direct intervention question

i was wondering: a minion attempts an action from a card. the card is burned with direct intervention. is the minion considered to have attempted the action or can he attempt it again by using a second copy of the card? same problem with action modifiers: modifier x is burned by direct intervention. can the minion use the modifier x again on the same action? thanks pallando -- __________________________________________________ lt. cmdr. pallando of g.a.b. black ice team G.A.B. was started to fight Bad Traders. Check out our website: http://www.gabtraders.com/ Join if you like.

pallando wrote: > > i was wondering: a minion attempts an action from a card. the card is burned > with direct intervention. is the minion considered to have attempted the > action or can he attempt it again by using a second copy of the card? He attempted it, sure. But that won't prevent him from attempting it again, even if you're using the No Repeat Action special floor rule for V:EKN constructed tourneys. The NRA rule only prevents him from performing the same action twice - it only "kicks in" when the action resolves (successfully or not). > same problem with action modifiers: modifier x is burned by direct > intervention. can the minion use the modifier x again on the same action? The rule on modifiers is that a minion can play no more than one of a given modifier on a given action. DI is only usable when the card is played, so the modifier must have been played (and therefore the same minion cannot play it again). -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

thanks for the quick answer. pallando -- __________________________________________________ lt. cmdr. pallando of g.a.b. black ice team G.A.B. was started to fight Bad Traders. Check out our website: http://www.gabtraders.com/ Join if you like. LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: 39ED94B6...@white-wolf.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39ED94B6...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > pallando wrote: > > > > i was wondering: a minion attempts an action from a card. the card is burned > > with direct intervention. is the minion considered to have attempted the > > action or can he attempt it again by using a second copy of the card? > > He attempted it, sure. > But that won't prevent him from attempting it again, even if you're using > the No Repeat Action special floor rule for V:EKN constructed tourneys. > The NRA rule only prevents him from performing the same action twice - it > only "kicks in" when the action resolves (successfully or not). > > > same problem with action modifiers: modifier x is burned by direct > > intervention. can the minion use the modifier x again on the same action? > > The rule on modifiers is that a minion can play no more than one of > a given modifier on a given action. DI is only usable when the card > is played, so the modifier must have been played (and therefore the same > minion cannot play it again). > Ok. This doesn't seem to follow through on my mind. The only way a card can be "Directly Intervened" upon with Direct Intervention is if an attempt to play a card is performed initally. From all the talk that has occurred in the past on the card, it seemed that when someone DI's a card, it was played but it was never really played as it was DI'ed. Thus, you able to attempt the same action that you had initially attempted prior. I would have figured the same logic would have applied with action modifiers as I certainly wouldn't play a DI on the "hope" that the opposing player is going to play an action modifier. So, if during a political referendum, the acting player plays Bewitching Oration and another player DI's it, the acting player is now barred from playing another. Seems a little fuzzy in my mind that the DI does one thing for action with the NRA rule but it can not do the same thing with modifiers when both prevent duplication of cards played for one minion during one turn. Michael Eichler Prince of Ramstein > -- > LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. > Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: > http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ > -- Worry comes from the belief you are powerless. (So get in there and kick some butt!) Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In another analogy: DI is a "Card Cancel'er" (exception being Master cards as you have Sudden Reversal for that). In order to cancel a card, it first has to be played by someone otherwise you can not cancel it's effect. [ quoted text not captured ]

Ramsteiner wrote: > > In another analogy: DI is a "Card Cancel'er" (exception being Master > cards as you have Sudden Reversal for that). Also excepted: crypt cards, which cannot be canceled (given the current card set). > In order to cancel a card, it first has to be played by someone > otherwise you can not cancel it's effect. Correct. [ quoted text not captured ]

