1) In Section 7.2.2 Minion Cards, it says the same action modifier or
reaction card cannot be used twice in the same action by the same MINION,
but in Sections 13.2 and 14 it says the same card cannot be used twice in
the same action by the same PLAYER. Which is correct?
Minion is correct. The same action modifier or reaction card may
not be played by the same Minion in the same action.
2) In Section 12.3.1 Minion Actions/Recruit Ally, it says allies can
block and bleed. Are these the only actions they can take, i.e., can
allies be equipped, employ retainers, or encounter vampires in torpor?
Allies can be equipped as they are minions, they may employ human
retainers (it says so in the second sentence of Employ Retainer), but
they cannot encounter vamps in torpor, (16.3 says only vamps may do so)
3) In section 13.3.2 Stealth and Intercept, it says that if the intercept
of the minion attempting to block is less than the the stealth of the
acting minion, the blocking minion is left untapped, and another minion
may attempt to block. Please confirm that the acting minion would still
enjoy any increased stealth, and the second attempt to block would have
to match that increased stealth.
The acting minion would still enjoy all benefits derived from the
action modifiers played earlier.
4) In the FAQ, it says that if one contested unique location is
burned,then all cards contesting the location are burned. Why?
This is a mistake. Contested cards may not be affected by any
card that does not specifically do so.
5) How fast are cards replaced? For example, suppose I play an Action.
Do I immediately draw a card to replace it, so that if it were an
appropriate Action Modifier, could I apply that to the Action?
Action cards are replaced immediately after they are played. You
can use the drawn card to modify the action.
6) Sudden Reversal doesn't retroactively undo the card being burned, it just
gives the master's controller any pool back, right? So for example, if I
use Sudden Reversal to burn someone else's out-of-turn card as they play it,
they would still lose their next master phase, right?
This is correct. It still counts as being played for Giant's
Blood or out of turn Master cards.
7) If the superior version of Form of Mist is used, then the action resumes
with another +1 stealth stacked on top of it, right? So any previous
stealth would be in effect, Dawn Operation would still apply if the action
is blocked a second time, and so on?
This is correct. All previous stealth bonuses still apply.
8) OK, so it's been established that I could use Govern the Unaligned, or
a similar action, to put blood on someone else' uncontrolled vampire.
Would that vampire pop out at the end of my influence phase, or at the
end of the other player's influence phase?
The vamp would pop out at the end of it's Methuselah's influence.
9) Are multiple Fames cumulative?
Multiple Fames are not cumulative, just like for Army of Rats.
/*
** More errata, basically.
*/
10) OK, so if Obedience is used, then the vampire which was blocked cannot
perform the same action again that turn.
- -> Is each type of bleed considered a different action? For example, if
a vampire was blocked from Computer Hacking and Obedience was then used,
would it be able to use Social Charm later that turn?
Each type of Bleed is a different action.
- -> Suppose the blocked vampire was trying to rescue a vampire from torpor.
I assume the actual action here was "encounter a vampire in torpor",
not "rescue a vampire from torpor" or "rescue vampire V from torpor", and
thus it couldn't try to rescue or diablerize anything else that turn?
You can try to rescue a different vampire. Each action is very
specific, ie rescue "Rikki" from torpor.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
1) In Section 7.2.2 Minion Cards, it says the same action modifier or
reaction card cannot be used twice in the same action by the same MINION,
but in Sections 13.2 and 14 it says the same card cannot be used twice in
the same action by the same PLAYER. Which is correct?
Minion is correct. The same action modifier or reaction card may
not be played by the same Minion in the same action.
2) In Section 12.3.1 Minion Actions/Recruit Ally, it says allies can
block and bleed. Are these the only actions they can take, i.e., can
allies be equipped, employ retainers, or encounter vampires in torpor?
Allies can be equipped as they are minions, they may employ human
retainers (it says so in the second sentence of Employ Retainer), but
they cannot encounter vamps in torpor, (16.3 says only vamps may do so)
3) In section 13.3.2 Stealth and Intercept, it says that if the intercept
of the minion attempting to block is less than the the stealth of the
acting minion, the blocking minion is left untapped, and another minion
may attempt to block. Please confirm that the acting minion would still
enjoy any increased stealth, and the second attempt to block would have
to match that increased stealth.
The acting minion would still enjoy all benefits derived from the
action modifiers played earlier.
4) In the FAQ, it says that if one contested unique location is
burned,then all cards contesting the location are burned. Why?
This is a mistake. Contested cards may not be affected by any
card that does not specifically do so.
5) How fast are cards replaced? For example, suppose I play an Action.
