(LSJ) Epikasta Rigatos' action card

Hi, [the action cards in the examples would go to the ash heap after resolution. Common example: Govern the Unaligned] a - My Epikasta Rigatos' action card is cancelled with Direct Intervention . May I move the action card in the library ? b - Epikasta's action is blocked, and she plays Change of Target. Can the action card be moved back to the library ? c - Epikasta's action is blocked, and the blocking vampire plays Obedience. Can the action card be moved back to the library ? d - Epikasta plays an action card. Someone plays Mask of a Thousand Faces during the action. Can the action card be moved back to the library ? Thanks ~ ~ Epikasta Rigatos Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Toreador Group: 4 Capacity: 8 Discipline: cel AUS DOM PRE Camarilla Prince of New York: You may move an action card Epikasta plays from your ash heap to your library at the end of the action (shuffle afterward). Direct Intervention Cardtype: Master Cost: 1 pool Master: out-of-turn. Cancel a minion card as it is played. No cost is paid. (If it was an action card, the acting minion doesn't tap. If it was a strike card, the minion chooses another strike.) Change of Target Cardtype: Action Modifier Only usable when this acting minion is blocked (play before combat, if any). Untap the acting minion, do not tap the blocking minion, and end the current action (it is not successful). This minion cannot perform the same action again this turn. Obedience Cardtype: Reaction Discipline: Dominate Only usable when this reacting vampire is about to enter combat with an acting younger vampire. [dom] Untap the acting vampire, do not tap this reacting vampire, and end the current action (and combat). The acting vampire cannot attempt the same action this turn. [DOM] As above, but do not untap the acting vampire. Mask of a Thousand Faces Cardtype: Action Modifier Discipline: Obfuscate [obf] Only usable by a ready, untapped vampire other than the acting minion who is capable of performing the action. Not usable if any action modifiers or other effects have been used that could not have been used if this vampire were the acting vampire. Untap the acting minion and tap this vampire instead. The action continues with this vampire as the acting minion. [OBF] As above, with +1 stealth.

On Apr 30, 7:37 am, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > [the action cards in the examples would go to the ash heap after > resolution. Common example: Govern the Unaligned] > > a - My Epikasta Rigatos' action card is cancelled with Direct > Intervention . May I move the action card in the library ? Yes. The card has still been played, and the action has ended (albeit by having the action effectively cancelled.) > b - Epikasta's action is blocked, and she plays Change of Target. Can > the action card be moved back to the library ? Yes. Change of target explicitly ends the action, which is what Epikasta is triggering on. (Not even sure why this one is a question.) > c - Epikasta's action is blocked, and the blocking vampire plays > Obedience. Can the action card be moved back to the library ? Again, why is this unclear? Obedience explicitly ends the action, so after that the card can be moved. > d - Epikasta plays an action card. Someone plays Mask of a Thousand > Faces during the action. Can the action card be moved back to the > library ? I'd say no - by taking over the role of the acting minion, the Mask- using vamp is treated as if they were the one that played the card as well - they have to pay the cost for it when the action resolves, etc. So if Epikasta no longer counts as playing it, no. -John Flournoy

[ quoted text not captured ] I'd say the confusion, in regards to Change of Target and Obedience, is due to rulings where you're not able to play a freak drive or any other action modifier after someone plays Obedience. This could lead someone to think that since the acting methuselah can't play action modifiers after these cards that they couldn't also play special abilities, etc. Also, rather than being a tad condescending in your analysis of these questions, you could try explaining why a methuselah can activate special abilities that trigger after an action has ended but cannot play action modifiers. Jeff Poole

On Apr 30, 11:26 am, John Flournoy <carne...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 30, 7:37 am, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > [the action cards in the examples would go to the ash heap after > > resolution. Common example: Govern the Unaligned] > > > a - My Epikasta Rigatos' action card is cancelled with Direct > > Intervention . May I move the action card in the library ? > > Yes. The card has still been played, and the action has ended (albeit > by having the action effectively cancelled.) No. There is no action, so there is no end of the action. > > b - Epikasta's action is blocked, and she plays Change of Target. Can > > the action card be moved back to the library ? > > Yes. Change of target explicitly ends the action, which is what > Epikasta is triggering on. (Not even sure why this one is a question.) Correct. > > c - Epikasta's action is blocked, and the blocking vampire plays > > Obedience. Can the action card be moved back to the library ? > > Again, why is this unclear? Obedience explicitly ends the action, so > after that the card can be moved. Correct. > > d - Epikasta plays an action card. Someone plays Mask of a Thousand > > Faces during the action. Can the action card be moved back to the > > library ? > > I'd say no - by taking over the role of the acting minion, the Mask- > using vamp is treated as if they were the one that played the card as > well - they have to pay the cost for it when the action resolves, etc. > So if Epikasta no longer counts as playing it, no. He can. He played the action card. The masker has to pay (assuming the action is successful), but that's not at issue to Epikasta's text .

