Spawning Pool rules

I am disappointed. Just when I thought that someone was going to extoll the virtues of the Spawning Pool, all they want is RULES ie. regulations. So, if they won't say it, I will. Spawning Pool RULES!!!! tee hee Thomas Kuster V:EKN Prince of Caledon "Of Man's first disobedience, and the fruit Of that forbidden tree whose mortal taste Brought death into the world, and all our woe." John Milton Paradise Lost. Book i. Line 1. <hel...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ju96t$dk5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > Hi all, > > The Masquerade is alive and well in New Zealand (or undead and well, as > the case may be). > > I'm not used to playing Nosferatu, so am unsure about some of the > details on how the Spawning Pool works. > > 1. If a vamp blocks a bleed, completes combat in the first round, and > a second vamp fast reacts, and presses combat to a second round, can > the Spawning Pool be utilised? > > 2. If in a combat the Spawning Pool is utilised, resulting in the > opposing vampire heading to torpor, can Taste of Vitae be played to > gain the blood lost by the opposing vampire? Taste reads that it must > be played after strike resolution. If the opposing vampire goes > torporous at the start of the round, does the combat ever get to strike > resolution? > > Thanks, > > Heldrew. > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

In article <8ju96t$dk5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, <hel...@my-deja.com> wrote: >1. If a vamp blocks a bleed, completes combat in the first round, and >a second vamp fast reacts, and presses combat to a second round, can >the Spawning Pool be utilised? No. The Spawning Pool must be used in the combat resulting from the block. This is implied but not directly evident from cardtext, so an official LSJ imprimatur would help. >2. If in a combat the Spawning Pool is utilised, resulting in the >opposing vampire heading to torpor, can Taste of Vitae be played to >gain the blood lost by the opposing vampire? Taste reads that it must >be played after strike resolution. If the opposing vampire goes >torporous at the start of the round, does the combat ever get to strike >resolution? Nope. Yer out of luck, Taste-Wise. TSP cardtext implies (but, again, is not explicit) that it must be tapped as the second round begins if it is to be tapped at all. gomi >Thanks, > >Heldrew. > > >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ >Before you buy. -- you say they taught you how to read and write yeah, they taught you how to count i say they taught you how to buy and sell your own body by the pound

In article <8k5vmd$1hbd$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com>, go...@best.com (Gomi no Sensei) wrote: > In article <8ju96t$dk5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, <hel...@my-deja.com> wrote: > > >1. If a vamp blocks a bleed, completes combat in the first round, and > >a second vamp fast reacts, and presses combat to a second round, can > >the Spawning Pool be utilised? > > No. The Spawning Pool must be used in the combat resulting from the block. > This is implied but not directly evident from cardtext, so an official > LSJ imprimatur would help. > > >2. If in a combat the Spawning Pool is utilised, resulting in the > >opposing vampire heading to torpor, can Taste of Vitae be played to > >gain the blood lost by the opposing vampire? Taste reads that it must > >be played after strike resolution. If the opposing vampire goes > >torporous at the start of the round, does the combat ever get to strike > >resolution? > > Nope. Yer out of luck, Taste-Wise. TSP cardtext implies (but, again, > is not explicit) that it must be tapped as the second round begins if > it is to be tapped at all. > > gomi > i think the fact that it is not stated when during the second round you may use it means that you CAN tap it anytime you like during the second round. Start of the round could be good, or after strike resolution. Heavens above, the card is pretty tightly limited as it is! i agree with matthew and Thomas that this is a terrific combo, BTW. Pain! [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8kc3mb$97d$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > In article <8k5vmd$1hbd$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com>, > go...@best.com (Gomi no Sensei) wrote: > > In article <8ju96t$dk5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, <hel...@my-deja.com> wrote: > > > > >1. If a vamp blocks a bleed, completes combat in the first round, and > > >a second vamp fast reacts, and presses combat to a second round, can > > >the Spawning Pool be utilised? > > > > No. The Spawning Pool must be used in the combat resulting from the block. > > This is implied but not directly evident from cardtext, so an official > > LSJ imprimatur would help. > > I am unsure of this area. The Spawning Pool states that it can only be utilized by when a bleed is blocked. So if Minion (1) blocks Minion (A)'s bleed action and afterward Minion (2) reacts with Fast Reaction to enter combat with Minion (A) and push the fight to the second round, I would believe the use of Spawning Pool could utilized. This is due to the fact that Minion (A)'s bleed attempt was blocked. Spawning Pool makes no mention that it can only be utilized by the original blocking minion, only that it can only be utilized against the acting minion in conjunction with a blocked bleed attempt. The Minion (2) is reacting to acting Minion (A), who attempted a bleed action. The fact that Minion (2) is able to play the Fast Reaction is due to Minion (A) being blocked in it's attempt to bleed. There is nothing that states Minion (A) couldn't use a Form of the Mist at superior to continue the action during the second combat as the resolution of the action is still pending. > > >2. If in a combat the Spawning Pool is utilised, resulting in the > > >opposing vampire heading to torpor, can Taste of Vitae be played to > > >gain the blood lost by the opposing vampire? Taste reads that it must > > >be played after strike resolution. If the opposing vampire goes > > >torporous at the start of the round, does the combat ever get to strike > > >resolution? > > > > Nope. Yer out of luck, Taste-Wise. TSP cardtext implies (but, again, > > is not explicit) that it must be tapped as the second round begins if > > it is to be tapped at all. > > > > gomi > > Here I have a hard time figuring out as to exactly when you deal damage to minions in combat. If you are in combat with a Tremere minion and it plays Weather Control, you both take damage. In fact, you take the damage right then and there. So is the taking of the damage considered a "mini" damage resolution phase? And if it is, could you play Taste of Vitae to reclaim the 1 point of lost blood at that moment prior to the other phases of combat continuing? The current errata seems to support this capability with - "Only counts blood that the opposing vampire burned as a result of damage. It will not, for example, give blood for blood spent playing combat cards or stolen blood." Additionally, any blood gained by a ToV can not be regained again by a later ToV. I would say that since the Spawning Pool can "dish-out" it's damage at anytime during the second round of combat, the blood loss the opposing minion burns as a result of the damage can be reclaimed, even if the combat ends prior to the Strike Phase. But I would still wait on an answer from LSJ. Michael Eichler Prince of Ramstein > i think the fact that it is not stated when during the second round you > may use it means that you CAN tap it anytime you like during the second > round. Start of the round could be good, or after strike resolution. > Heavens above, the card is pretty tightly limited as it is! > > i agree with matthew and Thomas that this is a terrific combo, BTW. Pain! > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy. > -- Worry comes from the belief you are powerless. (So get in there and kick some butt!) [ quoted text not captured ]

