rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Some rules questions

19 messages from 12 participants · 05 January 1996 – 25 January 1996
original thread on Google Groups

Petri Wessman

We were playing a twisted variant of Jyhad last night and some general questions came up: + Can you commit suicide (transfer all of your pool to a minion with a Blood Doll, for example)? + Archon: the card reads "any vampire". Can a meth with an Archon attack his/her own vampires? + Malkavian Prank: the card says "each Methuselah". Does the meth playing the card also take 1-4 blood and "guess" the amount? //Petri

Neil Bernstein

Petri Wessman (Petri....@hut.fi) wrote: : We were playing a twisted variant of Jyhad last night and some general : questions came up: : + Can you commit suicide (transfer all of your pool to a minion with a : Blood Doll, for example)? This is a time-honored practice in our group (though a more usual way to do it is by transferring to uncontrolled vampires). Sort of like mana-burn suicides in That Other Game. : + Archon: the card reads "any vampire". Can a meth with an Archon : attack his/her own vampires? Why not? I can think of several situations in which I'd like to see one of my own vampires torpored, and if my opponent keeps dodging out of the way I might want to do it myself. : + Malkavian Prank: the card says "each Methuselah". Does the meth : playing the card also take 1-4 blood and "guess" the amount? Nope. The Malk player only joins the party in Game of Malkav. - Neil -- nwbe...@unix.amherst.edu, lentus in umbra | nudus ara, sere nudus... in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro

L. Scott Johnson

Petri....@hut.fi (Petri Wessman) writes: >We were playing a twisted variant of Jyhad last night and some general >questions came up: >+ Can you commit suicide (transfer all of your pool to a minion with a > Blood Doll, for example)? Of course. Calling a Domain Challenge to oust yourself as well as your Prey is not unheard of in my group. And there's the old example of ousting yourself by equipping with Vast Wealth and drawing an equipment that costs too much. >+ Archon: the card reads "any vampire". Can a meth with an Archon > attack his/her own vampires? Well, A, it has errata that the attack is a (D) action, and as such cannot be directed toward your own cards. And, B, you can never get into combat with nor Bleed yourself under any circumstances. >+ Malkavian Prank: the card says "each Methuselah". Does the meth > playing the card also take 1-4 blood and "guess" the amount? Heh. I'm sure the answer is no. It says "guess how much is in each Methuselah's hand", but it starts with "All *other* Methuselahs hold between 1 and 4 blood" [emphasis mine]. So, while you could guess for yourself, you would not be holding anything - and so would gain or lose zero, respectively. Good try, though :-) -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | These opinions are mine and http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | are subject to card text. Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |

L. Scott Johnson

aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes: >L. Scott Johnson <sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu> wrote: >>>+ Archon: the card reads "any vampire". Can a meth with an Archon >>> attack his/her own vampires? >>Well, A, it has errata that the attack is a (D) action, and as >>such cannot be directed toward your own cards. And, B, you can >>never get into combat with nor Bleed yourself under any circumstances. >Well, neither of those is technically impossible. The card set is just >engineered to avoid that sort of thing, is all. Eh? You have said "(D) actions cannot be directed at oneself unless card text indicates that it can be self-directed <4ar27a$q...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>". Was that a mistake? And are you saying that some card may eventually allow me to attack my own minion? Combat with oneself is patently against the mechanics of the game. As far as Bleeding yourself, that is a longstanding rule: From: aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad Subject: DESIGN TEAM RULINGS: 5/9/95 Date: 9 May 1995 07:17:48 GMT Message-ID: <3on4us$l...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> 5) If an action card such as Computer Hacking provides a directed bleed, you may bleed any player other than yourself. [ quoted text not captured ]

Thomas R Wylie

L. Scott Johnson <sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu> wrote: >>>...B, you can >>>never get into combat with nor Bleed yourself under any circumstances. >>Well, neither of those is technically impossible. The card set is just >>engineered to avoid that sort of thing, is all. >Eh? >You have said "(D) actions cannot be directed at oneself unless card text >indicates that it can be self-directed <4ar27a$q...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>". >Was that a mistake? No. As I said, the card set is just *engineered* to avoid attacking your own minions, and a large part of that is making all attacks directed. >And are you saying that some card may eventually allow me to attack >my own minion? Combat with oneself is patently against the mechanics >of the game. It's against the design of the game, but not against the mechanics of the game. While I doubt we would print a card that simply let you attack your own minions, if someone found a tortured combination of three or four cards that wound up letting you attack one of your own, there wouldn't be any (meta)rule stopping you. >As far as Bleeding yourself, that is a longstanding rule: > 5) If an action card such as Computer Hacking provides a directed > bleed, you may bleed any player other than yourself. Again, it's a design issue, not a mechanics issue. While we don't intend to ever let you flatly bleed yourself, there wouldn't be anything stopping obscure card combos from allowing this. Let me emphasize: I don't expect us to ever allow a player to attack his or her own minions, or bleed his or her own pool. But that's purely a design issue, not a mechanics issue. Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

