rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

(LSJ) M1000F (again) and conditionnal intercept

11 messages from 5 participants · 04 September 2007 – 05 September 2007
original thread on Google Groups

François

Hello, I have again some questions concerning Mask of 1000 Faces : Dimple attempts a hunt. David Morgan (+1 intercept against 2 caps and less) attempts to block. Can Arika mask the action ? My guess is "No", since David's intercept has been applied and could not have been if Arika were acting. If I am wrong and she could, could she play it at superior to gain stealth ? Dimple needs stealth but Arika wouldn't. Similarly : Normal attempts a hunt. Selma (+1 intercept against Nosferatu) attempts to block. Even before she gains intercept, Aggrippina wants to play Mask (I guess she can). Can she play it at superior to gain stealth ? Normal does not need stealth but Aggrippina would. Thank you again ! François.

LSJ

François wrote: > Hello, > > > I have again some questions concerning Mask of 1000 Faces : > > > Dimple attempts a hunt. > David Morgan (+1 intercept against 2 caps and less) attempts to block. > Can Arika mask the action ? > > My guess is "No", since David's intercept has been applied and could > not have been if Arika were acting. Correct. > If I am wrong and she could, could she play it at superior to gain > stealth ? Dimple needs stealth but Arika wouldn't. > > > Similarly : > > Normal attempts a hunt. > Selma (+1 intercept against Nosferatu) attempts to block. > Even before she gains intercept, Aggrippina wants to play Mask (I > guess she can). Yes. > Can she play it at superior to gain stealth ? Normal does not need > stealth but Aggrippina would. Yes. Parallel to the reverse case (a minion with inherent +stealth cannot mask at superior if the superior's stealth is not needed after considering the inherent stealth).

tigernat1

[ quoted text not captured ] LSJ, this contradicts your answer to my question: mask author:tigernat1

LSJ

[ quoted text not captured ] OK. Quote what you would like answered.

tigernat1

[ quoted text not captured ] Alicia Barrows attempts a bleed action against my prey. My prey attemps to block with Normal. Can Aristotle de Laurent play SUPERIOR Mask of 1000k to take over that action? The resulting bleed would then be at +2 stealth (+1 from Aristotle's cardtext and +1 from Sup. Mask). Vegas gNat

LSJ

[ quoted text not captured ] No, he cannot. He can play it at inferior, though.

tigernat1

[ quoted text not captured ] > No, he cannot. He can play it at inferior, though.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - What is the reasoning behind not being able to play the card at superior? Stealth is needed at the time the card is played. To me, not allowing play of the card at superior is like not allowing the play of Lost in Crowds at superior because only +1 stealth is needed. Vegas gNat

RocketEddy

On 4 Sep, 23:39, tigernat1 <tigern...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sep 4, 1:56 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > tigernat1 wrote: > > > Alicia Barrows attempts a bleed action against my prey. My prey > > > attemps to block with Normal. Can Aristotle > > > de Laurent play SUPERIOR Mask of 1000k to take over that action? The > > > resulting bleed would then be at +2 stealth (+1 from Aristotle's > > > cardtext and +1 from Sup. Mask). > > > No, he cannot. He can play it at inferior, though. > > What is the reasoning behind not being able to play the card at > superior? Stealth is needed at the time the card is played. To me, > not allowing play of the card at superior is like not allowing the > play of Lost in Crowds at superior because only +1 stealth is needed. Because if Aristotle is the acting minion (which he will be) the +1 stealth isn't needed.

Blooded Sand

[ quoted text not captured ] But he is not the acting minion untill after the card is played, at the time the card is played the +1 stealth is still required, so the card text of aristotle affects the play of cards in this action before he plays them?

RocketEddy

[ quoted text not captured ] That certainly seems to be the implication of the ruling. Going back to LSJ's earlier post: On 4 Sep, 18:19, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > François wrote: > > Normal attempts a hunt. > > Selma (+1 intercept against Nosferatu) attempts to block. > > Even before she gains intercept, Aggrippina wants to play Mask (I > > guess she can). > > Yes. > > > Can she play it at superior to gain stealth ? Normal does not need > > stealth but Aggrippina would. > > Yes. > Parallel to the reverse case (a minion with inherent +stealth cannot mask at > superior if the superior's stealth is not needed after considering the inherent > stealth). So you could clarify this with the statement along the lines of: "Mask's superior effect can (only) be played if the masking minion would require stealth at this point in the action and irrespective of whether or not the original minion would require stealth to continue unblocked." Which covers both of LSJ's above examples. Sorry if this posts twice, I'm having trouble with the google interface.

tigernat1

[ quoted text not captured ] Key here is he *will* be, but at the time Mask of 1000k is played he is NOT. Therefore playing the card at superior should be legal. I see no reason to complicate matters with some wierd ruling. And LSJ still has not given justification for his ruling. Aristotle's stealth does not come into play until the Mask of 1000k resolves. At the time of play, the stealth is needed. After Mask of 1000k resolves and Aristotle has taken over the action, he is now the acting minion and you apply his stealth. Vegas gNat