> > > > Here I have a hard time figuring out as to exactly when you deal damage > to minions in combat. If you are in combat with a Tremere minion and > it plays Weather Control, you both take damage. In fact, you take the > damage right then and there. So is the taking of the damage considered > a "mini" damage resolution phase? And if it is, could you play Taste > of Vitae to reclaim the 1 point of lost blood at that moment prior to > the other phases of combat continuing? The current errata seems to > support this capability with - "Only counts blood that the opposing > vampire burned as a result of damage. It will not, for example, give > blood for blood spent playing combat cards or stolen blood." > Additionally, any blood gained by a ToV can not be regained again by a > later ToV. You cannot play Taste of Vitae prior to strike resolution, as per card text: "only usable after strikes have been resolved" Comments Welcome Norman S. Brown Jr. X_Zealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8kci1u$itb$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, X_Ze...@email.msn.com wrote: > > > > > > > > Here I have a hard time figuring out as to exactly when you deal > damage > > to minions in combat. If you are in combat with a Tremere minion and > > it plays Weather Control, you both take damage. In fact, you take the > > damage right then and there. So is the taking of the damage > considered > > a "mini" damage resolution phase? And if it is, could you play Taste > > of Vitae to reclaim the 1 point of lost blood at that moment prior to > > the other phases of combat continuing? The current errata seems to > > support this capability with - "Only counts blood that the opposing > > vampire burned as a result of damage. It will not, for example, give > > blood for blood spent playing combat cards or stolen blood." > > Additionally, any blood gained by a ToV can not be regained again by a > > later ToV. > > You cannot play Taste of Vitae prior to strike resolution, as per card > text: "only usable after strikes have been resolved" > Hello Norman, I know is states that on the card, however, I am unsure as to how it works now with the errata mentioned above. If it works as you state, then the use of Spawning Pool or Weather Control that sends opposing minions to torpor prior to the Strike phase and then the Damage Resolution phase would never be reached. Aside from S:CE, is this legal? Or would the damage be applied and cause the combat to rush through the other phases toward End of Combat? If that is so, then you should still be able to play the ToV. Otherwise, you are correct, and no ToV could be played. Michael Eichler Prince of Ramstein -- Worry comes from the belief you are powerless. (So get in there and kick some butt!) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8kckr6$kpj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Ramsteiner <ramsteiner@my- deja.com> writes >If it works as you state, >then the use of Spawning Pool or Weather Control that sends opposing >minions to torpor prior to the Strike phase and then the Damage >Resolution phase would never be reached. Each dealing of damage in a round has its own "mini" Damage Resolution step, in order to allow Damage Prevention etc. cards to be played. Clearly, in the case of Spawning Pool, the damage is not preventable, but you still have to do Damage Resolution in order to see if the vampire goes to torpor or not etc. However, that isn't the same as strike resolution. > Aside from S:CE, is this >legal? Or would the damage be applied and cause the combat to rush >through the other phases toward End of Combat? What you are doing is assuming there can only be one "Damage Resolution" in a combat. Clearly, there can be several. For instance, additional strikes will cause a number of Damage Resolution phases - one for each additional pair of strikes. > If that is so, then you >should still be able to play the ToV. Otherwise, you are correct, and >no ToV could be played. The combat goes like this: First Round - Press to second round Second Round: - Tap Spawning Pool - Resolve Damage - Range - Choose Strikes - Resolve Strikes Now, of course, a Strike: Combat Ends strike will abort the combat. Since you never pass Strike Resolution, you cannot play Taste of Vitae. However, if, say, your minion (probably a Nosferatu, but not required) plays Immortal Grapple again, say, and both of you stay in combat, and both hit each other then, after Strike Resolution you can: - Play Taste of Vitae Taste of Vitae will, of course, if you get there, count all the damage from Spawning Pool since Taste of Vitae does not care for the source of the damage - merely that the opponent suffered damage. -- James Coupe (Prince of Mercia, England) Vampire: Elder Kindred Network http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net http://www.zephyr.org.uk