Ramsteiner wrote: > Ok. This doesn't seem to follow through on my mind. The only way a > card can be "Directly Intervened" upon with Direct Intervention is if > an attempt to play a card is performed initally. From all the talk Not merely an "attempt to play". DI is played when the card to be canceled is "played", by card text. > that has occurred in the past on the card, it seemed that when someone > DI's a card, it was played but it was never really played as it was It was really played. Its effect was canceled, but the card was still played. > DI'ed. Thus, you able to attempt the same action that you had > initially attempted prior. I would have figured the same logic would The statement that precedes "thus the NRA rule doesn't prohibit performing the action with another copy of the card" is something that notes that NRA only prohibits the same minion from *performing* the same action twice in a turn. NRA has nothing to do with whether a card was played or not. > have applied with action modifiers as I certainly wouldn't play a DI on > the "hope" that the opposing player is going to play an action modifier. The logic applied to NRA doesn't result in a parallel ruling for action modifiers, since the restriction on action modifiers ("played") doesn't parallel the NRA restriction on actions ("performed"). > So, if during a political referendum, the acting player plays > Bewitching Oration and another player DI's it, the acting player is now > barred from playing another. Seems a little fuzzy in my mind that the Correct. He is barred from playing another whether the first is canceled or not - all that is important is that he played the first. > DI does one thing for action with the NRA rule but it can not do the > same thing with modifiers when both prevent duplication of cards played > for one minion during one turn. DI does the same thing in both cases - cancels the card (without erasing the fact that the card was played). [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39EDB457...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Ramsteiner wrote: > > > > In another analogy: DI is a "Card Cancel'er" (exception being Master > > cards as you have Sudden Reversal for that). > > Also excepted: crypt cards, which cannot be canceled (given the current > card set). Given the current card set? Are there rumors about possible "crypt cancellers" in the forthcoming sets?? > > > In order to cancel a card, it first has to be played by someone > > otherwise you can not cancel it's effect. > > Correct. > > -- > LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES 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 ]

"guntherbl" <gunt...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8skqu8$9jb$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > LSJ wrote; > > Also excepted: crypt cards, which cannot be canceled (given the current > > card set). > Given the current card set? Are there rumors about possible "crypt > cancellers" in the forthcoming sets?? Not likely. LSJ just usually answers that way to be all cryptic and shit. Or because he knows that nothing's ever final. One or the other... Xian -- I'd tell the world and save my soul, But rain falls down and I feel cold. A cold that sleeps within my heart, It tears the earth and sun apart. --_Shellshock_, New Order www.waste.org/~xian

Ok. I can see this working now for the Action Modifiers. Initially, I have to turn off the NRA aspect as it only applies to Tournament rules, plus it deals with actions alone. In the original rules, NRA does not exist, and DI is written with that in mind. Thus, no clause was written concerning Action Modifiers because they can not be repeated once played per the rules of the game. Now, while I have that one aspect down in my mind and I have tried to explain it to some of the players within my group, the NRA seems to be a big sticking point. After pulling down all the information concerning it, I am inclined to agree with them. NRA - A given minion may not repeat an action, by action type, in a single turn (whether the first action was successful or not). The defined "action types" are the ones defined in the rulebook: bleed, hunt, equip, employ retainer, recruit ally, political action, leave torpor, rescue a vampire from torpor, and diablerize a vampire in torpor. Direct Intervention - Master: out-of-turn. Burn a minion card as it is played. Any blood or pool cost burned for that card is retrieved from the blood bank by the vampire or Methuselah who played it. If the burned card was an action card, the acting minion remains untapped. If the card was a strike card, the minion chooses another strike. Summary of the Course of Action - 1. The action is declared, and the card used for the action (action card, equipment, etc.) is played, if any. Tap the minion who is taking the action (the acting minion). 2. The target Methuselah may try to block the action with any of her ready untapped minions. If the action doesn't target another Methuselah (or targets more than one), then the minions of the prey and predator may try to block. 3. If one attempt to block is unsuccessful, another attempt can be made. If no more attempts are made, then the action is successful, and the cost of the action is paid. If a block attempt is successful, then blocking minion taps and enters combat with the acting minion. The sticking point is the actual definition of whether or not an action is successful and not-successful prior to Block/No-Block segment of an action's life. In the case of Delaying Tactics, it depends upon the Political Action's success before it can be played. Direct Intervention burns a card after it is played. And while you state that burning a card cancels it's effect, it does not remove the fact that the card was played. Hence, when an Action Modifier is DI'ed you can not replay it. But with an Action under the NRA rule for tournament play, you can as the action was unresolved? That is not what NRA states. An Action Type can not be repeated by a given minion in a single turn whether it was successful or not. Direct Intervention seems to have made the action unsuccessful as it had to be played in order for the DI to work in the first place. If I am completely off-base here, please "explain" it to me so I can in turn explain as well. Thank you 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 ]