James R. McClure Jr.

aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote: [lots of explaination omitted] >Let me emphasize: I don't expect us to ever allow a player to attack his or >her own minions, or bleed his or her own pool. But that's purely a design >issue, not a mechanics issue. Peace Thom, Well, you should make it a rule that (D) actions can NEVER be directed at yourself. This prevents/eliminates all sorts of silliness. Being able to attack yourself could easily be distorted as could bleeding oneself. Nil carborundum illigitimi, James R. McClure Jr. The OS/2 Apostle <insert disclaimer here>

Thomas R Wylie

L. Scott Johnson <sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu> wrote: >>+ Archon: the card reads "any vampire". Can a meth with an Archon >> attack his/her own vampires? >Well, A, it has errata that the attack is a (D) action, and as >such cannot be directed toward your own cards. And, B, you can >never get into combat with nor Bleed yourself under any circumstances. Well, neither of those is technically impossible. The card set is just engineered to avoid that sort of thing, is all. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Puzzo

L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: : aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes: : >Well, neither of those is technically impossible. The card set is just : >engineered to avoid that sort of thing, is all. : Eh? : As far as Bleeding yourself, that is a longstanding rule: : From: aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) : Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad : Subject: DESIGN TEAM RULINGS: 5/9/95 : Date: 9 May 1995 07:17:48 GMT : Message-ID: <3on4us$l...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> : : 5) If an action card such as Computer Hacking provides a directed : bleed, you may bleed any player other than yourself. Yeah, but what if you direct the bleed at your predator, and they deflect it to you? In which case you would bleed yourself, wouldn't you? -James

Algustas

Hi James, On 10 Jan 1996, James Puzzo wrote: > > L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: > : aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes: > : > : 5) If an action card such as Computer Hacking provides a directed > : bleed, you may bleed any player other than yourself. > > Yeah, but what if you direct the bleed at your predator, and they deflect > it to you? In which case you would bleed yourself, wouldn't you? > Actually, I belive both of the bleed bounce cards say that you can't deflect - misdirect it back at the acting Methuselah. Algustas *****If there is a wrong way to do something, then someone will do it.***** Edward A. Murphy, Jr.

Richard Mines

In article <4cuu63$1...@hermes.louisville.edu>, jmcc...@e-mail.kdp-baptist.louisville.edu says... > >aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote: >[lots of explaination omitted] >>Let me emphasize: I don't expect us to ever allow a player to attack his or >>her own minions, or bleed his or her own pool. But that's purely a design >>issue, not a mechanics issue. > >Peace Thom, > >Well, you should make it a rule that (D) actions can NEVER be directed at >yourself. This prevents/eliminates all sorts of silliness. Being able >to attack yourself could easily be distorted as could bleeding oneself. It's be handy for getting rid of Charnas though... :) Richard -- "A Smith & Wesson beats four aces" ric...@onechip.co.uk

L. Scott Johnson

jam...@gw.digibd.com (James Puzzo) writes: >L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: >: As far as Bleeding yourself, that is a longstanding rule: >: 5) If an action card such as Computer Hacking provides a directed >: bleed, you may bleed any player other than yourself. >Yeah, but what if you direct the bleed at your predator, and they deflect >it to you? In which case you would bleed yourself, wouldn't you? Sure, except that card text on deflection expressly prohibits this, as well. There is currently no convolution of cards and/or other events that will permit you to bleed yourself, even though the rules don't disallow the possibility of future card convolutions doing so. [ quoted text not captured ]

Martin Engelhardt

James R. McClure Jr. (jmcc...@e-mail.kdp-baptist.louisville.edu) wrote: : aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote: : [lots of explaination omitted] : >Let me emphasize: I don't expect us to ever allow a player to attack his or : >her own minions, or bleed his or her own pool. But that's purely a design : >issue, not a mechanics issue. : Peace Thom, : Well, you should make it a rule that (D) actions can NEVER be directed at : yourself. This prevents/eliminates all sorts of silliness. Being able : to attack yourself could easily be distorted as could bleeding oneself. : Good idea, but then they would have to change the card text on at least Rampage. In the next Edition, maybe? Martin -- Martin Engelhardt mer...@fim1.informatik.uni-mannheim.de GB/GCS d? p+ c++++(++) l u+ e++/* m+(-) s /+ !n h f++ !g w- t++ r++ y@

