LSJ- Bum's Rush and Freak Drive

Bum's Rush Type: Action Do not replace until the end of this action. (D) Enter combat with a ready minion controlled by another Methuselah. The acting minion gets an optional maneuver during this combat. Freak Drive Type: Action Modifier Requires: Fortitude Cost: 1 blood [for] Only usable at the end of a successful action (after resolving the action). This vampire untaps. [FOR] As above, but usable even if the action is blocked (play after combat, if any). If the card that you replace Bum's Rush with is a Freak Drive, can you play it to untap the acting vampire. The language of both cards occur in the "end of an action" window by card text. Since you can order your turn as you like you can arrange to replace the bum's rush then play the freak drive while never leaving the "end of action" window. Is this correct?

On Oct 21, 5:58 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote: > Bum's Rush > Type: Action > Do not replace until the end of this action. > (D) Enter combat with a ready minion controlled by another Methuselah. > The acting minion gets an optional maneuver during this combat. > > Freak Drive > Type: Action Modifier > Requires: Fortitude > Cost: 1 blood > [for] Only usable at the end of a successful action (after resolving > the action). This vampire untaps. > [FOR] As above, but usable even if the action is blocked (play after > combat, if any). > > If the card that you replace Bum's Rush with is a Freak Drive, can you > play it to untap the acting vampire. No. > The language of both cards occur in the "end of an action" window by > card text. Since you can order your turn as you like you can arrange > to replace the bum's rush then play the freak drive while never > leaving the "end of action" window. Is this correct? The language of Bum's Rush is "not". Do not replace. It isn't something to do. It's something not to do. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/c4e3aeb5c1324e62

[ quoted text not captured ] > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/c4e3... The default is for you to replace the card immediately. Bum's Rush uses "not" to delay that replacement "until the end of the action" which is the exact same window as Freak Drive's "at the end of a successful action". They are both at the "end of the action". That is what both cards say.

[ quoted text not captured ] FD is playable at the end of the action. That phrase, "at the end", means during the action, after resolving the action. Bum's rush is not replaced until the end of the action. That phrase, "until the end" means as long as it has not ended. If you've replaced the Bum's Rush, the action has ended. Action modifiers, like Freak Drive, cannot be played with no action to modify.

LSJ wrote: > FD is playable at the end of the action. > That phrase, "at the end", means during the action, > after resolving the action. > > Bum's rush is not replaced until the end of the action. > That phrase, "until the end" means as long as it has not ended. > > If you've replaced the Bum's Rush, the action has ended. > Action modifiers, like Freak Drive, cannot be played with > no action to modify. PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: I'd like to caution all players of The Una Deck to MAKE SURE that you play your Freak Drive BEFORE you replace from your Bum's Rush, et.al., otherwise you're going to be very sad. ;) Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/ Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=129744447064017

LSJ wrote: > FD is playable at the end of the action. > That phrase, "at the end", means during the action, > after resolving the action. > > Bum's rush is not replaced until the end of the action. > That phrase, "until the end" means as long as it has not ended. > > If you've replaced the Bum's Rush, the action has ended. > Action modifiers, like Freak Drive, cannot be played with > no action to modify. Looking at the Rules Outline, it would appear that there is no difference in the timing of when the resolution of FD and BR happen -- the only place they can both occur is in IV.E., true? I'm not saying that your explanation isn't reasonable -- it is -- but it appears that IV.E. could use some sub-phases added. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Looking at the Rules Outline, it would appear that there is no > difference in the timing of when the resolution of FD and BR > happen -- the only place they can both occur is in IV.E., true? > > I'm not saying that your explanation isn't reasonable -- it is -- > but it appears that IV.E. could use some sub-phases added. > It does seem that both should happen in IV.E, which would allow the acting Meth to order them as preferred. Maybe a IV.D.4 Section to allow for the playable at the end of an action effects. This puts it in the action after success/failure is determined (so FD/Forced March type cards can check) and before the action ends which prevents any more action modifiers. Then E ends the action, which would trigger replacement effects from card's like Bum's Rush.

[ quoted text not captured ] Well, this sort of thing is something that should DEFINATELY appear on any impending VEKN Updated Site...

Kevin M. <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > Looking at the Rules Outline, it would appear that there is no > difference in the timing of when the resolution of FD and BR > happen -- the only place they can both occur is in IV.E., true? > I'm not saying that your explanation isn't reasonable -- it is -- > but it appears that IV.E. could use some sub-phases added. It is not a timing issue. It's the "VTES English" definition of the words "until" and "at". Someone should publish a glossary of words that have very specific VTES meanings (until, at, during, "tap to"...)

On 23 oct, 12:23, Jozxyqk <jfeue...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I'm trying to get that sorted in a lengthy article about the impulse. I'll extract some relevant data regarding that and hope the rest isn't that needed for the extract to be understandable :)

Jozxyqk wrote: > Kevin M. wrote: >> Looking at the Rules Outline, it would appear that there is no >> difference in the timing of when the resolution of FD and BR >> happen -- the only place they can both occur is in IV.E., true? > >> I'm not saying that your explanation isn't reasonable -- it is -- >> but it appears that IV.E. could use some sub-phases added. > > It is not a timing issue. > It's the "VTES English" definition of the words "until" and "at". Then the Rules Outline is useless, since it COMPLETELY contradicts what LSJ just said. Ok. [ quoted text not captured ]

Kevin M. <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote: >Jozxyqk wrote: >> Kevin M. wrote: >>> Looking at the Rules Outline, it would appear that there is no >>> difference in the timing of when the resolution of FD and BR >>> happen -- the only place they can both occur is in IV.E., true? >> >>> I'm not saying that your explanation isn't reasonable -- it is -- >>> but it appears that IV.E. could use some sub-phases added. >> >> It is not a timing issue. >> It's the "VTES English" definition of the words "until" and "at". > >Then the Rules Outline is useless, since it COMPLETELY contradicts >what LSJ just said. Ok. Perhaps you, instead, mean "could be improved with a small clarification"? -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

James Coupe wrote: > Kevin M. wrote: >> Jozxyqk wrote: >>> Kevin M. wrote: >>>> Looking at the Rules Outline, it would appear that there is no >>>> difference in the timing of when the resolution of FD and BR >>>> happen -- the only place they can both occur is in IV.E., true? >>> >>>> I'm not saying that your explanation isn't reasonable -- it is -- >>>> but it appears that IV.E. could use some sub-phases added. >>> >>> It is not a timing issue. >>> It's the "VTES English" definition of the words "until" and "at". >> >> Then the Rules Outline is useless, since it COMPLETELY contradicts >> what LSJ just said. Ok. > > Perhaps you, instead, mean "could be improved with a small > clarification"? That is what I did say, originally: >>>> but it appears that IV.E. could use some sub-phases added. [ quoted text not captured ]