Do I immediately draw a card to replace it, so that if it were an
appropriate Action Modifier, could I apply that to the Action?
Action cards are replaced immediately after they are played. You
can use the drawn card to modify the action.
6) Sudden Reversal doesn't retroactively undo the card being burned, it just
gives the master's controller any pool back, right? So for example, if I
use Sudden Reversal to burn someone else's out-of-turn card as they play it,
they would still lose their next master phase, right?
This is correct. It still counts as being played for Giant's
Blood or out of turn Master cards.
7) If the superior version of Form of Mist is used, then the action resumes
with another +1 stealth stacked on top of it, right? So any previous
stealth would be in effect, Dawn Operation would still apply if the action
is blocked a second time, and so on?
This is correct. All previous stealth bonuses still apply.
8) OK, so it's been established that I could use Govern the Unaligned, or
a similar action, to put blood on someone else' uncontrolled vampire.
Would that vampire pop out at the end of my influence phase, or at the
end of the other player's influence phase?
The vamp would pop out at the end of it's Methuselah's influence.
9) Are multiple Fames cumulative?
Multiple Fames are not cumulative, just like for Army of Rats.
/*
** More errata, basically.
*/
10) OK, so if Obedience is used, then the vampire which was blocked cannot
perform the same action again that turn.
- -> Is each type of bleed considered a different action? For example, if
a vampire was blocked from Computer Hacking and Obedience was then used,
would it be able to use Social Charm later that turn?
Each type of Bleed is a different action.
- -> Suppose the blocked vampire was trying to rescue a vampire from torpor.
I assume the actual action here was "encounter a vampire in torpor",
not "rescue a vampire from torpor" or "rescue vampire V from torpor", and
thus it couldn't try to rescue or diablerize anything else that turn?
You can try to rescue a different vampire. Each action is very
specific, ie rescue "Rikki" from torpor.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Has there been an absolutely-final, we-really-mean-it ruling on Rotscheck?
Also, I now have the corrected rules. (Thanks, WotC!) Any hope of a delta
list-- the changes from the original rulebook?
--
Kevin J. Maroney|kjm@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
Never send money to someone who has the language skills of a rutabaga.
Has there been an absolutely-final, we-really-mean-it ruling on Rotscheck?
Also, I now have the corrected rules. (Thanks, WotC!) Any hope of a delta
list-- the changes from the original rulebook?
--
Kevin J. Maroney|kjm@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
Never send money to someone who has the language skills of a rutabaga.
In article <CwtC6C.72t@rci.ripco.com>, jroberts@ripco.com (Jack Roberts)
writes:
>What on earth is Rotscheck?
Well, my dear, Earth is a proper noun. However, Rotscheck is a very
poorly worded card which sends one of the two minions in combat to Torpor
(Do not pass Go, do not untap next phase), but it's not clear WHICH minion
goes down.
-Lucyred
Kevin Maroney <kjm@panix.com> wrote:
>Has there been an absolutely-final, we-really-mean-it ruling on Rotscheck?
Not so far as I know, sadly.
>Also, I now have the corrected rules. (Thanks, WotC!) Any hope of a delta
>list-- the changes from the original rulebook?
I suspect we'll want to put the rulebook through another iteration or two
of changes before issuing a delta list. This of course assumes that there
will be more changes, but it certainly needs them...
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
also the Network Representative for alt.games.jyhad
Kevin Maroney <kjm@panix.com> wrote:
>Has there been an absolutely-final, we-really-mean-it ruling on Rotscheck?
Not so far as I know, sadly.
>Also, I now have the corrected rules. (Thanks, WotC!) Any hope of a delta
>list-- the changes from the original rulebook?
I suspect we'll want to put the rulebook through another iteration or two
of changes before issuing a delta list. This of course assumes that there
will be more changes, but it certainly needs them...
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
also the Network Representative for alt.games.jyhad
In article <36ervt$p65@lastactionhero.rs.itd.umich.edu>,
Ryan David Simmons <rsimon@umich.edu> wrote:
>I think it's quite clear. Read the card. It says that ANY minion in acting
>combat with A VAMPIRE. This means that if the Rotschreck card is played
>then it can only be played on the minion on the card which is refered to
>as VAMPIRE.>... The card is quite clear on its intent and this debate
>should be ended.
I agree completely. However, the last time I checked, Tom Wylie said that
the Design Team said the exact opposite. That's why I brought this up
after Tom's latest batch of "design team rulings" on Jyhad.
--
Kevin J. Maroney|kjm@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
Never send money to someone who has the language skills of a rutabaga.