On Apr 30, 12:47 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > He can. He played the action card. The masker has to pay (assuming the > action is successful), but that's not at issue to Epikasta's text . Slightly off-topic followup, then, to make sure I'm right... Frederick the Weak, equipped with Textbook Damnation, plays a Concordance. Am I correct in thinking that Cybele could not Mask of 1000 Faces that action, because FTW had to announce all the details of the action, including the cost and that the Textbook was reducing it to zero, which is an effect that Cybele can't produce? And thus this would also apply to (for instance) any action whose cost is reduced by a Path being Masked by a vampire of a different, non- Path clan? -John Flournoy

[ quoted text not captured ] If those cards were already played & paid (e.g. Path of Night used to cheapen an [obt] stealth card), then yes. If it's the action card... I'd have said no... cost is paid at the end not at the point of declaration.

LSJ wrote: > On Apr 30, 11:26 am, John Flournoy <carne...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Apr 30, 7:37 am, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> [the action cards in the examples would go to the ash heap after >>> resolution. Common example: Govern the Unaligned] >> >>> a - My Epikasta Rigatos' action card is cancelled with Direct >>> Intervention . May I move the action card in the library ? >> >> Yes. The card has still been played, and the action has ended (albeit >> by having the action effectively cancelled.) > > No. There is no action, so there is no end of the action. So, then getting an "Only one X can be played in a game" card D.I.ed allows you to fetch it from the ash heap and play it again, since it hadn't been "played" ? Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/ Please bid on my auctions! http://shop.ebay.com/kjmergen/m.html

Kevin M. <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote: >LSJ wrote: >> On Apr 30, 11:26 am, John Flournoy <carne...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Apr 30, 7:37 am, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> [the action cards in the examples would go to the ash heap after >>>> resolution. Common example: Govern the Unaligned] >>> >>>> a - My Epikasta Rigatos' action card is cancelled with Direct >>>> Intervention . May I move the action card in the library ? >>> >>> Yes. The card has still been played, and the action has ended (albeit >>> by having the action effectively cancelled.) >> >> No. There is no action, so there is no end of the action. > >So, then getting an "Only one X can be played in a game" card >D.I.ed allows you to fetch it from the ash heap and play it again, >since it hadn't been "played" ? No, the general ruling is that the card has been played but - in the case of an action - the cancellation meant that the action itself didn't start. Similarly, cancelling a strike means that you haven't chosen the strike - so a strike that could only be played once per combat wouldn't be usable again, but you would have to choose another strike. There is a potential nit here - how does Denial of Aphrodite's Favor - "Cancel an action card... as it is played" - get played to cancel an action card, when there is no action until after this timing window? (The usual answer to this would be that the card's explicit timing requirement, stated on the card, means it can be played here, since it contradicts the normal rules.) -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

[ quoted text not captured ] Regardless of when the cost is paid, the cost has to be _announced_ at the same time as the action; if I say "Janey Pickman will play this Dual Form, and it will cost only one because of the Path", I'm thinking that prevents Pariah from Masking the action, since Pariah cannot take that action for the stated cost of one blood (and you can't retroactively change the cost of the action without an explicit effect, which Mask isn't.) I think the key is that the Path changes the cost itself, not the amount paid for the cost. But, hopefully LSJ can verify. -John Flournoy

