This is something of a cornercase question, but might affect a deck
I'm thinking of constructing, so lets see whether anyone out there can
stop some arguments before they start :)
1) Just for the sake of completeness (and so the rest of my players
dont bitch when I do this), can Vengence of Samiel and Sword of the
Righteous (Both Valeren) be used in conjunction with a Wooden Stake?
I'm pretty sure you can, since the Wooden Stake is a 'Melee Weapon'
(so a valid target) which does damage as a strike. Am I wrong?
2) This is the real stumper. I'm in combat with a vampire with 3
blood. I ramp up my Wooden Stake with Sword of the Righteous on Sup
(so now its doing STR+1 Agg), then play Vengence to do 4agg
undodgeable to my opponent. He burns. The card text states 'If more
than 1 damage is inflicted on an opposing vampire by this weapon in a
given combat, then that vampire is sent into torpor' Does that somehow
overrule the burning affect from the agg damage? Or does the opposing
minion go to torpor as per the card text, then burn? and what happens
to the Stake? The card text states 'In that case, this card is
transferred to that vampire, and he or she doesn't untap as normal
during the untap phase as long as he or she remains in torpor.' If I
burn my opponent with the aggravated stake, what happens to him? Does
he get the stake before he burns, or does the stakes transfer effect
no resolve because there is no minion to transfer to? And if the
stake doesnt transfer, does my minion retain it, ot does it explode
into the netherworld due to existential uncertainty?
Any ideas?
Ricky van Hammond
"Rich H." <five_mi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c5310562.02060...@posting.google.com...
> 1) Just for the sake of completeness (and so the rest of my players
> dont bitch when I do this), can Vengence of Samiel and Sword of the
> Righteous (Both Valeren) be used in conjunction with a Wooden Stake?
> I'm pretty sure you can, since the Wooden Stake is a 'Melee Weapon'
> (so a valid target) which does damage as a strike. Am I wrong?
Is wooden stake a melee weapon ? yes ! =)
So you can use it in conjonction with Vengeance of Samiel and Sword of the
Righteous.
> 2) This is the real stumper. I'm in combat with a vampire with 3
> blood. I ramp up my Wooden Stake with Sword of the Righteous on Sup
> (so now its doing STR+1 Agg), then play Vengence to do 4agg
> undodgeable to my opponent. He burns.
goodnews ;)
> The card text states 'If more
> than 1 damage is inflicted on an opposing vampire by this weapon in a
> given combat, then that vampire is sent into torpor' Does that somehow
> overrule the burning affect from the agg damage?
no. If the vampire is burned he is not bound to torpor =)
> Or does the opposing
> minion go to torpor as per the card text, then burn? and what happens
> to the Stake? The card text states 'In that case, this card is
> transferred to that vampire, and he or she doesn't untap as normal
> during the untap phase as long as he or she remains in torpor.' If I
> burn my opponent with the aggravated stake, what happens to him?
You keep the stake. If your opponent doesn't burn and goes to torpor (due to
ashes to ashes or other effect) he will gain the stake though.
> Does
> he get the stake before he burns, or does the stakes transfer effect
> no resolve because there is no minion to transfer to?
the latter.
> And if the
> stake doesnt transfer, does my minion retain it, ot does it explode
> into the netherworld due to existential uncertainty?
your minion retains it =)
reyda
reyda <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3d034284$0$20705$79c1...@nan-newsreader-02.noos.net...
>
> "Rich H." <five_mi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c5310562.02060...@posting.google.com...
>
> > 1) Just for the sake of completeness (and so the rest of my players
> > dont bitch when I do this), can Vengence of Samiel and Sword of the
> > Righteous (Both Valeren) be used in conjunction with a Wooden Stake?
> > I'm pretty sure you can, since the Wooden Stake is a 'Melee Weapon'
> > (so a valid target) which does damage as a strike. Am I wrong?
>
> Is wooden stake a melee weapon ? yes ! =)
> So you can use it in conjonction with Vengeance of Samiel and Sword of the
> Righteous.
>
> > 2) This is the real stumper. I'm in combat with a vampire with 3
> > blood. I ramp up my Wooden Stake with Sword of the Righteous on Sup
> > (so now its doing STR+1 Agg), then play Vengence to do 4agg
> > undodgeable to my opponent. He burns.
>
> goodnews ;)
>
> > The card text states 'If more
> > than 1 damage is inflicted on an opposing vampire by this weapon in a
> > given combat, then that vampire is sent into torpor' Does that somehow
> > overrule the burning affect from the agg damage?
>
> no. If the vampire is burned he is not bound to torpor =)
Ummm...... My understanding is that it's up to the controling methusla if
the vampire visits torpor on the way to Ashtown (ie Burnsville). Think
Fame. If a Famed vamp is burned in combat his controler can chose to have
him take a nap (and lose 3 pool) on his way to to his final fireside nap.
So a wooden stake might not be the best weapon for you to use.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Dave Brereton wrote:
> Ummm...... My understanding is that it's up to the controling methusla if
> the vampire visits torpor on the way to Ashtown (ie Burnsville). Think
> Fame. If a Famed vamp is burned in combat his controler can chose to have
> him take a nap (and lose 3 pool) on his way to to his final fireside nap.
