These questions are not in the FAQ or updates...
o The rule books say that "Aggravated damage ... Thus the vampire loses
no blood, unless more than 1 aggravated damage is received. In this case,
the excess is paid in blood. ... If the vampire does not have the blood
to heal excess aggravated damage, then it is ... burned"
What happens when:
1. Vampire with 0 blood is dealt 1 aggravated damage,
2. Vampire with is sent to torpor with normal damage, then
receives 1 aggravated damage(via pulled fangs)
Pulled fangs only does 1 aggravated damage. Does this mean that there
is no 'excess' to be paid in blood?
When does the pulled fangs resolve? Does it 'fizzle' since the vampire
is already going to torpor? Does it burn the vampire? This really needs
to be answered since when using pulled fangs the target vampire is
often beaten into torpor beforehand, and pulled fangs is a very popular
card.
o Spying Mission says, "Instead of removing pool from the Methusalah
you are bleeding, put this card on the acting vampire, next time..."
But is the bleed counted as successful? Or does it fizzle just like
it has been telepathically countered?
Thanks in advance for any clarifications.
--
ME: Univ. of Waterloo YOU: Huh? o=> ME: in Canada, YOU: Huh?
ME: in Ontario, YOU: Huh? /o/ ME: up north! YOU: Aaaaaahhh...
ME: near Toronto, YOU: Huh? ==o Huh??
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
l2w...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca ( Lei Wang ) writes:
> What happens when:> 1. Vampire with 0 blood is dealt 1 aggravated damage,
He goes to torpor (rulebook).
> 2. Vampire with is sent to torpor with normal damage, then
> receives 1 aggravated damage(via pulled fangs)
He goes to torpor: the 1 agg has no effect, since he was on his way to
torpor anyhow (the vamp still took 1 agg, which re-sent him to torpor).
> Pulled fangs only does 1 aggravated damage. Does this mean that there
>is no 'excess' to be paid in blood?
Yes. 1 agg never costs blood.
> When does the pulled fangs resolve? Does it 'fizzle' since the vampire
>is already going to torpor? Does it burn the vampire? This really needs
>to be answered since when using pulled fangs the target vampire is
>often beaten into torpor beforehand, and pulled fangs is a very popular
>card.
I always resolves when played. (Assuming you've met the requirements for
playing it).
> o Spying Mission says, "Instead of removing pool from the Methusalah
>you are bleeding, put this card on the acting vampire, next time..."
> But is the bleed counted as successful? Or does it fizzle just like
>it has been telepathically countered?
It is a successful action, but not a successful bleed - you do not get the
Edge. (Just as if Tel.Counter had been played, yes).
l2w...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca ( Lei Wang ) wrote:
> What happens when:
>
> 1. Vampire with 0 blood is dealt 1 aggravated damage,> 2. Vampire with is sent to torpor with normal damage, then
> receives 1 aggravated damage(via pulled fangs)
Peace Lei,
1. The vampire goes to torpor, because s/h/it took one aggr dam, just
like normal.
2. The vampire is in torpor with Pulled Fangs card hanging on s/h/it.
One aggr dam cannot destroy/burn a vampire. It always takes at least two
points of aggr dam to burn a vamp. That is: a vampire must take X+2 aggr
damage, in a single strike, to be burned, where X is the current available
blood on that vampire.
> o Spying Mission says, "Instead of removing pool from the Methusalah
> you are bleeding, put this card on the acting vampire, next time..."
>
> But is the bleed counted as successful? Or does it fizzle just like
> it has been telepathically countered?
Good question, I'll answer, but I expect to be corrected. Bleeds that
do zero pool are NOT considered successful, therefore I believe that a
successful Spying Mission is NOT considered a successful bleed.
Nil carborundum illigitimi,
James R. McClure Jr.
The OS/2 Apostle
<insert disclaimer here>
In article <3lbmur$k...@redwood.cs.scarolina.edu>,
sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) wrote:
> l2w...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca ( Lei Wang ) writes:
>
>
> > 2. Vampire with is sent to torpor with normal damage, then
> > receives 1 aggravated damage(via pulled fangs)> He goes to torpor: the 1 agg has no effect, since he was on his way to
> torpor anyhow (the vamp still took 1 agg, which re-sent him to torpor).
>
> > Pulled fangs only does 1 aggravated damage. Does this mean that there
> >is no 'excess' to be paid in blood?
> Yes. 1 agg never costs blood.
