rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Bleed action clarification needed re: bleed modifiers

4 messages from 2 participants · 09 November 2001 – 12 November 2001
original thread on Google Groups

Patrick Harris

I guess I've never been 100% clear about this, but we were discussing it last night and we couldn't find a definitive answer. --- Methuselah (A) attempts to bleed Meth (B). Now (B) only has one untapped minion and no untaps, while (A) has two minions to bleed with. (B) suspects that (A) might have a bleed modifier to play, so he doesn't want to block the first minion unless that modifier shows. --- Meth (B) refuses to block (for now, hoping to fish out the modifier). --- (A) plays a bleed modifier. Can (B) block now, in reaction to the bleed modifier, or has he lost the opportunity to do so by refusing to block, and is now only able to play reaction cards (deflects, etc.)? I've always played that if a modifier was played after a refusal to block, that then gives the target Meth the opportunity to block again. Different situation: Say (A) does not play a bleed modifier. Can (B) then block knowing that a modifier isn't coming? Similar to: (A): I attempt to bleed for 1. (B): I'll take it. (A): No mods. It's 1. (B): Okay then I block. Does it depend on how the two players word their questions/answers? For example: (A): "Any other attempts to block this action?" (B): "I choose not to block at this time." (A): "No modifiers, it's for 1." (B): "I choose to block now." Is there a point at which the acting minion's Meth can no longer be blocked (Anneke, Eagle's Sight aside) even if he/she adds modifiers to the bleed? I've always thought it was played like this: (A) bleeds: "Any (other) attempts to block?" (B) refuses to block. Regardless of how the answer refusal was worded, he/she can no longer block unless the bleed is modified. If the bleed action is modified, then (B) has the opportunity to block again (well, unless something like Spying Mission - but you know what I mean). I hope the questions make sense. They did last night. Thanks, p.

LSJ

Patrick Harris wrote: > > I guess I've never been 100% clear about this, but we were discussing > it last night and we couldn't find a definitive answer. > > --- Methuselah (A) attempts to bleed Meth (B). > > Now (B) only has one untapped minion and no untaps, while (A) has two > minions to bleed with. (B) suspects that (A) might have a bleed > modifier to play, so he doesn't want to block the first minion unless > that modifier shows. > > --- Meth (B) refuses to block (for now, hoping to fish out the > modifier). > --- (A) plays a bleed modifier. > > Can (B) block now, in reaction to the bleed modifier, or has he lost > the opportunity to do so by refusing to block, and is now only able to > play reaction cards (deflects, etc.)? > > I've always played that if a modifier was played after a refusal to > block, that then gives the target Meth the opportunity to block again. No. The decision not to block is final. This is stated in 6.2.2.1. B cannot block after declining, but is free to play reaction cards. > Different situation: Say (A) does not play a bleed modifier. Can (B) > then block knowing that a modifier isn't coming? Similar to: > (A): I attempt to bleed for 1. > (B): I'll take it. > (A): No mods. It's 1. > (B): Okay then I block. No. The decision not to block is final (unless the target of the bleed is changed). > Does it depend on how the two players word their questions/answers? > For example: > (A): "Any other attempts to block this action?" > (B): "I choose not to block at this time." > (A): "No modifiers, it's for 1." > (B): "I choose to block now." > > Is there a point at which the acting minion's Meth can no longer be > blocked (Anneke, Eagle's Sight aside) even if he/she adds modifiers to > the bleed? Yes, right after the target of the bleed declines to block (and all other Methuselahs decline to use Anneke/Eagle's Sight) to block. > I've always thought it was played like this: > (A) bleeds: "Any (other) attempts to block?" > (B) refuses to block. Regardless of how the answer refusal was > worded, he/she can no longer block unless the bleed is modified. If > the bleed action is modified, then (B) has the opportunity to block > again (well, unless something like Spying Mission - but you know what > I mean). Modifying it won't change the "I don't block" status achieved before the modification. -- 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/

Patrick Harris

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3BEC53C8...@white-wolf.com>... > Patrick Harris wrote: > > > > I guess I've never been 100% clear about this, but we were discussing > > it last night and we couldn't find a definitive answer. > > > > --- Methuselah (A) attempts to bleed Meth (B). > > > > Now (B) only has one untapped minion and no untaps, while (A) has two > > minions to bleed with. (B) suspects that (A) might have a bleed > > modifier to play, so he doesn't want to block the first minion unless > > that modifier shows. > > > > --- Meth (B) refuses to block (for now, hoping to fish out the > > modifier). > > --- (A) plays a bleed modifier. > > > > Can (B) block now, in reaction to the bleed modifier, or has he lost > > the opportunity to do so by refusing to block, and is now only able to > > play reaction cards (deflects, etc.)? > > > > I've always played that if a modifier was played after a refusal to > > block, that then gives the target Meth the opportunity to block again. > > No. The decision not to block is final. This is stated in 6.2.2.1. > B cannot block after declining, but is free to play reaction cards. > > Is there a point at which the acting minion's Meth can no longer be > > blocked (Anneke, Eagle's Sight aside) even if he/she adds modifiers to > > the bleed? > > Yes, right after the target of the bleed declines to block (and all > other Methuselahs decline to use Anneke/Eagle's Sight) to block. > > I've always thought it was played like this: > > (A) bleeds: "Any (other) attempts to block?" > > (B) refuses to block. Regardless of how the answer refusal was > > worded, he/she can no longer block unless the bleed is modified. If > > the bleed action is modified, then (B) has the opportunity to block > > again (well, unless something like Spying Mission - but you know what > > I mean). > > Modifying it won't change the "I don't block" status achieved before > the modification. Follow-up question(s): The reacting Methuselah attempts to block with one of his minions (when the action is initially declared). Assuming the acting minion can then add a bleed modifier (to cycle the card, or whatever), can the reacting Methuselah *then* decide *not* to block? (Maybe he's able to see that the acting Meth just cycled in a card that will burn the blocker) p.

LSJ

Patrick Harris wrote: [ 46 lines of unused quotes snipped - please quote responsibly ] > Follow-up question(s): > The reacting Methuselah attempts to block with one of his minions > (when the action is initially declared). Assuming the acting minion > can then add a bleed modifier (to cycle the card, or whatever), can > the reacting Methuselah *then* decide *not* to block? (Maybe he's > able to see that the acting Meth just cycled in a card that will burn > the blocker) Not unless the modifier provided an "out" (making the acting minion's stealth exceed the blocker's intercept, for instance). See also superior Dawn Operation. [ quoted text not captured ]