On May 1, 11:37 am, John Flournoy <carne...@gmail.com> wrote: > On May 1, 3:01 am, Juggernaut1981 <brasscompo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 1, 6:58 am, John Flournoy <carne...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 30, 12:47 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > > > He can. He played the action card. The masker has to pay (assuming the > > > > action is successful), but that's not at issue to Epikasta's text . > > > > Slightly off-topic followup, then, to make sure I'm right... > > > > Frederick the Weak, equipped with Textbook Damnation, plays a > > > Concordance. > > > > Am I correct in thinking that Cybele could not Mask of 1000 Faces that > > > action, because FTW had to announce all the details of the action, > > > including the cost and that the Textbook was reducing it to zero, > > > which is an effect that Cybele can't produce? > > > > And thus this would also apply to (for instance) any action whose cost > > > is reduced by a Path being Masked by a vampire of a different, non- > > > Path clan? > > > > -John Flournoy > > > If those cards were already played & paid (e.g. Path of Night used to > > cheapen an [obt] stealth card), then yes. If it's the action card... > > I'd have said no... cost is paid at the end not at the point of > > declaration. > > Regardless of when the cost is paid, the cost has to be _announced_ at > the same time as the action True. Much like the value of a bleed must be announced as the action is declared (I bleed for 3 with Govern the Unaligned) That does not preclude an increase or decrease in the value of that bleed through the play of other cards. I would consider the cost reduction / increase to be applied in the same way - it only really matters when you hit success and resolution.

> I would consider the cost reduction / increase to be applied in the > same way - it only really matters when you hit success and resolution. Here's the counter example: Frederick declares that he is rescuing Karsh from torpor, and that they'll each be paying 1 blood. If Pariah masks the action, the player does not get to go back and say "oh, now I decided that Karsh is paying both blood now that it's Pariah." (as far as I know.) -John Flournoy

[ quoted text not captured ] Hrm. You're talking about something different than increases/ decreases in cost, but I can see the point you're trying to make. I don't agree with it, since I consider your example more akin "I bleed......now I Mask, but make it a Govern because I can change the very nature of the action when I Mask!" But I can see the logic in your example. Certainly, I think we both agree that I could bleed for 1 with Vampire A, then Mask to Vampire B who has +1 bleed (creating a bleed which will resolve for 2) - even though the original vampire couldn't bleed for 2 without an action card. After all, there was an entire deck archtype that used Memories of Mortality on its prey's vampires, started an ally-based bleed (often for 0 with Jake Washington - so that the deck never had to take undirected actions), then Masked to a vampire and modified the bleed after blocks were (had to be) passed. The biggest fear I have in this whole discussion is that the ruling above (of a pre-Mask vampire also having counted as playing the card) is that it opens a whole new set of rules questions even beyond this. My 11 cap calls Banishment. He PLAYED the card. Some 2 cap chump Masks. He also played the card. We hit a referendum. Since my 11 cap (also) played the card, can I choose a 10 vampire to Banish? Why not? The Banishment card says "Choose a ready younger vampire" - which should be interpreted as "a vampire younger than the one the played this card" - which is either my 11 cap or my 2 cap. I'm sure that there are many (more abusable) twists that can come from this general ruling of "every vampire in the Mask chain played the card"

[ quoted text not captured ] My guess is that any reference regarding the capacity of the acting minion refers to the acting minion, and not the minion who declared the action. In your example of Banishment, Masking the action with a 2-cap wouldn't change a thing until resolution of the action, at which point a target (younger [that this acting vampire]) must be chosen. If there's no such target, then the 2-cap couldn't have played the action card, and therefore, couldn't have masked the action. Regarding the change of cost, I think there's a ruling somewhere that says that cost of the action can change during that action. Anyway, in the case of a !Gangrel playing Mantle of Bestial Majesty while the Path of Feral Heart is in play (reducing the cost by 1), I think a non-!Gangrel can mask the action (provided he has the adequate level of pro). The effect of the Path will be applied at resolution, when cost has to be paid. I couldn't find a card that would check for cost of the card before resolution (with the exception of some obscure rulings checking blood cost vs amount of blood on vampire), which means to me that the cost is not relevant until resolution. And, for that reason, Mask shouldn't take it into consideration