In article <8kc3mb$97d$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, legb...@my-deja.com writes >i think the fact that it is not stated when during the second round you >may use it means that you CAN tap it anytime you like during the second >round. I'll just go and check my actual card.... Okay, the card text file is correct. (It's always difficult doing a ruling based on the card text file and finding its wrong.) The relevant card text is: "If a minion you control successfully blocks a bleed against you and a second round of combat begins, tap this card to inflict 1 damage to the acting minion for each blood on the Spawning Pool. " You have no option. It's not a "can" or a "may", it's an imperative - "tap". Therefore: If: - the block is from a bleed - you press to the second round Then: - tap the card there and then Since you *have* to tap the card, you have to tap it at the earliest opportunity - the very start of the second round. Else, you wouldn't be able to guarantee tapping it. The same logic applies to commiting yourself to strike with a gun by maneuvering with it. Since you could not guarantee being around for an additional strike (as you could not guarantee being around later in the round to tap the card[0]), you have to do it now. [0] For instance, three of us are playing on the table, Carol, Bob and I (that order). Bob has a Madness Network in play and so bleeds me at the end of Carol's turn with Zebulon. I block, first round goes and we go to the second round. If you delayed playing it, the following could happen: We choose strikes. Zebulon says hands and I say hands. Then, Zebulon, as acting minion, has priority to play the next effect. He chooses Wolf Claws. Then, he still has priority, so his Methuselah, Bob, plays Rotschreck. Due to card text, Combat Ends. At that point, I am ineligible to tap Spawning Pool, and so have failed to do what is required by the card - tap it. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote in message ... snip >The relevant card text is: > > "If a > minion you control successfully blocks a bleed > against you and a second round of combat begins, > tap this card to inflict 1 damage to the acting minion > for each blood on the Spawning Pool. " > >You have no option. It's not a "can" or a "may", it's an imperative - >"tap". Therefore: > I don't think that the implied imperative "must tap" holds here, James. All resources that tap are optional resources. This would be like saying that Mob Connections is an imperative tap... it says "Tap for an optional press, only usable to continue combat" "Tap" doesn't equal "Must tap" "Tap" = "May tap" >If: > - the block is from a bleed > - you press to the second round >Then: > - tap the card there and then > >Since you *have* to tap the card, you have to tap it at the earliest >opportunity - the very start of the second round. Else, you wouldn't be >able to guarantee tapping it. > I believe that you do have to tap before maneuvers in the second round (as expressed by the text "a second round of combat begins") but that tapping is not required. If you don't tap then, though, you lose the opportunity to do so until a future combat ensues (and goes to the beginning of a second round, as well...) >The same logic applies to commiting yourself to strike with a gun by >maneuvering with it. Since you could not guarantee being around for an >additional strike (as you could not guarantee being around later in the >round to tap the card[0]), you have to do it now. > Equating weaponry/equipment to master cards is potentially inaccurate, in this case... Better to stick with apples and apples (other master cards...) Regards, R. David Zopf Atom Weaver V:EKN Prince of Charlotte, NC

