Paul Jensen (pjensen@orion.it.luc.edu) wrote:
: LANspeed (lanspeed@coyote.rain.org) wrote:
: : In a recent game I bum rushed one of my prey's minions with a
: : brujah that had superior celerity and potence. During the strike phase I
: : played Fists of Death which gave me +2 damage but cost 1 blood from my
: : vampire and Blur which game me 2 addtitional strikes but cost 1. (I
: : thought it was pretty cool, until) I payed the blood and had put the cards
: : in my ash pile, when my opponet played Majesty or some combat ends stike.
: : Now my question is do I get either cards back or either of the
: : blood? It seems that I wouldn't have exerted myself to the point where I
: : would have to pay any blood for either of those skills if I nveer used
: : them. Maybe turning my fists into fists of death would cost me one, but
: : wouldn't that happen during combat...not as I chose my strikes. Well
: : anyway...any feedback is welcome: Well it seems to me that you did everything right except one, which ended up
: costing you some blood. For combat cards, I've always understood the rules to
: be that you pay the blood, when they are played--immediately. I think this
: is the bonus of having combat ends, cards--your opponent pays for a combat card
: and gets nothing out of it. However, Blur is *not* a strike cards, or you
: would not have been able to play it as you can only play *one* strike card
: a strike phase. Blur is an additional strike card and is played on the combat
: phase after damage resolution. In the situtation stated above, I think you
: used Blur a little to early. It should have gone like this:: 1. Manuver (no manuvers)
: 2. Strike (Fists of Death , Majesty)
: if no Majesty had been played
: 3. Resolve Damage
: 4. Additional Strikes (Blur)
: 5. Press: By playing the Blur out of turn you lost the extra blood for the Blur.
: I hope this makes sense.
: --
: /===================================================\
: | Paul Jensen |
: | pjensen@orion.it.luc.edu |
: | Chicago, IL |
: +---------------------------------------------------+
: | Good advertising space for rent |
: | (It must be pretty good YOU just read it) |
: \===================================================/
I was under the impression that strike resolution came after ALL strikes.
If you played blur, your additional strikes would all be resolved at the
same time as the first one.
1. Manuver
2. Strike
3. Additional strikes
4. Strike resolution
5. Press
This way, you can blur your flamethower and get in extra strikes. Makes
sense, no?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Mazarakos pmazarak@eecs.uic.edu
University of Illinois at Chicago
Peter Mazarakos (pmazarak@snoqualmie.eecs.uic.edu) wrote:
>I was under the impression that strike resolution came after ALL strikes.
>If you played blur, your additional strikes would all be resolved at the
>same time as the first one.>1. Manuver
>2. Strike
>3. Additional strikes
>4. Strike resolution
>5. Press>This way, you can blur your flamethower and get in extra strikes. Makes
>sense, no?
Um, no. The original and corrected rules both list additional strikes as
happening after the resolution of the initial strike, and each additional
strike also has its own distinct choose strike and resolve strike phases.
--
Eric Amick eamick@clark.net
Columbia, MD Public key available via finger
In article <37jdf7$aue@clarknet.clark.net>, eamick@clark.net (Eric Amick) writes:
>Peter Mazarakos (pmazarak@snoqualmie.eecs.uic.edu) wrote:>>I was under the impression that strike resolution came after ALL strikes.
>>If you played blur, your additional strikes would all be resolved at the
>>same time as the first one.
>>1. Manuver
>>2. Strike
>>3. Additional strikes
>>4. Strike resolution
>>5. Press
>>This way, you can blur your flamethower and get in extra strikes. Makes
>>sense, no?>Um, no. The original and corrected rules both list additional strikes as
>happening after the resolution of the initial strike, and each additional
>strike also has its own distinct choose strike and resolve strike phases.
So what's the point of having an aggravated-damage weapon that hits each
strike? The only usefulness would be if they prevented the damage or dodged
the first strike. Are you telling me that the first time they get nicked by
an aggravated strike, they fall over so you can't do it to them again?! >:-D
Granted, that IS the way it states in the rules, I guess - but how are you
supposed to burn people in combat? :-( (My favourite!)