James Coupe wrote: > Kevin M. <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote: >> LSJ wrote: >>> On Apr 30, 11:26 am, John Flournoy <carne...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Apr 30, 7:37 am, floppyzedolfin <floppyzedol...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> [the action cards in the examples would go to the ash heap after >>>>> resolution. Common example: Govern the Unaligned] >>>> >>>>> a - My Epikasta Rigatos' action card is cancelled with Direct >>>>> Intervention . May I move the action card in the library ? >>>> >>>> Yes. The card has still been played, and the action has ended >>>> (albeit by having the action effectively cancelled.) >>> >>> No. There is no action, so there is no end of the action. >> >> So, then getting an "Only one X can be played in a game" card >> D.I.ed allows you to fetch it from the ash heap and play it again, >> since it hadn't been "played" ? > > No, the general ruling is that the card has been played but - in the > case of an action - the cancellation meant that the action itself > didn't start. > > Similarly, cancelling a strike means that you haven't chosen the > strike - so a strike that could only be played once per combat > wouldn't be usable again, but you would have to choose another strike. Ah, I was seeing LSJ saying that the card hadn't been PLAYED, which of course he wasn't saying, he was only saying that there was no end of action because tehre was no action. Ok. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] I'm pretty sure this is the right interpretation, and I have no idea where people are getting this idea that the announcement of an action is set in stone. if that were true, you could never play Action Modifiers! Mask doesn't care about the announcement, nor about blood already spent, all it cares about is that the new acting minion can legally play all those cards at the same discipline level, and meet requirements of triggered effects. Like using Labyrinth on a Nosferatu, you can't switch to a Malkavian after that. and I don't think a Path discount is one of those types of effects. I would compare it to a Palla Grande in play, which is not an effect applied during a Toreador-Anti's bleed action; it's already been there all this time, as if such vampires had +1 bleed written in their ability box. Ozmo having +1 bleed does not prevent Gilbert Duane from using Mask to take over his bleed. but if Julia Prima used her ability to burn one blood to get +1 bleed, now that's an effect you chose when and where to activate, so Gilbert can't Mask her action.

