Q: Flesh of Marble

If I play Flesh of Marble at superior at the beginning of a round, and during that round my vampire has 3 normal and two aggravated damage dealt to it (in the same strike, if it matters), does my vampire take one normal or one aggravated damage?

[ quoted text not captured ] Officially, he takes only one of the damage - whichever one you want (so, in the case where you take a mix of normal and agg, you may choose to take one normal damage *or* one aggravated damage). Fun, huh? -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Virtue is the failure to http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | achieve vice. Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |

David Gausebeck wrote: > > If I play Flesh of Marble at superior at the beginning of a round, and during > that round my vampire has 3 normal and two aggravated damage dealt to it (in the > same strike, if it matters), does my vampire take one normal or one aggravated > damage? Under V:TES rules the aggravated damage is applied last in regard to damage prevention. With 3 points normal and 2 points aggro you would need 5 points of damage prevention to avoid taking at least 1 point aggro. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- pheersum inhabits the mortal shell of eric schultheis. one channels mailto://phee...@sb.net. pheersum manifests at http://www.sb.net/pheersum/Pheerpage.htm . nature says,"go ahead, have as many babies as you want. something will eat them." ---------------------------------------------------------------------

Pheersum <phee...@sb.net> writes: >David Gausebeck wrote: >> If I play Flesh of Marble at superior at the beginning of a round, and during >> that round my vampire has 3 normal and two aggravated damage dealt to it (in the >> same strike, if it matters), does my vampire take one normal or one aggravated >> damage? >Under V:TES rules the aggravated damage is applied last in regard to >damage prevention. With 3 points normal and 2 points aggro you would >need 5 points of damage prevention to avoid taking at least 1 point >aggro. The normal is applied before the agg if the damage is done at the same time, correct. However, *all* of the unprevented damage is applied before you use FoMarble to shake off all but one. (This is why you can't play prevention cards to reduce that final 1 to zero - the damage is already applied). So, when you check FoMarble, you have 3 normal and 2 agg applied to you. You reduce that to one (whichever one of the five you want - one of the three normal *or* one of the two agg). Reference: From: aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad Subject: Re: Flesh of Marble Date: 14 May 1996 20:30:50 GMT Message-ID: <4naqhq$7...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> Um, the wording of superior Flesh of Marble is perfectly clear: it lifts the restriction against preventing aggravated damage. Yes, this means that if you take a mix of aggravated and non-agg damage, the unprevented point can come from the non-agg part, but this is really no different from using Skin of Rock to prevent the agg damage, and taking the rest of it. Aggravated damage is always applied last, to maximize the chances of burning the vampire; nothing says it is, or should be, prevented last. Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) writes: >Reference: > From: aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) > Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad > Subject: Re: Flesh of Marble > Date: 14 May 1996 20:30:50 GMT > Message-ID: <4naqhq$7...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> > Um, the wording of superior Flesh of Marble is perfectly clear: it lifts > the restriction against preventing aggravated damage. Yes, this means that > if you take a mix of aggravated and non-agg damage, the unprevented point > can come from the non-agg part, but this is really no different from using > Skin of Rock to prevent the agg damage, and taking the rest of it. > Aggravated > damage is always applied last, to maximize the chances of burning the > vampire; > nothing says it is, or should be, prevented last. Well, this odd little ruling leads me to think up the following non-pathological case: Vamp A and Vamp B are in combat. B is Quinton who's rushed A with Uncontolled Rage (Total: 4 agg hand damage). A plays superior FoMarble. B plays superior Drawing out the Beast. No maneuvers. A strikes: hands for two (using the Beast's +1 hand damage). B strikes: hands for five agg. Strikes resolve. (B burns two blood to heal.) A receives 4 agg and prevents none. 4 agg is applied. FoMarble can reduce the total damage in a round to one. This leaves 1 agg. to be paid for (to prevent destruction). A burns one blood and is about to go to torpor. Since A is about to go to torpor, the round is ending, so superior Beast deals one (normal) damage to A. FoMarble can reduce the total damage in a round to one. A mix of damage is now taken, and (according to WotC) the vampire can choose which damage to take. A chooses to take only the normal damage, naturally, and is no longer going to torpor. Since A is still ready, the round isn't over, and superior Beast hasn't yet dealt any damage, so FoMarble only has 4 agg damage from which to choose. ----- Any would-be Net.Rep's out there want to clear this up? (Without the "ruling" applied to it, the original Jyhad wording reducing normal and preventing agg wouldn't lead to this catch-22 situation.) [ quoted text not captured ]