No. He doesn't pass through torpor on the way to the ash heap.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3d034284$0$20705$79c1...@nan-newsreader-02.noos.net>...
> "Rich H." <five_mi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c5310562.02060...@posting.google.com...> > The card text states 'If more> > than 1 damage is inflicted on an opposing vampire by this weapon in a
> > given combat, then that vampire is sent into torpor' Does that somehow
> > overrule the burning affect from the agg damage?
>
> no. If the vampire is burned he is not bound to torpor =)
Um.. I thought vampires weren't burned until they burn blood to
prevent destructiona dn see that they have no blood to burn to prevent
destruction...
My thoughts are that A strikes and deals 4 agg damage to B. B doesn't
prevent it. A says "go to torpor because you've taken more than 1
point of damage" before B even burns blood off of his vampire. Once he
does that (in that case, as the card reads) the card gets transferred.
Once there (in torpor, satisfying the rules of thec ard, which
supercede the rules of the game), he now has to burn blood to
'prevent' the damage from burning him. He can't, and is burned.
Where's my flaw?
~SV
"vermillian" <vermil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f987c6cd.02061...@posting.google.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
I think it's this:
You don't actually go to torpor for having more than one
point of damage from a Wooden Stake before you're done
handling damage. In fact, the Stake can't "know" that
it's done more than one point of damage until after any
given damage-resolution-step for its damage; until the
end of that damage-resolution-step, the damage could still
be prevented.
Once you start burning blood to avoid destruction from
the agg damage, you're already "on the way to torpor" as
a result of agg damage. When you've burned your first
blood to avoid destruction, you've taken 2 points of
damage from the Stake and it says "send the opposing
vampire to torpor" (or else it waits until after damage
resolution, I'm not sure, but I don't think it matters),
but it's not going to preempt the rest of the "stuff
that should happen in combat", ie damage-handling. So
the opposing vampire is put "on the way to torpor"
again; you don't actually *go* to torpor until everything
that needs to happen in combat is finished, as far as
I know. But before either "go to torpor" gets to take
effect, the vampire is burned by having taken too much
aggravated damage.
I'm not sure if the Wooden Stake should be transferred to
the vampire that got burned in this scenario; I think it
would depend on whether WStake does its "if this happens,
that vampire is sent into torpor. In that case, this
card is transferred to that vampire" bit "in the middle"
of damage resolution (ie when it "sees" a second point
of damage that it's inflicted) or "after" (which would
be late enough that the opposing vampire's already burned
and can't get the WStake).
LSJ? (Apologies if you already answered this question
in this thread and I just didn't see it.)
Josh
stakeholder
Rich asked:
>> The card text states 'If more
>> than 1 damage is inflicted on an opposing vampire by this weapon in a
>> given combat, then that vampire is sent into torpor' Does that somehow
>> overrule the burning affect from the agg damage?
Reyda replied:
> > no. If the vampire is burned he is not bound to torpor =)
"vermillian" asked:
> Um.. I thought vampires weren't burned until they burn blood to
> prevent destructiona dn see that they have no blood to burn to prevent
> destruction...
Which they do doing damage resolution. [6.4.6]
> My thoughts are that A strikes and deals 4 agg damage to B. B doesn't
> prevent it. A says "go to torpor because you've taken more than 1
> point of damage" before B even burns blood off of his vampire.
"A" should shut up.
All of the damage is resolved before anything else occurs.
The vampire does not "take 1 agg, go to torpor, take the rest".
The vampire deals with all of the damage, then if he would be
in torpor, he moves to torpor. If he would be burned, he is burned.
[6.4.6]
> Once he
> does that (in that case, as the card reads) the card gets transferred.
No, it doesn't.
> Once there (in torpor, satisfying the rules of thec ard, which
> supercede the rules of the game), he now has to burn blood to
> 'prevent' the damage from burning him. He can't, and is burned.
> Where's my flaw?
Interrupting the damage resolution to change the state of your
minion. This does not happen.
Carpe noctem.
Lasombra
http://www.TheLasombra.com
thela...@hotmail.com (The Lasombra) wrote in message news:<132cdedd.0206...@posting.google.com>...
> "vermillian" asked:
> > Um.. I thought vampires weren't burned until they burn blood to
> > prevent destructiona dn see that they have no blood to burn to prevent
> > destruction...
>
> Which they do doing damage resolution. [6.4.6]
Heheh. You said do do.
> > My thoughts are that A strikes and deals 4 agg damage to B. B doesn't
> > prevent it. A says "go to torpor because you've taken more than 1
> > point of damage" before B even burns blood off of his vampire.
>
> "A" should shut up.
!
> All of the damage is resolved before anything else occurs.
> The vampire does not "take 1 agg, go to torpor, take the rest".
> The vampire deals with all of the damage, then if he would be
> in torpor, he moves to torpor. If he would be burned, he is burned.
>
> [6.4.6]
OK, just thought that the effects of a card over rided normal rules,
but I suppose the wooden stake would have no idea how much damage its
doing until damage resolution, and AT that time the minion would be
burned (at which time the stake's like "Oh hey! More than one damage!
Go to torpo... oh. You're not there anymore. OK, I'll stay here."
~SV