Nest of Eagles [LotN:C/PA2]
Cardtype: Reaction
Clan: Assamite
Reduce a bleed against you by 1. If the acting minion is a vampire
with capacity less than 6 or an ally, reduce the bleed by 3. Not
usable if the acting minion is an Assamite or wraith or has flight
[FLIGHT].
#1. So if a vampire with capacity less than 6 or an ally is bleeding
you and you play Nest of Eagles, the bleed is reduced by a total of 4,
right? The first clause reduces it by one, and then the second
(conditional) clause reduces it by another 3. Since the second clause
does not replace the first sentence (no "instead") it seems like both
would trigger, reducing the bleed by 4. Correct? Was that the original
intent?
Open Dossier [LotN:C]
Cardtype: Reaction
Cost: 1 blood
Only usable by a vampire who has been chosen for a contract on the
acting minion. This vampire attempts to block with +2 intercept and
gets an optional maneuver in the resulting combat if successful.
Usable by a tapped vampire even if intercept is not yet needed.
#2. The last sentence seems ambiguous. It could be interpreted as
stating a tapped vampire who could play Open Dossier (i.e. having
already played a Wake) can play OD even if intercept is not needed. Or
it could mean that a tapped vampire can play Open Dossier and block
with it (without needing an additional Wake) - functioning like a
Second Tradition or Read the Winds.
One might ask what the purpose of the former interpretation would be.
You could play it to cycle, or if you just wanted the maneuver in
combat.
Most cards that have "usable by a tapped vampire" seem to place it at
the beginning of the text box (e.g. Fillip, Provision of the Silsila,
Army of Apparitions). Also, most cards that allow stealth or intercept
"even if...not yet needed" usually separate it out with a semi-colon,
comma, or parentheses.
For example, if it said "Usable by a tapped vampire, even if intercept
is not yet needed" then it would be clear that the card can be "used
by a tapped vampire" (without a Wake), and the not yet needed portion
is just modifying the main clause.
But as written, it seems to simply allow tapped vampires who can
already play reaction cards (via Wake), to play it under additional
circumstances (when intercept is not yet needed).
Can someone with an English degree help clarify?
Thanks!
echia...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Nest of Eagles [LotN:C/PA2]
> Cardtype: Reaction
> Clan: Assamite
> Reduce a bleed against you by 1. If the acting minion is a vampire
> with capacity less than 6 or an ally, reduce the bleed by 3. Not
> usable if the acting minion is an Assamite or wraith or has flight
> [FLIGHT].
>
>
>
> #1. So if a vampire with capacity less than 6 or an ally is bleeding
> you and you play Nest of Eagles, the bleed is reduced by a total of 4,
> right? The first clause reduces it by one, and then the second
> (conditional) clause reduces it by another 3. Since the second clause
> does not replace the first sentence (no "instead") it seems like both
> would trigger, reducing the bleed by 4. Correct? Was that the original
> intent?
No. 3.
> Open Dossier [LotN:C]
> Cardtype: Reaction
> Cost: 1 blood
> Only usable by a vampire who has been chosen for a contract on the
> acting minion. This vampire attempts to block with +2 intercept and
> gets an optional maneuver in the resulting combat if successful.
> Usable by a tapped vampire even if intercept is not yet needed.
>
>
>
> #2. The last sentence seems ambiguous. It could be interpreted as
> stating a tapped vampire who could play Open Dossier (i.e. having
> already played a Wake) can play OD even if intercept is not needed. Or
> it could mean that a tapped vampire can play Open Dossier and block
> with it (without needing an additional Wake) - functioning like a
> Second Tradition or Read the Winds.
It works as written: it is usable by a tapped vampire.
> One might ask what the purpose of the former interpretation would be.
> You could play it to cycle, or if you just wanted the maneuver in
> combat.
>
> Most cards that have "usable by a tapped vampire" seem to place it at
> the beginning of the text box (e.g. Fillip, Provision of the Silsila,
> Army of Apparitions). Also, most cards that allow stealth or intercept
> "even if...not yet needed" usually separate it out with a semi-colon,
> comma, or parentheses.
>
> For example, if it said "Usable by a tapped vampire, even if intercept
> is not yet needed" then it would be clear that the card can be "used
> by a tapped vampire" (without a Wake), and the not yet needed portion
> is just modifying the main clause.
>
> But as written, it seems to simply allow tapped vampires who can
> already play reaction cards (via Wake), to play it under additional
> circumstances (when intercept is not yet needed).
>
> Can someone with an English degree help clarify?
No English degree necessary.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Eric,
I have an English degree and LSJ is Correct.
best -
chris
--
Super Fun Cards
http://stores.ebay.com/superfuncards/
auct...@superfuncards.com
On Oct 15, 8:30 am, "echiang...@yahoo.com" <echiang...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Nest of Eagles [LotN:C/PA2]
> Cardtype: Reaction
> Clan: Assamite
> Reduce a bleed against you by 1. If the acting minion is a vampire
> with capacity less than 6 or an ally, reduce the bleed by 3. Not
> usable if the acting minion is an Assamite or wraith or has flight
> [FLIGHT].
>
> #1. So if a vampire with capacity less than 6 or an ally is bleeding
> you and you play Nest of Eagles, the bleed is reduced by a total of 4,
> right? The first clause reduces it by one, and then the second
> (conditional) clause reduces it by another 3. Since the second clause
> does not replace the first sentence (no "instead") it seems like both
> would trigger, reducing the bleed by 4. Correct? Was that the original
> intent?
If it were to reduce the bleed by 4, it would say "an additional 3" or
similar.
>
> Open Dossier [LotN:C]
> Cardtype: Reaction
> Cost: 1 blood
> Only usable by a vampire who has been chosen for a contract on the
> acting minion. This vampire attempts to block with +2 intercept and
> gets an optional maneuver in the resulting combat if successful.
> Usable by a tapped vampire even if intercept is not yet needed.
>
> #2. The last sentence seems ambiguous. It could be interpreted as
> stating a tapped vampire who could play Open Dossier (i.e. having
> already played a Wake) can play OD even if intercept is not needed. Or
> it could mean that a tapped vampire can play Open Dossier and block
> with it (without needing an additional Wake) - functioning like a
> Second Tradition or Read the Winds.
>
If the card required an untapped vampire or an effect that allowed the
playing of cards as though untapped (like WWEF), it wouldn't need to
state "Usable by a tapped vampire" at all. It would default to the
rulebook governing the playing of reaction cards.
-Fine Arts degree with an emphasis in oil painting and a minor in
Graphic Arts