> > If that is so, then you > >should still be able to play the ToV. Otherwise, you are correct, and > >no ToV could be played. > > The combat goes like this: > > First Round - Press to second round > Second Round: > - Tap Spawning Pool > - Resolve Damage > - Range > - Choose Strikes > - Resolve Strikes > > Now, of course, a Strike: Combat Ends strike will abort the combat. > Since you never pass Strike Resolution, you cannot play Taste of Vitae. > However, if, say, your minion (probably a Nosferatu, but not required) > plays Immortal Grapple again, say, and both of you stay in combat, and > both hit each other then, after Strike Resolution you can: > > - Play Taste of Vitae > > Taste of Vitae will, of course, if you get there, count all the damage > from Spawning Pool since Taste of Vitae does not care for the source of > the damage - merely that the opponent suffered damage. I concur with James's explanation of the functionality of Taste of Vitae. Yummy, Norman S. Brown Jr. X_Zealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

hel...@my-deja.com wrote: > 1. If a vamp blocks a bleed, completes combat in the first round, and > a second vamp fast reacts, and presses combat to a second round, can > the Spawning Pool be utilised? No. It can only be utilized in the block-induced combat. > 2. If in a combat the Spawning Pool is utilised, resulting in the > opposing vampire heading to torpor, can Taste of Vitae be played to > gain the blood lost by the opposing vampire? Taste reads that it must > be played after strike resolution. If the opposing vampire goes > torporous at the start of the round, does the combat ever get to strike > resolution? No. If combat ends before strikes resolve, then combat never gets to strike resolution. But, if you tap Spawning Pool to deal damage during strike resolution (or immedaitely after), you can Taste the blood lost to the damage. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > In article <8kc3mb$97d$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, legb...@my-deja.com writes > >i think the fact that it is not stated when during the second round you > >may use it means that you CAN tap it anytime you like during the second > >round. > "If a > minion you control successfully blocks a bleed > against you and a second round of combat begins, > tap this card to inflict 1 damage to the acting minion > for each blood on the Spawning Pool. " > > You have no option. It's not a "can" or a "may", it's an imperative - > "tap". Nah - it's optional. See also Barrens, Arcane Library, Chantry, Mariel, Ravnos Cache, etc. "Do X to do Y" is usually indicating that you can choose to do something (pay some "cost") "to" have some effect take place. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8kd9tj$ak4$1...@slb0.atl.mindspring.net>, R. David Zopf <guenh...@mindspring.com> writes >"Tap" doesn't equal "Must tap" >"Tap" = "May tap" Hmmm... It's a very fine line. Though, as you suggest, looking at other master cards, there would be some support for that. Minion cards (and don't forget that, for some reason, the card text files take Ally cards out of that) are generally much more explicit in the 2nd person imperative being a 2nd person imperative.[0] However, would you suggest that in Malkavian Game, you can choose not to play Rock/Paper/Scissors? Does "Play", in that card's text, mean "Can play"? And Blood Doll is quite explicit in its use of "May". I think the only conclusion that can be drawn is that no conclusion can be drawn. LSJ's intervention, when he is next around, would be welcome. [0] Bauble, for instance, clearly differentiates between the imperative and the permissive form of the verb - "Search" "You may burn". [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8kdhcr$bos$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > hel...@my-deja.com wrote: > > 1. If a vamp blocks a bleed, completes combat in the first round, and > > a second vamp fast reacts, and presses combat to a second round, can > > the Spawning Pool be utilised? > > No. It can only be utilized in the block-induced combat. > How is that? The card only states that it can only be used in combat of a successful block of a bleed attempt... Ok. So the end of the first combat also ends the attempted action. Correct? If that is so, a second combat via Fast Reaction is outside the Action (bleed attempt) Resolution and therefore could not be continued with a superior Form of the Mist. Is this correct? > > 2. If in a combat the Spawning Pool is utilised, resulting in the > > opposing vampire heading to torpor, can Taste of Vitae be played to > > gain the blood lost by the opposing vampire? Taste reads that it must > > be played after strike resolution. If the opposing vampire goes > > torporous at the start of the round, does the combat ever get to strike > > resolution? > > No. If combat ends before strikes resolve, then combat never gets > to strike resolution. What? If combat damage is delivered and it sends a minion to torpor prior to the strike phase, how do you get to the end of combat phase if the combat sequence terminates at that point. But then again, S:CE just aborts the combat so I suppose this is the same thing as well? Either way, I should still be able to use cards like the Amaranth and Ritual of the Bitter Rose combo, correct? > > But, if you tap Spawning Pool to deal damage during strike resolution > (or immedaitely after), you can Taste the blood lost to the damage. > So you can tap the Spawning Pool at anytime within the combat to deliver it's damage to the opposing minion? It doesn't have to be at the start of the combat as it sounded from other posts within this thread? Michael Eichler Prince of Ramstein > -- > LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. > Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: > http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy. > -- Worry comes from the belief you are powerless. (So get in there and kick some butt!) [ quoted text not captured ]

