(LSJ) Eagle's sight and others

Troublesome situation: Meth B has 2 pool Meth A bleeds Meth B for one. Meth B doesn't block. Meth A asks Meth C will he play ES or other card allowing him to block. Is the answer from Meth C mandatory at this point? If Meth C says he will not block can he block after B boosts his bleed? Thanks, B.

Boogie <po...@wp.pl> wrote: > Troublesome situation: > Meth B has 2 pool > Meth A bleeds Meth B for one. > Meth B doesn't block. > Meth A asks Meth C will he play ES or other card allowing him to > block. > Is the answer from Meth C mandatory at this point? Yes. "Declining to block" is an Effect.

On Jul 26, 8:04 am, Boogie <p...@wp.pl> wrote: > Troublesome situation: > Meth B has 2 pool > Meth A bleeds Meth B for one. > Meth B doesn't block. > Meth A asks Meth C will he play ES or other card allowing him to > block. > > Is the answer from Meth C mandatory at this point? Yes. > If Meth C says he will not block can he block after B boosts his > bleed? No. The decision not to block is final (unless the target of the action is changed).

[ quoted text not captured ] http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/browse_thread/thread/c930a68e797adea6/2af38a848e20fe78?q=eagle%27s+sight+modifier+author:lsj&pli=1 According to this, all players need to eventually declare no blocks, after which you can play action modifiers. If a player has declared no blocks Eagle's Sight can't override that decision.

"Boogie" <po...@wp.pl> schreef in bericht news:ca4887cb-cd32-4666...@r27g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... > Troublesome situation: > Meth B has 2 pool > Meth A bleeds Meth B for one. > Meth B doesn't block. > Meth A asks Meth C will he play ES or other card allowing him to > block. > > Is the answer from Meth C mandatory at this point? Unfortunately, yes.

[ quoted text not captured ] Just to clarify: So, the upshot is A was smart to ask if C would block? If A boosted the bleed without asking after receiving 'No Block' from B, could C block? Should fictional A always ask C, D, E in case one of them plays Eagle's Sight?

On Jul 26, 4:04 pm, Shockwave <d_knowles...@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 26, 2:00 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 26, 8:04 am, Boogie <p...@wp.pl> wrote: > > > > Troublesome situation: > > > Meth B has 2 pool > > > Meth A bleeds Meth B for one. > > > Meth B doesn't block. > > > Meth A asks Meth C will he play ES or other card allowing him to > > > block. > > > > Is the answer from Meth C mandatory at this point? > > > Yes. > > > > If Meth C says he will not block can he block after B boosts his > > > bleed? > > > No. > > The decision not to block is final (unless the target of the action is > > changed). > > Just to clarify: > So, the upshot is A was smart to ask if C would block? If A boosted > the bleed without asking after receiving 'No Block' from B, could C > block? Should fictional A always ask C, D, E in case one of them plays > Eagle's Sight? Yes.

[ quoted text not captured ] Right. Note that asking for "Any blocks?" and waiting to observe a period of attentive silence from B, C, D, and E is often sufficient for B (who will likely be vocal about "no block") and C, D, and E to confirm their decisions not to block. That is, C can't silently forego xeir impulse in the hopes of drawing out the boost before blocking.

[ quoted text not captured ] > out the boost before blocking.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Great stuff, that's the bit I was looking for. (Apart from obnoxious xeir usage :P) I'm sure sooner or later someone will pull the ploy of noting their lack of 'No Block' declaration to allow them to block at any point, such as post-boost.