WARNING. WALL OF TEXT AND PONTIFICATION FOLLOW. Yes, in retrospect, it's quite likely that the acting minion is the only one that matters at resolution - just like masking from a +1 bleed minion to a minion without +1 bleed - the resulting base bleed is 1, not 2, as the +1 doesn't "hang around" - so capacity is unlikely to be persistent as well. Much of the confusing results from rulings around Mask itself interacting with vampire text, and or equipment. Or maybe I have an incomplete understanding of the current Mask rulings. You can Mask to/from a vampire with a Laptop to any other minion, because the bleed component is not relevant until resolution. Likewise, who can Mask to/from minions with innate +1/+2/+3 bleed for the same reason - it only matters when the action resolves. You can Mask to a vampire with Enchanted Marionette, resulting in additional bleed and stealth. But you cannot Mask from a vampire with the Marionette to one without it - even if there were no eligible blockers and/or no block attempts which were referenced against the +1 stealth granted by the Marionette - simply because the effect was there. Huh? From what I understand (and this may be wrong), you can't even Mask to/ from a minion with Enchanted Marionette to/from Aristotle de Laurent, because it's not the SAME +1 stealth effect, even though the entry stealth values (pre-Mask) are identical. Huh again? Similarly, you can't Mask from a minion firing a previously applied [OBF] Marked Path to Aristotle with the Marionette, because the effect sources are different and Aristotle could not have used the Marked Path on the other minion - because it was not on him to begin with. I guess you could Mask between 2 minions both having Blithe Acceptance, since the sources match. And from what I understand, you cannot Mask away from a vampire with Sacre Cour Cathedral, France to another minion, because the "allies cannot block" effect cannot be replicated on the next action minion. Even if there were no allies in play. Even if you were Masking to Lord Fianna (because the effect source is dissimilar). Perhaps I'm wrong about those situations and would love a correction if I am - but all this leads to an unnecessarily complicated set of rulings. Bleed value isn't referenced by Mask until it is used, innate stealth should not be referenced UNLESS USED either. For that matter, no card text should be references unless used (see Lord Fianna). In other words, if the target(s) of Aristotle's bleed had no minions available to block - or never attempted to block - I never needed (used) the +1 stealth on his card text and I should be able to freely Mask away from him. If there were ANY block attempt, sure, then the stealth was referenced and I should not be able to Mask away, except to a minion with AT LEAST the same resultant stealth value as Aristotle could take over. That could be generated in any way - including Enhanted Marionette, Blithe Acceptance. All that my prey would need to do would be attempt to block and fail, were no intercept generated) with any minion to limit my Masking. Without that effort, I should be able to Mask at will, to any minion with [obf], regardless of ancillary card text on the vampires. Example: Aristotle bleeds at +1 stealth. An Embrace attempts to block and fails. I cannot [obf] Mask to a +bleed minion without +stealth from an effect in-play because I was forced to reference Aristotle's +1 stealth text. I cannot [OBF] Mask to that other minion either, because (by rule) I am prohibited from generating stealth by cardplay without requiring that additional stealth to pass a block - which I am not (I would be playing to try to match stealth already exceeding the available intercept of blockers). If the Embrace generated +1 intercept, I could [OBF] Mask to another minion (I need the stealth now), and either further increase stealth to fight with the 2nd minion. In this way, [OBF] Masking is worse than if I had started out with a 0-stealth minion - I'm not really getting any additional stealth from its play. Case closed. Easier to understand, I think. I get that the rules team didn't want some +4 stealth minion (Aristole with Enchanted Marionette and Blithe Acceptance) initiating bleeds, passing the block phase and having the action Masked to 0-stealth minions - rinsing and repeating. But were there ANY block attempt, all 4 stealth would register and only a minion generating at least matching stealth when the Mask were played would be able to take over the action - even less favorable for the acting player than a case where the acting minion had only +1 stealth. On another note, you could (at one time) play Memories of Mortality, initiate bleeds with an ally, then Mask to a vampire and increase the bleed - because the no-block effect was tied to the potential blockers, not the acting/masking minions. I suppose you could still do this with Blind Spot, Blood Bond and Incriminating Videotapes (though you would still have to get the Videotapes and Blood Bonds on). I don't think that's a viable deck, but it does highlight a clear difference between "I can't Mask because my minions current requirements don't match in some way (stealth, title, capacity, whatever)" and "I can Mask because it's your minions that are hosed in some fashion - and we're not referencing ANYTHING on mine." I think that's OK, especially in the current environment where most of the large-scale no-block stuff is action-based or one-off, not Master- based and widely scaleable. Card references: Laptop Computer Type: Equipment Cost: 1 pool Electronic equipment. The minion with this equipment gets +1 bleed. A minion may have only 1 Laptop Computer. Enchanted Marionette Type: Equipment Requires: Malkavian antitribu Cost: 3 pool Unique equipment. The Malkavian antitribu with this equipment gets +1 bleed and +1 stealth when bleeding. Aristotle de Laurent Clan: Malkavian antitribu (group 3) Capacity: 9 Disciplines: AUS DEM OBF PRE pot Sabbat: While Aristotle is ready, every Methuselah has +1 hand size. +1 stealth. Marked Path Type: Action Modifier Requires: Obfuscate Only usable after a successful (D) action. [obf] Put this card on the acting vampire. During a (D) action against the same Methuselah (or same set of Methuselahs), this vampire may burn this card to get +1 stealth. [OBF] As above, but for +2 stealth. Sacre Cour Cathedral, France Type: Equipment Cost: 2 blood This equipment card represents a unique location and does not count as equipment while in play. Allies cannot block the vampire with this location. Lord Fianna Clan: Malkavian (group 5) Capacity: 8 Disciplines: AUS DEM OBF cel pro Camarilla. Red List: Allies cannot block Lord Fianna. +1 stealth. Memories of Mortality Type: Master Cost: 1 pool Master. Put this card on a vampire; this vampire cannot attempt to block allies. Any damage this vampire inflicts on allies is reduced to 0. This vampire may burn 1 blood during his or her controller's influence phase to burn this card; he or she then goes into torpor. Added to the V:EKN banned list in 2008. Blind Spot Type: Master Master. Choose a vampire you control and an ally or younger vampire controlled by your prey. While the first chosen vampire is acting this turn, the other chosen minion cannot block or play reaction cards. Blood Bond Type: Action Cost: 2 blood +1 stealth action. (D) Put this card on any vampire. The vampire with this card cannot block this acting vampire. Incriminating Videotape Type: Equipment Cost: 1 pool Equipment. Choose a minion your prey controls. The chosen minion cannot block the minion with this equipment. Blithe Acceptance Type: Action Requires: Obfuscate Cost: 1 blood [obf] Put this card on the acting vampire. This vampire gets +1 stealth. Burn this card if this vampire enters combat. A vampire may have only 1 Blithe Acceptance. [OBF] As above, but this vampire can burn 1 blood when he enters combat instead of burning this card.

On May 1, 6:26 am, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > No, the general ruling is that the card has been played but - in the > case of an action - the cancellation meant that the action itself didn't > start. Correct. > Similarly, cancelling a strike means that you haven't chosen the strike > - so a strike that could only be played once per combat wouldn't be > usable again, but you would have to choose another strike. Correct. > There is a potential nit here - how does Denial of Aphrodite's Favor - > "Cancel an action card... as it is played" - get played to cancel an > action card, when there is no action until after this timing window? > (The usual answer to this would be that the card's explicit timing > requirement, stated on the card, means it can be played here, since it > contradicts the normal rules.) Correct.