If a Second Tradition is used to untap a Vampire does that Vampire
have to block or can the Vampire play reaction cards like Deflection
or Telepathic Counter and not block?
This one isn't a question just something I noticed. The way that
second tradition is written if it is used to block the Vampire gets a
total of +4 intercept. Card text start "+2 intercept." so the Vampire
gets the intercept then "Also usable by a tapped prince or justicar,
even if intercept is not yet needed, to untap and attempt to block
with +2 intercept" so this would add with the +2 already given. I
wouldn't try this just thought It sounded strange.
Vincent Price
Prince of Seattle
vincen...@hotmail.com (Vincent Price) wrote:
>If a Second Tradition is used to untap a Vampire does that Vampire
>have to block or can the Vampire play reaction cards like Deflection
>or Telepathic Counter and not block?
Ya gotta block.
>This one isn't a question just something I noticed. The way that
>second tradition is written if it is used to block the Vampire gets a
>total of +4 intercept. Card text start "+2 intercept." so the Vampire
>gets the intercept then "Also usable by a tapped prince or justicar,
>even if intercept is not yet needed, to untap and attempt to block
>with +2 intercept" so this would add with the +2 already given. I
>wouldn't try this just thought It sounded strange.
Not true. The period after the initial text can result in
interpreting it as a choice. Without more explicit text saying that a
card adds intercept twice, I cannot make the additive leap you did.
Its an either-or selection.
hope this helps
Regards,
R. David Zopf
guenh...@mindspring.com
Atom Weaver
[ quoted text not captured ]
Correct on both.
--
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/
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3BD69B30...@white-wolf.com...
> "R. David Zopf" wrote:
> >
> > vincen...@hotmail.com (Vincent Price) wrote:
> >
> > >If a Second Tradition is used to untap a Vampire does that Vampire
> > >have to block or can the Vampire play reaction cards like Deflection
> > >or Telepathic Counter and not block?
> >
> > Ya gotta block.
> >
> > >This one isn't a question just something I noticed. The way that
> > >second tradition is written if it is used to block the Vampire gets a
> > >total of +4 intercept. Card text start "+2 intercept." so the Vampire
> > >gets the intercept then "Also usable by a tapped prince or justicar,
> > >even if intercept is not yet needed, to untap and attempt to block
> > >with +2 intercept" so this would add with the +2 already given. I
> > >wouldn't try this just thought It sounded strange.
> >
> > Not true. The period after the initial text can result in
> > interpreting it as a choice. Without more explicit text saying that a
> > card adds intercept twice, I cannot make the additive leap you did.
> > Its an either-or selection.
>
> Correct on both.
Literally, but not really. I mean, what if they them play Elder
Impersonation. Then you are left untaped, and unable to block. Then you
can deflect or whatever.
--
Aaron
The Nosferatu Stuff
"The Nosferatu Stuff" <roans...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:_FHB7.32582$bK.3...@typhoon.mw.mediaone.net...
[ quoted text not captured ]
You are only required to attempt to block, if they generate more stealth
than you have intercept you are left untapped and can do what you like. If
you're on 1 pool and your predator attempts a Night Moves, you can play 2nd,
untap, attempt to block, fail and then deflect ( because you're still
untapped ).
"The Nosferatu Stuff" <roans...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Literally, but not really. I mean, what if they them play Elder
>Impersonation. Then you are left untaped, and unable to block. Then you
>can deflect or whatever.
Sure (you used the magic words "what if" ;-) which automatically put
you past the scope of the initial question) If an untapped minion
lacks the intercept or is otherwise denied the capability to block, it
can play other, non-blocking reaction cards, just like any other
minion. What If that minion were then somehow tapped mid-action, they
would then need another means of being able to play reaction cards as
if untapped, etc etc etc.
[ quoted text not captured ]
guenh...@mindspring.com (R. David Zopf) wrote in message news:<9r7va7$1vm$1...@slb7.atl.mindspring.net>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Why can't you play the deflection before combat starts as a result of
the successful block (which you could with, say, an obedience)? This
would have the same effect as having made the block illegal/invalid
through a Call of the Hungry Dead (because you would no longer be the
target of the D action bleed). If the answer is that 2nd trad makes
it so that (both) Meths can only play "blocking" cards, that begs the
question what the hell *is* a blocking card? Cards that would
increase (or with chi/nec, decrease) stealth or intercept seem like
the only fits. Which would mean that you couldn't, for example, play
an inferior bonding in an attempt to cycle through to a
stealth/blocking failure card. Nor could the defender play a
Telepathic Counter (which would be important if the bleeding minion
used Form of Mist at superior in combat. Is this accurate?
Shaun McIsaac wrote:
> Why can't you play the deflection before combat starts as a result of
> the successful block (which you could with, say, an obedience)? This
Because you cannot interrupt the successful block effect, except
as allowed by explicit card text (e.g, obedience).
For instance, after saying "the block is successful", the acting minion
cannot then slough another stealth card (and still go to combat).
[ quoted text not captured ]