[ quoted text not captured ] It is not successful or unsuccessful prior to being resolved (successfully or not). It is merely being attempted at that point. Delaying Tactics can only be played during the referendum, so requires that the action be successful before it can be played. > Direct Intervention burns a card after it is played. And while you > state that burning a card cancels it's effect, it does not remove the > fact that the card was played. Hence, when an Action Modifier is DI'ed > you can not replay it. But with an Action under the NRA rule for > tournament play, you can as the action was unresolved? That is not > what NRA states. An Action Type can not be repeated by a given minion > in a single turn whether it was successful or not. Direct Intervention > seems to have made the action unsuccessful as it had to be played in > order for the DI to work in the first place. A DI'ed action was not taken/performed/made. So performing it later won't consitute "repeating" it, since it wasn't performed in the first place. DI doesn't make the action unsuccessful. Likewise, Delaying Tactics doesn't make the political action unsuccessful (you can't follow a DT with a Political Backlash, for example). Playing a card and taking an action are not equivalent. > If I am completely off-base here, please "explain" it to me so I can in > turn explain as well. The NRA rule works like this: during the resolution of an action (as in section 6.2.3 of the rulebook), the acting minion at that point (who may or may not be the minion who played the action card - the action may have been Masked) becomes unable to perform the same type of action again for the remainder of the turn. If you don't get to the resolution, then the minion is not restricted by the NRA rule. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: > "guntherbl" <gunt...@my-deja.com> > > LSJ wrote; > > > crypt cards cannot be canceled (given the current card set). > > Given the current card set? Are there rumors about possible "crypt > > cancellers" in the forthcoming sets?? > > Not likely. LSJ just usually answers that way to be all cryptic [...] > or because he knows that nothing's ever final. One or the other... Actually, I was trying to be complete, not cryptic. There's nothing special about a crypt card that prohibits it from being canceled. It just so happens that there are no cards or effects in the current set that can cancel a crypt card. Contrast with the absolute rule that a minion you control can never enter combat with another minion you control, regardless of the card set. -- 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 ]

On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, guntherbl wrote: > > Also excepted: crypt cards, which cannot be canceled (given the current > > card set). > Given the current card set? Are there rumors about possible "crypt > cancellers" in the forthcoming sets?? I think the implication is more that there is nothing in the Rules to prevent such, and th at such a card *could* exist, rather than *does* or *will* exist. -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "And all the while I'm thinking things that I can never share with him. I'm a bundle of confusion, yet it has a strange appeal. Did it all begin with him and the way he makes me feel?"

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:8smp16$qta$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > Actually, I was trying to be complete, not cryptic. I know. :) It's just much more fun to imagine that you do it to counfound people, in a Silent Bob-esque sort of way. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Contrast with the absolute rule that a minion you control can never > enter combat with another minion you control, regardless of the card > set. I think that one is a bit stiff. If your guys been hit with Anathema it'd be handy to take the pool for yourself. It would also be neat to be able to introduce Charnas to a magnum...

In article <39EEDD8B...@white-wolf.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] > LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. > Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: > http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ > Hmm so if vampire X plays Computer Hacking and vampire Y Masks it, then vampire X can take the same action again in that round since vampire Y counts as the acting vampire for the first CH? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8sv59j$7bt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, cantila <rogc...@student.luth.se> wrote: > Hmm so if vampire X plays Computer Hacking and vampire Y Masks it, > then vampire X can take the same action again in that round since > vampire Y counts as the acting vampire for the first CH? Yes, vampire X can then bleed, as it has not taken any actions. Vampire X never had a bleed blocked, or successful, or reduced, and is untapped by the Mask of vampire Y, so it may bleed again. Carpe Noctem. Lasombra http://lasombra.tripod.com http://legbiter.tripod.com [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, cantila wrote: > Hmm so if vampire X plays Computer Hacking and vampire Y Masks it, then > vampire X can take the same action again in that round since vampire Y > counts as the acting vampire for the first CH? The Computer Hack with vampire X never resolved, so Vampire X has not taken a bleed action that turn. So they may bleed that turn, under NRA. [ quoted text not captured ]