I'm acting out of turn with a malkavian and its maddness network, and
play dawn operation while being blocked. I play a trap and Drawing out
the Beast at superior. We get to the press step and we're all still
ready.
LSJ on the white wolf forums said:
"There is no way to end combat with an uncanceled press to continue
(with both
combatants still ready)."
I would now like to mention that if my minion plays a Rotschreck at
this point (during the press step while DotB is inflicting its damage,
which is agg), combat would be ending, during the press step, with an
uncanceled press to continue. Right?
So TT Tracking says "SUP: Only usable when both combatants are still
ready and combat is about to end (with no uncanceled press to
continue). Combat does not end; another round starts." so apparently,
in the above situation, we can't play TT tracking. Right? If so, I
rule!
~SV
vermillian wrote:
> So TT Tracking says "SUP: Only usable when both combatants are still
> ready and combat is about to end (with no uncanceled press to
> continue). Combat does not end; another round starts." so apparently,
> in the above situation, we can't play TT tracking. Right? If so, I
> rule!
DOtB is environmental damage. You can't Rotschreck it.
--Colin McGuigan
vermil...@yahoo.com (vermillian) wrote in message news:<f987c6cd.04061...@posting.google.com>...
> > I would now like to mention that if my minion plays a Rotschreck at
> this point (during the press step while DotB is inflicting its damage,
> which is agg), combat would be ending, during the press step, with an
> uncanceled press to continue. Right?
>
IANLSJ, but here's my take (I look forward to hear if I'm even close
to right)
1) Combat ends immediately when either minion goes to torpor under any
circumstances. So it's fairly common for the opposing minion to go to
torpor before press step (with uncancelled presses that WOULD happen,
if combat got that far).
2) by card text ...Put this card on a vampire when an opposing minion
attempts to inflict aggravated damage on him or her....
You can't play Rotschrek on Drawing out the Beast damage - since it is
not damage inflicted by your minion (it is environmental). However,
you can play Rotschrek on the declaration of your Dawn-Op aggro hand
strike. Simpler, yes (plus you don't take aggro hands in return)
D.
> You can't play Rotschrek on Drawing out the Beast damage - since it is
> not damage inflicted by your minion (it is environmental). However,
> you can play Rotschrek on the declaration of your Dawn-Op aggro hand
> strike. Simpler, yes (plus you don't take aggro hands in return)
Though if you drew the Rotschrek to replace the prevention of the
aggro hand, a bit frustrating (and probably why you would want to play
it on the DotB damage, though I agree that you can't).
Darby Keeney expounded:
> vermil...@yahoo.com (vermillian) wrote in message news:<f987c6cd.04061...@posting.google.com>...
> > > I would now like to mention that if my minion plays a Rotschreck at
> > this point (during the press step while DotB is inflicting its damage,
> > which is agg), combat would be ending, during the press step, with an
> > uncanceled press to continue. Right?
> >
>
> IANLSJ, but here's my take (I look forward to hear if I'm even close
> to right)
>
> 1) Combat ends immediately when either minion goes to torpor under any
> circumstances. So it's fairly common for the opposing minion to go to
> torpor before press step (with uncancelled presses that WOULD happen,
> if combat got that far).
There is no press to continue until the press step (even with trap -
check the text). A "press only useable to continute" is not a press to
continue.
"The Fanboy" <texas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f99d61c5.04061...@posting.google.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
you can play it on damage from pulled fangs though =)
Colin McGuigan <magu...@BGONEspeakeasy.net> wrote in message news:<CBOdnZBBz9J...@speakeasy.net>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Man that's dumb. I see where you're saying that it can't be done "Put
this card on a vampire when an opposing minion attempts to inflict
aggravated damage on him or her, whether the damage would be
successfully inflicted or not." Mainly the Opposing minion attempts to
inflict damage part... but, damnit, wasn't DotB played by the opposing
minion, hence, the opposing minion attempted to inflict ag. damage?
Similarly I suppose Rotschrek couldn't be played by a minion who had
Burst of Sunlight played on them, because they weren't the oposing
minion that was attempting to inflict ag. damage then, were they.
~SV
"Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<40cb49c1$0$16266$79c1...@nan-newsreader-04.noos.net>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
So THATS the way you end combat with an uncanceled press to continue
combat? If so, would TT Tracking be playabled then?
I think we need a comprehensive list of all cards that inflict
environmental damage... Perhaps thelasombra would post it on his
website, if compiled?
~SV
vermillian wrote:
> I think we need a comprehensive list of all cards that inflict
> environmental damage... Perhaps thelasombra would post it on his
> website, if compiled?
Comprehensive list:
All damage from a strike is "inflicted" by the striking minion.
All damage whose card text says that the minion "inflicts" the damage is
inflicted by the minion.
All other damage is environmental damage.
All cards that inflict such damage are cards that inflict environmental
damage.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
On 13 Jun 2004 08:52:36 -0700, vermil...@yahoo.com (vermillian)
wrote:
>I think we need a comprehensive list of all cards that inflict
>environmental damage... Perhaps thelasombra would post it on his
>website, if compiled?
This is covered in the FAQ, but is not comprehensive.
http://www.thelasombra.com/vtes_faq.htm
3.17 What is "environmental damage" versus "damage from a minion"?
Five cards require you to determine where damage comes from to
determine their effect. Blood of Acid, Disarm, Memories of Mortality,
Pulled Fangs, and Rotschreck require you to know if damage was
inflicted "by a minion" or if it was caused by another source.
Damage is only considered to have come from a minion if the damage is
from a strike or if an effect specifically states that the damage is
dealt by the minion. Damage from other effects is considered
"environmental", and has no particular source.