L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: : A burns one blood and is about to go to torpor. : Since A is about to go to torpor, the round is ending, so superior Beast : deals one (normal) damage to A. : FoMarble can reduce the total damage in a round to one. : A mix of damage is now taken, and (according to WotC) the vampire can choose : which damage to take. : A chooses to take only the normal damage, naturally, and is no longer going : to torpor. : Since A is still ready, the round isn't over, and superior Beast hasn't : yet dealt any damage, so FoMarble only has 4 agg damage from which to : choose. : : ----- : Any would-be Net.Rep's out there want to clear this up? My seat of the pants ruling is that you can't undo an effect already resolved. Since the damage has already affected the vampire, you can't undo it. I suppose you could rule that the vamp has already taken 1 damage, he dosen't have to take the additional point, though I'd expect a "per damage resolution phase" eratta to be added as soon as this little gem comes up to the Rules Team. Your opinions, Mawthter? :) Joe, Rulemonger Apprentice -- Joe Helfrich, Managing Editor, CPI | I think the past/the past is behind us j...@dimensional.com | be real confusing if not/but anyway http://www.dimensional.com/~jbh | --Blues Traveller "But Anyway" I will not go quietly into that good night.

In article <53isgg$2...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) wrote: > Vamp A and Vamp B are in combat. > B is Quinton who's rushed A with Uncontolled Rage > (Total: 4 agg hand damage). > > A plays superior FoMarble. > B plays superior Drawing out the Beast. > No maneuvers. > A strikes: hands for two (using the Beast's +1 hand damage). > B strikes: hands for five agg. > Strikes resolve. (B burns two blood to heal.) > A receives 4 agg and prevents none. 4 agg is applied. > FoMarble can reduce the total damage in a round to one. > This leaves 1 agg. to be paid for (to prevent destruction). > A burns one blood and is about to go to torpor. > Since A is about to go to torpor, the round is ending, so superior Beast > deals one (normal) damage to A. Since A took the one agg. he goes to torpor ending the round, then he takes one normal from Drawing out the Beast "..suffers 1 damage AFTER each round..." > FoMarble can reduce the total damage in a round to one. In a round, not after. > A mix of damage is now taken, and (according to WotC) the vampire can choose > which damage to take. The mix doesnt occur since the damage from DotB occurs after the round. -- Phaedrus *Deep in the human unconsciousness is a *pervasive need for a logical universe that e-mail: *makes sence. But the real universe is always Herbe...@osu.edu *one step beyond logic. * *Shit happens is deeper than it sounds.

herbe...@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu (Phaedrus) writes: >In article <53isgg$2...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. >Scott Johnson) wrote: >> Vamp A and Vamp B are in combat. >> B is Quinton who's rushed A with Uncontolled Rage >> (Total: 4 agg hand damage). >> >> A plays superior FoMarble. >> B plays superior Drawing out the Beast. >> No maneuvers. >> A strikes: hands for two (using the Beast's +1 hand damage). >> B strikes: hands for five agg. >> Strikes resolve. (B burns two blood to heal.) >> A receives 4 agg and prevents none. 4 agg is applied. >> FoMarble can reduce the total damage in a round to one. >> This leaves 1 agg. to be paid for (to prevent destruction). >> A burns one blood and is about to go to torpor. >> Since A is about to go to torpor, the round is ending, so superior Beast >> deals one (normal) damage to A. >Since A took the one agg. he goes to torpor ending the round, then he >takes one normal from Drawing out the Beast "..suffers 1 damage AFTER each >round..." Very good point. However, the damage has been ruled to come at the end of the round (not after): From: aa...@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) Newsgroups: rec.games.deckmaster Subject: NEW: Rulings summary for Jyhad Date: 9 Nov 1994 13:11:24 -0800 Message-ID: <39rdts$s...@perv.hal.COM> Drawing out the Beast: Does 1 damage at end of round, regardless of how the round ends. Original card text would mean that the damage from Beast wouldn't be aggravated in a Dawn Operation if the combat was terminated due to an Earth Meld. It also leads to a new phase of combat between rounds. I would actually prefer this ruling - since it allieviates the catch-22, but... Currently nothing happens in combat that doesn't happen during a round of combat (it either happends at the end of a round, at the beginning of a round, or in the middle - never between rounds). Beast does its damage during combat, and after the round is after the combat in this case. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Hard work has a future payoff. http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | Laziness pays off now. [ quoted text not captured ]