Ramsteiner <ramst...@my-deja.com> wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > hel...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > 1. If a vamp blocks a bleed, completes combat in the first round, > and > > > a second vamp fast reacts, and presses combat to a 2nd round, can > > > the Spawning Pool be utilised? > > > > No. It can only be utilized in the block-induced combat. > > > How is that? The card only states that it can only be used in combat > of a successful block of a bleed attempt... Ok. Right. You seem to have answered the "How is that?" question already, so I am at a loss as to the response you seek. > So the end of the > first combat also ends the attempted action. Correct? No. The action isn't over until it's over (which is why you can play action modifiers like Freak Drive after the combat(s)). > If that is so, > a second combat via Fast Reaction is outside the Action (bleed attempt) > Resolution and therefore could not be continued with a superior Form of > the Mist. Is this correct? No, but the acting vampire cannot play sup Form of Mist vs. a non-blocking vampire since he doesn't need stealth at that point. > > No. If combat ends before strikes resolve, then combat never gets > > to strike resolution. > > What? If combat damage is delivered and it sends a minion to torpor > prior to the strike phase, how do you get to the end of combat phase ? To restate: If combat ends before phase X of combat, then phase X doesn't happen. This is axiomatic. > if the combat sequence terminates at that point. But then again, S:CE > just aborts the combat so I suppose this is the same thing as well? Sure. > Either way, I should still be able to use cards like the Amaranth and > Ritual of the Bitter Rose combo, correct? Yes. Neither of these cards specify that the are played "after strike resolution", so can be played before strike resolution. > > But if you tap Spawning Pool to deal damage during strike resolution > > (or immedaitely after), you can Taste the blood lost to the damage. > > > So you can tap the Spawning Pool at anytime within the combat to > deliver it's damage to the opposing minion? It doesn't have to be at > the start of the combat as it sounded from other posts within this > thread? Any time within the second round, yes. See one of my other posts in this thread. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > No, but the acting vampire cannot play sup Form of Mist vs. a > non-blocking vampire since he doesn't need stealth at that point. ??? So...if I block a vampire with sup. Protean with my last untapped minion, the opposing vampire can't use Form of Mist because all of my minions are tapped and he doesn't need the stealth to make the action successful...so the action becomes unsuccessful? That doesn't seem quite right. Besides which, you already covered the above issue in errata...but it appears that you used different reasoning. Any effect that starts a new combat after the combat that was ended by superior Form of Mist will nullify the "continue action" effect. This includes Psyche (superior), Fast Reaction, and Hidden Lurker. [LSJ 19980109] No mention of stealth in the ruling at all. Why use it now? Regards, Noal -- "What you cannot enforce, do not command." -- Socrates [ quoted text not captured ]

Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > No, but the acting vampire cannot play sup Form of Mist vs. a > > non-blocking vampire since he doesn't need stealth at that point. > > ??? > > So...if I block a vampire with sup. Protean with my last untapped > minion, the opposing vampire can't use Form of Mist because all of my > minions are tapped and he doesn't need the stealth to make the action > successful...so the action becomes unsuccessful? That doesn't seem quite > right. No, he can play sup Form of Mist. Since there is a blocker (his opponent) who has sufficient intercept, he needs the stealth. > Besides which, you already covered the above issue in errata...but it > appears that you used different reasoning. > > Any effect that starts a new combat after the combat that was ended by > superior Form of Mist will nullify the "continue action" effect. This > includes Psyche (superior), Fast Reaction, and Hidden Lurker. > [LSJ 19980109] > > No mention of stealth in the ruling at all. Why use it now? That is a different issue - it regards the use of FoM in the first combat followed by an effect that starts a new combat. The current thread is dealing with the use of FoM in that resulting combat (with a non-blocking minion). -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ [ quoted text not captured ]

