damage. I assume that she ends up with 1, not 2 blood, >because the steal is resolved before she can absorb damage, and she must >throw away one of the two she stole because she was full. Comments? It is errata to the rulebook that she doesn't drain away excess blood until she's burned blood as a result of taking damage. So she winds up with 2. >She could have two blood if I read your comment literally: >"She can then burn this blood to heal the damage inflicted on her, even > though she stole more blood than she could hold." Which is the correct reading :) [ quoted text not captured ]