Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com#
+1 str each strike, with an optional addtional every round
Does this mean that because the text is listed as one complete
sentence, that you must strike with the sword first to gain the
additional?
T
LSJ: !brujah sword of Judgement
The Lasombra#
"Talonz51" <Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3c8c3a5d.272981387@news...
[ quoted text not captured ]
No.
Effective card text: "Strike: hand damage +1. The BruAnti with this
equipment gets an optional additional strike each round of combat."
[LSJ 970821].
Also:
----
> 1. Rictor had the Sword of Judgement and Bang Nakh. Could he use the additional strike from the
> Sword but do the strike with Bang Nakh (or something else)? The card (and the errata) seem to
> just say that the Sword gives an additional strike.
Yes.
----
[LSJ 990430]
Carpe noctem.
Lasombra
http://www.TheLasombra.com
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com#
On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 05:16:54 +0000 (UTC), "The Lasombra"
<thela...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Talonz51" <Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3c8c3a5d.272981387@news...
>
>
>> +1 str each strike, with an optional addtional every round
>
>> Does this mean that because the text is listed as one complete
>> sentence, that you must strike with the sword first to gain the
>> additional?
>
>No.
>
>Effective card text: "Strike: hand damage +1. The BruAnti with this
>equipment gets an optional additional strike each round of combat."
>[LSJ 970821].
>
>
Just a note, that doesnt match current cardtext on the WW site;
"Strength+1 damage each strike, with an optional additional strike
each round. Only usable by a Brujah antitribu.
"
Were the two effects seperated by a period I would agree, but the
comma seems to indicate otherwise and thus the question. So an update
to the cardtext would seem to be in order.
T
[ quoted text not captured ]
LSJ#
Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote:
> "Strength+1 damage each strike, with an optional additional strike
> each round. Only usable by a Brujah antitribu.
> "
>
> Were the two effects seperated by a period I would agree, but the
> comma seems to indicate otherwise and thus the question. So an update
> to the cardtext would seem to be in order.
Not necessary.
Card text indicates no connection between the strike and the additional
strike.
--
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/