> > Any effect that starts a new combat after the combat that was ended by > > superior Form of Mist will nullify the "continue action" effect. This > > includes Psyche (superior), Fast Reaction, and Hidden Lurker. > > [LSJ 19980109] > > No mention of stealth in the ruling at all. Why use it now? > That is a different issue - it regards the use of FoM in the > first combat followed by an effect that starts a new combat. > The current thread is dealing with the use of FoM in that > resulting combat (with a non-blocking minion). So the following situation is not valid: Vamp A bleeds Vamp B blocks Vamp A Strikes: Earth Meld Vamp C uses Fast Reaction Vamp A uses FoM to continue the action ? I would think it was legit... Sorrow --- I don't want to be alone | I hurt, therefore I am anymore |-------------------------------- I don't want to be anyone | "What are you looking at...? anymore | you never seen anyone try to I don't need a reason to kill myself | commit suicide before?" - Anon ------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Sorrow" <cbo...@apdi.net> wrote: > So the following situation is not valid: > > Vamp A bleeds > Vamp B blocks > Vamp A Strikes: Earth Meld > Vamp C uses Fast Reaction > Vamp A uses FoM to continue the action Um, right - per this thread: http://www.deja.com/threadmsg_md.xp?AN=645018889 [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8kf6l7$gol$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Ramsteiner <ramst...@my-deja.com> wrote: > > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > hel...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > > 1. If a vamp blocks a bleed, completes combat in the first round, > > and > > > > a second vamp fast reacts, and presses combat to a 2nd round, can > > > > the Spawning Pool be utilised? > > > > > > No. It can only be utilized in the block-induced combat. > > > > > How is that? The card only states that it can only be used in combat > > of a successful block of a bleed attempt... Ok. > > Right. You seem to have answered the "How is that?" question > already, so I am at a loss as to the response you seek. > What you are stating is that no matter how many combats take place against the acting minion, the Spawning Pool can only be played in the first combat. Correct? If so, it is due to the latter combats not being involved with the block? Is this correct? If not, then shouldn't the Spawning Pool be allowed in any subsequent combats taking place after the block, especially as the action is still active (as you show below). > > So the end of the > > first combat also ends the attempted action. Correct? > > No. The action isn't over until it's over (which is why you can > play action modifiers like Freak Drive after the combat(s)). > I can understand that. The action is not over until another action is initiated. > > If that is so, > > a second combat via Fast Reaction is outside the Action (bleed > attempt) > > Resolution and therefore could not be continued with a superior Form > of > > the Mist. Is this correct? > > No, but the acting vampire cannot play sup Form of Mist vs. a > non-blocking vampire since he doesn't need stealth at that point. > Ok. Now I have a problem with the above statement. If the action is still pending (as you stated above citing Freak Drive) how does Form of Mist at superior get screwed from being played to continue the action? As Sorrow pointed out in his lateral post within this thread, Minion A bleeds Minion B blocks Minion A dodges or maneuvers to avoid damage Combat ends Minion C plays Fast Reaction Minion A plays Form of Mist at superior to continue the action at +1 stealth (as the action was still pending and another action has not started.) <snip> Michael Eichler Prince of Ramstein > -- > LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. > Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: > http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy. > -- Worry comes from the belief you are powerless. (So get in there and kick some butt!) [ quoted text not captured ]

Ramsteiner <ramst...@my-deja.com> wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > Ramsteiner <ramst...@my-deja.com> wrote: > > > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > > No. It can only be utilized in the block-induced combat. > > > > > > > How is that? The card only states that it can only be used in > combat > > > of a successful block of a bleed attempt... Ok. > > > > Right. You seem to have answered the "How is that?" question > > already, so I am at a loss as to the response you seek. > > > What you are stating is that no matter how many combats take place > against the acting minion, the Spawning Pool can only be played in the > first combat. Correct? First, last, whatever - it can only be used in a combat that results from a block. Similarly, the maneuver from Guard Dogs can only be used in a block-combat. > If so, it is due to the latter combats not being involved with the > block? Is this correct? Combats that are started by a means other than blocking are not block-induced combats. They occur during the action, however. > If not, then shouldn't the Spawning Pool be allowed in any subsequent > combats taking place after the block, especially as the action is still > active (as you show below). No, Spawning Pool is only usable in the block-induced combat. Spawning pool makes no mention of "after" the block - it just refers to the combat: "if a minion blocks and a second round of combat begins...". This is ruled to refer to the block-induced combat. It doesn't refer to every combat in the game that occurs after you manage to block a bleed. > > No, but the acting vampire cannot play sup Form of Mist vs. a > > non-blocking vampire since he doesn't need stealth at that point. > > > Ok. Now I have a problem with the above statement. If the action is > still pending (as you stated above citing Freak Drive) how does Form of > Mist at superior get screwed from being played to continue the action? As stated above, referring to the rule against adding stealth when stealth is not needed. [ quoted text not captured ]

> > Ok. Now I have a problem with the above statement. If the action is > > still pending (as you stated above citing Freak Drive) how does Form > > of Mist at superior get screwed from being played to continue the action? > As stated above, referring to the rule against adding stealth > when stealth is not needed. But see, this is what is getting me... the action *was* blocked. So in reality, you still need the stealth. So regardless of whether FoM was used in the first combat or the second combat, it still should be able to be used because the action is still ongoing and you do need the stealth because you were blocked initially. Sorrow --- no hate no wars no ignorance no politics no pain no force no weapons no oppression no sorrow no chemicals no dust no leaders no violence no dust no leaders no leaders now it's time for the world to see a man with open eyes now it's time to realize we tell ourselves the best of lies