Kevin Maroney (kjm@panix.com) wrote:
: In article <36ervt$p65@lastactionhero.rs.itd.umich.edu>,
: Ryan David Simmons <rsimon@umich.edu> wrote:
: >I think it's quite clear. Read the card. It says that ANY minion in acting
: >combat with A VAMPIRE. This means that if the Rotschreck card is played
: >then it can only be played on the minion on the card which is refered to
: >as VAMPIRE.: >... The card is quite clear on its intent and this debate
: >should be ended. : I agree completely. However, the last time I checked, Tom Wylie said that
: the Design Team said the exact opposite. That's why I brought this up
: after Tom's latest batch of "design team rulings" on Jyhad.
Then the design team are a bunch of morons who can't even understand the
words they've printed on their own cards. Also, changing what the card
says would mean that WOTC have absolutely no clue about Vampire: The
Masquerade as this directly contradicts the entire idea of Rotschreck as
fashioned by Mark Rein*Hagen. Hopefully they will come to their senses...
Ryan D. Simmons
rsimon@umich.edu
As far as I know, the design team ruling on Rotschreck has not been
made/given out yet. The official ruling at this point comes from
customer service. I must say that my brain insists on parsing the
card such that the vampire dealing the damage gets hosed by Rotschreck,
not the one receiving it; yes, I know this is the "opposite" of how
it would work in V:tM. Insert "usual shpiel about how one shouldn't
have to know anything about V:tM to play Jyhad" here.
Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <36tahj$6cq@perv.hal.COM> aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes:
>As far as I know, the design team ruling on Rotschreck has not been
>made/given out yet. The official ruling at this point comes from
>customer service. I must say that my brain insists on parsing the
>card such that the vampire dealing the damage gets hosed by Rotschreck,
>not the one receiving it; yes, I know this is the "opposite" of how
>it would work in V:tM. Insert "usual shpiel about how one shouldn't
>have to know anything about V:tM to play Jyhad" here.
Then you brain must be installed backwards :-) ;-)
The first sentence on the card mentions two entities: a "Minion" that is
doing aggravated damage and a "Vampire" that is receiving the damage.
The second sentence then starts out: "That vampire ...". Now which of the
two entities in the first sentence is that refering to? Obviously
the vampire not the minion. I have shown this card to 20 different
people and ALL of them agreed that the "vampire" in the second sentence
must be refering to the "vampire" in the first sentence not the "minion".
--
Mark Biggar
mab@wdl.loral.com
Tom Wylie (aahz@hal.COM) wrote:
: As far as I know, the design team ruling on Rotschreck has not been
: made/given out yet. The official ruling at this point comes from
: customer service. I must say that my brain insists on parsing the
: card such that the vampire dealing the damage gets hosed by Rotschreck,
: not the one receiving it; yes, I know this is the "opposite" of how
: it would work in V:tM. Insert "usual shpiel about how one shouldn't
: have to know anything about V:tM to play Jyhad" here.
You can make a new card in the next expansion deck. As for now I see
nothing wrong with the way that Rotschreck is worded and it also remains
true to VtM.
Ryan D. Simmons
rsimon@umich.edu
>As far as I know, the design team ruling on Rotschreck has not been
>made/given out yet. The official ruling at this point comes from
>customer service. I must say that my brain insists on parsing the
>card such that the vampire dealing the damage gets hosed by Rotschreck,
Maybe this will help. The card says (not an exact quote):
---
Play when a MINION attempts to do aggravated damage to a VAMPIRE. ...
The VAMPIRE is tapped, eviscerated and mulched.
---
From the first sentence, any reference to a vampire means the victim,
and any reference to a minion refers to the aggressor.
In article <36tahj$6cq@perv.hal.com>, Tom Wylie <aahz@hal.COM> wrote:
>As far as I know, the design team ruling on Rotschreck has not been
>made/given out yet. The official ruling at this point comes from
>customer service.
Ah. My mistake.
>I must say that my brain insists on parsing the
>card such that the vampire dealing the damage gets hosed by Rotschreck,
>not the one receiving it
Really? Despite the discussion of "the minion" versus "that vampire"? It
seems pretty unambiguous to me.
>; yes, I know this is the "opposite" of how
>it would work in V:tM. Insert "usual shpiel about how one shouldn't
>have to know anything about V:tM to play Jyhad" here.
In fact, I know practically nothing about V:tM, and I came to the
conclusion I did based purely on the wording of the card.
--
Kevin J. Maroney|kjm@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
Never send money to someone who has the language skills of a rutabaga.