rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

rotsch

1 message from 1 participant · 18 August 1998
original thread on Google Groups

LSJ

On VTES-L, "....salem christ...." <k940...@BOHM.ANU.EDU.AU> wrote: > >sh...@leme.anu.edu.au wrote: > >> Can Rotschreck be played on an aggravated hand strike which is dealing > >> 0 damage be of erosion, disease, song of serenity, disarm or whatever? > > > >No, since attempting to use zero aggravated damage doesn't count > >as attempting to use aggravated damage (just as successfully > >bleeding for zero doesn't count as successfully bleeding). > > but bleeding for zero DOES count as a successful action (unless blocked) > and costs have to be paid for said bleed action (if any). Right. Unblocked action = successful action. Unblocked bleed for 0 or less = unsuccessful bleed. > [not that we should really be comparing strikes with actions (even though > that's the analogy we came up with last night when discussing this.)] > it just seems to me that attempting to strike: hands when hands are > aggravated should count as "attempts to inflict aggrovated damage, whether > successfully or not". Sorry. It requires "one or more". Just as the bit about bleeding requires "one or more". >i mean, rotschrek doesn't care if you have a skin of > night (which, when it gets to strike res phase, counts the agg as normal). > so why would it care if your damage was 0 or less, when the fact that it Because you're not "attempt[ing] to use aggravated damage against a vampire" (card text on Rotschreck). You're attempting to use zero (or less) aggravated damage, which is different. > wouldn't hurt the opposing minion doesn't become apparent until strike res > (not that rotshrek has previously cared whether the strike's going to work > during strike res or not) Because it is already declared not to be doing any damage (zero or less). > also, if minion A strikes for 0 hand damage, and minion B strikes for -1 > hand damage, does A count as having done more damage than B (for pulled > fangs purposes, etc.) or do they both count as having done the same damage > (ie: 0). When resolved (inflicted), damage of less than zero is treated as zero, just like bleeds of less than zero are treated as zero when resolved. (So no Pulled Fangs, etc.) -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Searchable database of official card text, errata, and rulings: http://deckserver.net/cgi-deckserver/rulemonger.cgi/powersearch