>> Ok. Now I have a problem with the above statement. If the action >> is still pending (as you stated above citing Freak Drive) how does >> Form of Mist at superior get screwed from being played to continue >> the action? > > As stated above, referring to the rule against adding stealth > when stealth is not needed. How is that you are able to make that assertion? Clearly, the minion needs the stealth to continue the action. How is this any different from a target tapping his last untapped minion to block and using Form of Mist when he no longer has any untapped minions to block with...resulting in a lack of need for the stealth? Let's use that as example 1: Vamp A bleeds Vamp B blocks (the prey's only vampire, for the sake of discussion) Vamp A uses FoM to continue the action Let's use Sorrow's illustration as exmaple 2: Vamp A bleeds Vamp B blocks Vamp A Strikes: Earth Meld Vamp C uses Fast Reaction Vamp A uses FoM to continue the action First off, are you saying that using the Form of Mist results in an unsuccessful block and does not leave the blocker tapped? If that was the case, the Vamp B in both examples would still be untapped and Vamp A would need the stealth to make the action resolve successfully. However, according to the on-line rulebook, that's not the case at all. I refer you to: 6.2.3. Resolve the Action If the action is blocked, then any card played to take the action is burned and the blocking minion is tapped and enters combat with the acting minion (see Combat, sec. 6.4). 6.4. Combat Combat results when a minion blocks the action of a ready minion. These exerpts make it clear that a Vamp B has to succesfully block Vamp A _and_ tap before combat even begins. Which means that Vamp B is not a valid blocker (barring a wake) and cannot even attempt to block the Vamp A again. Wether Vamp C enters combat with Vamp A with Fast Reaction is irrelevent per the following: 6.2.3. Resolve the Action Once the combat is resolved, the action is over. Which means the action was resolved at the end of the initial combat in both circumstances and strongly infers that the second attempt using Form of Mist is actually a seperate action entirely. Note that this technically violates NRA and pretty much means that a minion that used FA or WWEF to block can't attempt to block a 2nd time (without an additional wake) because the action had already resolved. So...either the rulebook is wrong and that the initial action did not resolve with the end of the first combat and that by its very nature, Form of Mist violates the ban on pushing stealth..._or_...the use of Psyche and Fast Reactions is completely irrelevant as the stealth is still required to attempt to successfully resolve the action. Regards, Noal -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: > > As stated above, referring to the rule against adding stealth > > when stealth is not needed. > > How is that you are able to make that assertion? Clearly, the minion > needs the stealth to continue the action. How is this different from > a target tapping his last untapped minion to block and using Form of > Mist when he no longer has any untapped minions to block > with...resulting in a lack of need for the stealth? It is different in that there is a current blocking minion. When in combat with a non-blocking minion, there is no current blocking minion. The criterion for "needs stealth" is currently: "there is a current blocking minion with intercept equal to or exceeding the acting minion's stealth." With no current blocking minion (as in the case of Fast Reaction combat), the acting minion doesn't "need stealth". > Let's use that as example 1: > > Vamp A bleeds > Vamp B blocks (the prey's only vampire, for the sake of discussion) > Vamp A uses FoM to continue the action > > Let's use Sorrow's illustration as exmaple 2: > > Vamp A bleeds > Vamp B blocks > Vamp A Strikes: Earth Meld > Vamp C uses Fast Reaction > Vamp A uses FoM to continue the action > > First off, are you saying that using the Form of Mist results in an > unsuccessful block and does not leave the blocker tapped? No. I can find nothing in my statements in this thread to suggest anything of the sort. Please explain the basis for the question. > If that was > the case, the Vamp B in both examples would still be untapped and Vamp A > would need the stealth to make the action resolve successfully. > > However, according to the on-line rulebook, that's not the case at all. > I refer you to: > > 6.2.3. Resolve the Action > If the action is blocked, then any card played to take the action is > burned and the blocking minion is tapped and enters combat with the > acting minion (see Combat, sec. 6.4). > 6.4. Combat > Combat results when a minion blocks the action of a ready minion. > > These exerpts make it clear that a Vamp B has to succesfully block Vamp > A _and_ tap before combat even begins. Right. I never suggested otherwise. > Which means that Vamp B is not a > valid blocker (barring a wake) and cannot even attempt to block the Vamp > A again. Right. Again, I never suggested otherwise. But Vamp B is the blocking minion in combat, even while tapped. > Wether Vamp C enters combat with Vamp A with Fast Reaction is > irrelevent per the following: > > 6.2.3. Resolve the Action > Once the combat is resolved, the action is over. > > Which means the action was resolved at the end of the initial combat in > both circumstances and strongly infers that the second attempt using > Form of Mist is actually a seperate action entirely. Note that this > technically violates NRA and pretty much means that a minion that used > FA or WWEF to block can't attempt to block a 2nd time (without an > additional wake) because the action had already resolved. Yes, the rulebook doesn't cover the multiple-combat cases adequately. The action isn't actually over until all of the effects to be handled during the action are concluded. Putting such text in the rulebook would only confuse the player attempting to learn how to play the game. A strict reading of the rulebook text would preclude the use of Cats Guidance or Freak Drive to untap after combat. > So...either the rulebook is wrong and that the initial action did not > resolve with the end of the first combat and that by its very nature, > Form of Mist violates the ban on pushing stealth..._or_...the use of > Psyche and Fast Reactions is completely irrelevant as the stealth is > still required to attempt to successfully resolve the action. The rulebook is "wrong" for these cases, but FoM doesn't get to violate the ban on "pushing" stealth. The only option (other than the current ruling) is to agree with you that, once tapped, the blocking minion ceases to qualify the acting minion as "needing stealth", and therefore superior Form of Mist could never be played to continue an action. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ [ quoted text not captured ]