Eric Pettersen

jam...@gw.digibd.com (James Puzzo) wrote: -> -> L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: -> : As far as Bleeding yourself, that is a longstanding rule: -> -> : From: aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) -> : Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad -> : Subject: DESIGN TEAM RULINGS: 5/9/95 -> : Date: 9 May 1995 07:17:48 GMT -> : Message-ID: <3on4us$l...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> -> : -> : 5) If an action card such as Computer Hacking provides a directed -> : bleed, you may bleed any player other than yourself. -> -> Yeah, but what if you direct the bleed at your predator, and they deflect -> it to you? In which case you would bleed yourself, wouldn't you? -> The text of Deflection disallows this. --Eric

James R. McClure Jr.

mer...@pips01.informatik.uni-mannheim.de (Martin Engelhardt) wrote: >James R. McClure Jr. (jmcc...@e-mail.kdp-baptist.louisville.edu) wrote: >: aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote: >: [lots of explaination omitted] >: >Let me emphasize: I don't expect us to ever allow a player to attack his or >: >her own minions, or bleed his or her own pool. But that's purely a design >: >issue, not a mechanics issue. > >: Well, you should make it a rule that (D) actions can NEVER be directed at >: yourself. This prevents/eliminates all sorts of silliness. Being able >: to attack yourself could easily be distorted as could bleeding oneself. >: >Good idea, > >but then they would have to change the card text on at least >Rampage. In the next Edition, maybe? Peace Martin, We already play Rampage as an undirected action at +1 stealth, when used on one of the locations you control, though I've yet to see a reason to. [ quoted text not captured ]

dj...@ttacs1.ttu.edu

In article <4d0s09$d...@gw.dgii.com>, jam...@gw.digibd.com (James Puzzo) writes: > > L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: > : aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes: > : >Well, neither of those is technically impossible. The card set is just > : >engineered to avoid that sort of thing, is all. > > : Eh? > > : As far as Bleeding yourself, that is a longstanding rule: > > : From: aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) > : Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad > : Subject: DESIGN TEAM RULINGS: 5/9/95 > : Date: 9 May 1995 07:17:48 GMT > : Message-ID: <3on4us$l...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> > : > : 5) If an action card such as Computer Hacking provides a directed > : bleed, you may bleed any player other than yourself. > > Yeah, but what if you direct the bleed at your predator, and they deflect > it to you? In which case you would bleed yourself, wouldn't you? > > -James > There is not a single 'deflection' type card that is able to deflect a bleed to the bleeding methuselah. -X

James Puzzo

dj...@ttacs1.ttu.edu wrote: : There is not a single 'deflection' type card that is able to deflect : a bleed to the bleeding methuselah. That's what I get for not double checking the card text first. But what about (which one is it... I think it's...) blood bond? The one where you pay for a bleed to a Methusaleh and later may force them to pay for a bleed to you? In a > 2 player game, this seems to be the best use for the card (blood bond your predator if your prey ever bleeds them). However, this would force your predator to "bleed" themselves. Is this an exception? Or would you simply not consider this "bleeding"? -James

L. Scott Johnson

[ quoted text not captured ] This is Major Boon. It merely changes who pays for the bleed, not who is being bled. So, while you could wind up paying for a bleed undertaken by one of your minions, you would not be being bled by that minion. [ quoted text not captured ]

dj...@ttacs1.ttu.edu

In article <4ddtbs$1...@gw.dgii.com>, jam...@gw.digibd.com (James Puzzo) writes: > dj...@ttacs1.ttu.edu wrote: > > : There is not a single 'deflection' type card that is able to deflect > : a bleed to the bleeding methuselah. > > That's what I get for not double checking the card text first. But what about > (which one is it... I think it's...) blood bond? The one where you pay for > a bleed to a Methusaleh and later may force them to pay for a bleed to you? > In a > 2 player game, this seems to be the best use for the card (blood bond > your predator if your prey ever bleeds them). However, this would force > your predator to "bleed" themselves. Is this an exception? Or would you > simply not consider this "bleeding"? > > -James > The card of which you speak is the Major Boon: M:OOT Play this card to take another Methuselah's blood pool loss due to a bleed (must be at least 1 blood). Modifiers to the bleed can be played after you play this card. In the future you can force the rescued Methuselah to take a loss due to a bleed against you. This boon is then burned. Nowhere in the text of the card does it state or imply that it cannot be used against the methuselah you rescued, so I would have to say that it is an exception to the rule. The 'deflection' type cards I was referring to are: Deflection, Telepathic Misdirection...and maybe a couple of others which are MINION cards, not master. Basically, what I am trying to say is that minions are not powerful enough to redirect a bleed to the bleeding methuselah. However, MASTERS (methuselahs) are powerful enough.

Mike Kelly

The bleed is NOT being redirected. The other Methuselah is being forced to pay for the bleed. YOU are still the one being bled, HE is the one paying.