Direction Intervention Question

Hey, I goggled the group and couldn't find the answer, but my reading comp skills are low. The question is, if someone DIs my first action, does the next action count as my second action (and therefore Channel 10 is can be used to intercept it) or was the first action treated like it didn't happen and therefore, the next action becomes the new first action?

[ quoted text not captured ] To cite LSJ from a different thread: >>If I DI a [political action card played by a vampire to call a referendum], >>the acting vampire which played the [PA card], cannot [attempt another >>political action] again the same turn? Right? >No, he can. >The DI cancels the card play. The action never occurs. >The restriction against taking another political action doesn't begin until >the first political action reaches resolution. "never occurs"-no action ocurred yet, so the "next" action is gonna be a "first" On the same note i'd say Loner and Gharston are both not frazzled by a DI, right (or did the attempt occur, but not the action)?

> To cite LSJ from a different thread: > > >>If I DI a [political action card played by a vampire to call a > referendum], > >>the acting vampire which played the [PA card], cannot [attempt > another > >>political action] again the same turn? Right? > > >No, he can. > >The DI cancels the card play. The action never occurs. > >The restriction against taking another political action doesn't begin > until >the first political action reaches resolution. > > "never occurs"-no action ocurred yet, so the "next" action is gonna be > a "first" Which is all fine, but I fail to see the logic behind this, since you *cannot* play the same reaction of action modifier again if i't's being DI'd. Is this just arbitrary ruling, or is there actually some rule involved I miss?

On Fri, 6 May 2005 16:51:06 +0200, "Izaak" <i.hav...@SPAMklg.nl> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Maybe this: There's nothing preventing you from playing the same action card again with the same minion - the NRA rule (now incorporated in the rulebook) prevents you from *taking* the same action provided by the same card. Since the first action card - say, a Govern at superior - was played but the action was not taken, there's this ruling above. The minion can play other Govern he has in hand. best, Fabio "Sooner" Macedo V:TES National Coordinator for Brazil Giovanni Newsletter Editor ----------------------------------------------------- V for Vendetta on the big screen! http://vforvendetta.warnerbros.com/

That's spilling some semantic differences pretty finely.

On 6 May 2005 12:34:55 -0700, "Preston" <preston...@hotmail.com> wrote: >That's spilling some semantic differences pretty finely. Semantics are quite important in this game, you know. ;-) I can say that, as English is not my first language. Sometimes it's hard to grasp the sutleties. [ quoted text not captured ]

Fabio "Sooner" Macedo wrote: > There's nothing preventing you from playing the same action card again > with the same minion - the NRA rule (now incorporated in the rulebook) > prevents you from *taking* the same action provided by the same card. > > Since the first action card - say, a Govern at superior - was played > but the action was not taken, there's this ruling above. The minion > can play other Govern he has in hand. Correct. -- LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply) Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

On Fri, 06 May 2005 17:28:35 -0300, "Fabio \"Sooner\" Macedo" <fabio_...@NOSPAMyahoo.com.br> scrawled: >On 6 May 2005 12:34:55 -0700, "Preston" <preston...@hotmail.com> >wrote: > >>That's spilling some semantic differences pretty finely. > >Semantics are quite important in this game, you know. ;-) > >I can say that, as English is not my first language. Sometimes it's >hard to grasp the sutleties. > the NRA has to work on actions performed, not action cards played, because there are quite a few actions that don't actually require you to play a card to take them. salem http://www.users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/VtES/index.htm (replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)

On Sat, 07 May 2005 20:29:32 +1000, salem <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote: >On Fri, 06 May 2005 17:28:35 -0300, "Fabio \"Sooner\" Macedo" ><fabio_...@NOSPAMyahoo.com.br> scrawled: > >>On 6 May 2005 12:34:55 -0700, "Preston" <preston...@hotmail.com> >>wrote: >> >>>That's spilling some semantic differences pretty finely. >> >>Semantics are quite important in this game, you know. ;-) >> >>I can say that, as English is not my first language. Sometimes it's >>hard to grasp the sutleties. >> > >the NRA has to work on actions performed, not action cards played, >because there are quite a few actions that don't actually require you >to play a card to take them. Good point. [ quoted text not captured ]