>> How is that you are able to make that assertion? Clearly, the minion >> needs the stealth to continue the action. How is this different from >> a target tapping his last untapped minion to block and using Form of >> Mist when he no longer has any untapped minions to block >> with...resulting in a lack of need for the stealth? > > It is different in that there is a current blocking minion. > When in combat with a non-blocking minion, there is no current > blocking minion. > > The criterion for "needs stealth" is currently: > "there is a current blocking minion with intercept equal to > or exceeding the acting minion's stealth." > > With no current blocking minion (as in the case of Fast Reaction > combat), the acting minion doesn't "need stealth". While that makes perfect sense, and I agree 100% with you, it doesn't completely gel with, "Combat results when a minion blocks the action of a ready minion," since it infers that the once combat begins, the opposing minion is no longer blocking. It's prolly too late for revsions now, but I would have suggested a better wording would be, "Combat results as the last part of a minion's successful block of an action of another ready minion." That makes clear that the opposing minion is still considered blocking and handles any confusion from Freak Drive and Cats' Guidance. >> First off, are you saying that using the Form of Mist results >> in an unsuccessful block and does not leave the blocker tapped? > > No. I can find nothing in my statements in this thread to suggest > anything of the sort. Please explain the basis for the question. It was based on my apparent confusion of what you were trying to express. Hence my request for clarification. > Yes, the rulebook doesn't cover the multiple-combat cases adequately. > The action isn't actually over until all of the effects to be handled > during the action are concluded. Putting such text in the rulebook > would only confuse the player attempting to learn how to play the > game. > > A strict reading of the rulebook text would preclude the use > of Cats Guidance or Freak Drive to untap after combat. It's prolly too late for revsions now, but I would have suggested a better wording of the first sentence of _6.4._Combat_ would be, "Combat results as the last part of a minion's successful block of an action of another ready minion." That makes clear that the opposing minion is still considered blocking and adequately handles any confusion from Freak Drive and Cats' Guidance. Even better, it's not (I think) very confusing at all. >> So...either the rulebook is wrong and that the initial action did not >> resolve with the end of the first combat and that by its very nature, >> Form of Mist violates the ban on pushing stealth..._or_...the use of >> Psyche and Fast Reactions is completely irrelevant as the stealth is >> still required to attempt to successfully resolve the action. > > The rulebook is "wrong" for these cases, but FoM doesn't get to > violate the ban on "pushing" stealth. The only option (other than > the current ruling) is to agree with you that, once tapped, the > blocking minion ceases to qualify the acting minion as "needing > stealth", and therefore superior Form of Mist could never be > played to continue an action. Of course, there is one other option. Use better wording...but that starts to lead down the road of picking nits. And I'd _never_ do that. *grin* Regards, Noal -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

> It's prolly too late for revsions now, but I would have suggested a > better wording would be, "Combat results as the last part of a > minion's successful block of an action of another ready minion." That > makes clear that the opposing minion is still considered blocking and > handles any confusion from Freak Drive and Cats' Guidance. > > It's prolly too late for revsions now, but I would have suggested a > better wording of the first sentence of _6.4._Combat_ would be, > "Combat results as the last part of a minion's successful block of an > action of another ready minion." That makes clear that the opposing > minion is still considered blocking and adequately handles any > confusion from Freak Drive and Cats' Guidance. Even better, it's not > (I think) very confusing at all. *deeps sighs* Ugh. I've got to do a better job of proofreading before I post. [ quoted text not captured ]