>
you're probably right on this one, but i have to disagree anyway. my
interpretation of agg damage is that 1 sends you to torpor (obviously)
because it sends the vamp into shock- no blood is lost because no damage
is being HEALED, which is what losing a blood means. if a vamp is going to
torpor already, and then agg. damage is dealt (pulled fangs e.g.) i
interpret this to be EXCESS agg. damage- which cannot be healed (no blood
on vamp) therefore, the EXCESS damage burns it. if a vamp has zero blood
on it when it gets hit by a flame thrower (obviously burnt) the first
point sends it to torpor (like 1 pt. of normal damage), the other agg.
damage burns it.
just my interpretation/ our house rules.
harpua
> > > Pulled fangs only does 1 aggravated damage. Does this mean that there
> > >is no 'excess' to be paid in blood?
> > Yes. 1 agg never costs blood.
> >
>
> you're probably right on this one, but i have to disagree anyway. my
> interpretation of agg damage is that 1 sends you to torpor (obviously)
> because it sends the vamp into shock- no blood is lost because no damage
> is being HEALED, which is what losing a blood means. if a vamp is going to
> torpor already, and then agg. damage is dealt (pulled fangs e.g.) i
> interpret this to be EXCESS agg. damage- which cannot be healed (no blood
> on vamp) therefore, the EXCESS damage burns it. if a vamp has zero blood
> on it when it gets hit by a flame thrower (obviously burnt) the first
> point sends it to torpor (like 1 pt. of normal damage), the other agg.
> damage burns it.
>
> just my interpretation/ our house rules.
>
> harpua
>
>
That would make Gangrels TOO good in combat. It's not that hard for
Gangrels to do some extra normal damage in combat (Wolf Companions,
Murder of Crows, etc.), but this eliminates the need for them to do 2
aggro damage to burn a vamp. With this interpretation, anybody with
protean and a wolf companion can burn a vamp. That's too easy. Also
requires either +1 intercept to nail a hunting vamp or presses, but
that's easy too.
---------
Paul Schaaf
sch...@u.washington.edu
In article <adm4.1615...@po.cwru.edu>,
Aaron Mandelbaum <ad...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>>> o Spying Mission says, "Instead of removing pool from the Methusalah
>>>you are bleeding, put this card on the acting vampire, next time..."
>>> But is the bleed counted as successful? Or does it fizzle just like
>>>it has been telepathically countered?>>Not sure how to answer the question without some context.>
>Do you get the edge?
No, the bleed is not considered successful unless blood is lost,
so you don't get the Edge for a spying mission.
| If you've got a hot lead on a new | *--Joe--*
| PC game, call the announce line at | js...@vt.edu
| ** csi...@discus.ise.vt.edu ** |
+-------------------------------------+----------------------------------
"Carnivores, oy!" -- Timon, TLK
In <3m3iqt$6...@solaris.cc.vt.edu> js...@discus.ise.vt.edu (Joseph Cochran) writes:
>In article <adm4.1615...@po.cwru.edu>,
>Aaron Mandelbaum <ad...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:>>>> o Spying Mission says, "Instead of removing pool from the Methusalah
>>>>you are bleeding, put this card on the acting vampire, next time..."
>>>> But is the bleed counted as successful? Or does it fizzle just like
>>>>it has been telepathically countered?>>>Not sure how to answer the question without some context.>>
>>Do you get the edge?> No, the bleed is not considered successful unless blood is lost,
>so you don't get the Edge for a spying mission.
Have you seen a ruling to that effect? The way I read the rules (12.3.1),
a bleed action is successful if it is unblocked. I don't see anything in
the rules that says the bleed action has to result in the loss of at least
one blood to be successful. On the contrary, Spying Mission reads "Only
usable when bleeding..." from which is pretty clear to me that the bleed is
successful.
Pat
oma...@convex.com
In article <3m3ptc$i...@zeppelin.convex.com>,
Patrick M. O'Malley <oma...@convex.com> wrote:
>> No, the bleed is not considered successful unless blood is lost,
>>so you don't get the Edge for a spying mission.>
>Have you seen a ruling to that effect? The way I read the rules (12.3.1),
>a bleed action is successful if it is unblocked. I don't see anything in
>the rules that says the bleed action has to result in the loss of at least
>one blood to be successful. On the contrary, Spying Mission reads "Only
>usable when bleeding..." from which is pretty clear to me that the bleed is
>successful.
The easiest way is to check out Telepathic Counter. "Note that
bleeds ending up at 0 or less are not considered successful."
A Spying Mission makes the current bleed end up at 0.
Anaglous with this is the DTR that a hunt which nets 0 blood is
also not considered successful.
[ quoted text not captured ]
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes:
>Lei Wang <l2w...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:>> o Spying Mission says, "Instead of removing pool from the Methusalah
>>you are bleeding, put this card on the acting vampire, next time..."
>> But is the bleed counted as successful? Or does it fizzle just like
>>it has been telepathically countered?>Not sure how to answer the question without some context.
Do you get the edge?
--
Aaron Mandelbaum