Yours aggravatedly;
--
\/\"Well, that concludes my victory dance..." - Susano Orbatos, Orion/\/
====\/\ Winner of Ian's Competition Summer Edition 1993/4! /\/====
=====\/\ Want any manga-style art done? EMail me at... /\/=====
\/\ cjudd@lawson.its.utas.edu.au a.k.a. KURO Shiro /\/
Craig Thomas Judd <cjudd@lawson.its.utas.edu.au> wrote:
>So what's the point of having an aggravated-damage weapon that hits each
>strike?...
The usefulness is that you don't have to keep playing aggravation cards
like Wolf Claws over and over again. The other players know that if they
get into combat with that minion and can't avoid or prevent the damage,
their minion *will* be going to torpor.
>Are you telling me that the first time they get nicked by
>an aggravated strike, they fall over so you can't do it to them again?! >:-D
Not until they get back out of torpor again, no.
>Granted, that IS the way it states in the rules, I guess - but how are you
>supposed to burn people in combat? :-( (My favourite!)
Doing lots and lots of aggravated damage all at once.
Torn Signpost/Growing Fury/Wolf Claws, for example :)
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Before I could do anything to stop it, Craig Thomas Judd wrote:
> So what's the point of having an aggravated-damage weapon that hits each
> strike? The only usefulness would be if they prevented the damage or dodged
> the first strike. Are you telling me that the first time they get nicked by
> an aggravated strike, they fall over so you can't do it to them again?! >:-D
Use regular damage and presses to lower that pesky opponent to an
exceptable level, than blast 'em with the flamethrower. Just because you
*have* a flamethrower doesn't mean you have to *use* the flamethrower for
your strike. Sleeve that Sengir Dagger until you have them on the ropes.
--
There be that can pack the cards and yet cannot play | a-Henh!
well; so there are some that are good in canvasses and | Brian Wilson
factions, that are otherwise weak men. |
Francis Bacon |
I thought the rules state:
(Summarized) The first point of aggravated damage shocks the vampires system and sends him to torpor. This is not healed by spending the vampires blood. Each additional point of aggravated damage is then healed within torpor so the vampire spends blood to heal that. if the vampire has no blood to heal the excess aggravated damage it is burned and placed in the ash heap.
That's what it says, and seems reasonable to play that way.
************************************************************
* The above views are considered (ir)relevant by the *
* Cyber-Siegal /\/\ ---------------------------*
* | When the Siegal flies *
* siegal@rintintin.colorado.edu | the net, don't look up. *
************************************************************
Well, if you notice, damage from one strike is applied before either
additional strikes or presses. As a result, a single hit doing
aggravated damage ends the entire combat. So, go up against a vampire
with a flamethrower, go to torpor before he can finish you off.
Again, run the combat round sequence rules past the other players. It's
in there. If they whine about it being to hard to kill vampires then,
In article <38954u$6h9@perv.hal.com>, Tom Wylie <aahz@hal.COM> wrote:
>Craig Thomas Judd <cjudd@lawson.its.utas.edu.au> wrote:
>>>Granted, that IS the way it states in the rules, I guess - but how are you
>>supposed to burn people in combat? :-( (My favourite!)>
>Doing lots and lots of aggravated damage all at once.
>Torn Signpost/Growing Fury/Wolf Claws, for example :)
>
Or, another example:
Torn Signpost(optional), blur, strike with hand, strike with hand, strike
with aggravated damage, hand or otherwise. (This IS legal, yes?)
or, for style points, blur, strike(for more than the other vampire
hopefully), pulled fangs, taste of vitae, strike combat ends pay a blood
to untap vampire.
Or:
Strike to 0 then pulled fangs.
I also like acrobatics + pulled fangs and prevent damage + pulled
fangs for sending things into torpor.
Sang
--
Magic or Jyhad?