Damage done by retainers or cards like Carrion Crows and Weather
Control are not considered to be "damage from a minion", therefore
they are usually referred to as "environmental" damage.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beginings of a comprehensive list of environmental combat damage
effects:
the one extra damage from Aeron
damage done by Blood of Acid
damage from Breath of the Dragon on the minion who made the strike if
the range is close
damage from Burst of Sunlight on the minion who made the strike
Carrion Crows
damage from Dagon's Call during the press step
damage from Darkling Trickery played at superior Mytherceria
damage from superior Drawing out the Beast during the press step
damage from superior King of the Mountain
tapping Mariel - Lady Thunder
damage done by retainers
damage from inferior Thought's Betrayed
Weather Control
----------------------------------
Questionably environmental effects:
tapping Alejandro Aguirre (different card text than Mariel)
The Lasombra wrote:
> Questionably environmental effects:
> tapping Alejandro Aguirre (different card text than Mariel)
The damage from Alejandro's effect is inflicted by Alejandro.
[ quoted text not captured ]
LSJ wrote:
> The Lasombra wrote:
>>> Questionably environmental effects:
>> tapping Alejandro Aguirre (different card text than Mariel)>
>
> The damage from Alejandro's effect is inflicted by Alejandro.
>
Which might be environmental for combats in which he is not involved
then? COz ehm
> Comprehensive list:
>
> All damage from a strike is "inflicted" by the striking minion.
Not the case here, obviously.
> All damage whose card text says that the minion "inflicts" the damage
> is inflicted by the minion.
Might be the situation here, though not very likely in case of things
like rotschreck during a dawn operation by some other vamp X who is
blocked by vamp Y and having the Alejandro tap. Alejandro is not the
'opposing' minion there, so is his damage environmental to that
combat/rotschrek?
//Doc.
--
"Wees jezelf, er zijn al zoveel anderen" - Loesje
begin Your_MS_program_incorrectly_interprets_this_as_an_attachment.txt
The Doctor wrote:
> LSJ wrote:>> The damage from Alejandro's effect is inflicted by Alejandro.
>>> Which might be environmental for combats in which he is not involved
> then? COz ehm
No.
It damage inflicted by a minion who is not the opposing
minion, however.
"COz ehm"?
> > All damage whose card text says that the minion "inflicts" the damage
> > is inflicted by the minion.
>
> Might be the situation here, though not very likely in case of things
> like rotschreck during a dawn operation by some other vamp X who is
> blocked by vamp Y and having the Alejandro tap. Alejandro is not the
> 'opposing' minion there, so is his damage environmental to that
> combat/rotschrek?
No. It is not environmental.
But Alejandro is not the opposing minion, as required by Rotschreck.
But the damage is still not environmental. If Alejandro had a Memories
of Mortality, then the damage he inflicts with his special on an
ally in combat would be reduced to 0, for example.
[ quoted text not captured ]
"The Lasombra" <TheLa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e9uoc0pbgplknsti4...@4ax.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
And the ubiquitous Neighborhood watch Commander.
Raille
"Raille" <rai...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:010aba89db95f219...@news.teranews.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
nope... sorry, but you're wrong : Neighborhood watch commands deals its
damage after combat....
"Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40cdbd2d$0$1337$79c1...@nan-newsreader-06.noos.net...
[ quoted text not captured ]
So that makes it NOT enviromental damage? How so?
Enviromental damage is damage inflicted on a minion NOT caused by a strike.
Raille
"Raille" <rai...@yahoo.com> wrote
(...)
> > > > damage from inferior Thought's Betrayed
> > > >
> > > > Weather Control
> > >
> > > And the ubiquitous Neighborhood watch Commander.
> > >
> > > Raille
> >
> > nope... sorry, but you're wrong : Neighborhood watch commands deals its
> > damage after combat....
>
> So that makes it NOT enviromental damage? How so?
> Enviromental damage is damage inflicted on a minion NOT caused by a
strike.0
First line of the topic :
> > > Beginings of a comprehensive list of environmental combat damage
> > > effects:
i am on topic, you are not =p
Damage from neighborhood watch command is just damage. Since it is inflicted
out of combat, no need to make the distinction. =p
-Now if you really want to know, this damage comes from the ally itself (in
case some newly printed vampire would be unaffected by damage done from
allies).
"Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40cdc80b$0$1501$79c1...@nan-newsreader-05.noos.net...
>
> "Raille" <rai...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> (...)
> > > > > damage from inferior Thought's Betrayed
> > > > >
> > > > > Weather Control
> > > >
> > > > And the ubiquitous Neighborhood watch Commander.
> > > >
> > > > Raille
> > >
> > > nope... sorry, but you're wrong : Neighborhood watch commands deals
its
> > > damage after combat....
> >
> > So that makes it NOT enviromental damage? How so?
> > Enviromental damage is damage inflicted on a minion NOT caused by a
> strike.0
>
> First line of the topic :
>
> > > > Beginings of a comprehensive list of environmental combat damage
> > > > effects:
>
> i am on topic, you are not =p
pooo.
> Damage from neighborhood watch command is just damage. Since it is
inflicted
> out of combat, no need to make the distinction. =p
>
> -Now if you really want to know, this damage comes from the ally itself
(in
> case some newly printed vampire would be unaffected by damage done from
> allies)
Is this correct? LSJ?
I don't have card text infront of me, but I seem to recall that its simply a
tap effect to cause the additional point of damage, not unlike an additional
point of damage from a retainer.
Raille
"Raille" <rai...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:db6f929164f8a52c...@news.teranews.com...
> "Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message> > -Now if you really want to know, this damage comes from the ally itself
> (in
> > case some newly printed vampire would be unaffected by damage done from
> > allies)
>
> Is this correct? LSJ?
>
> I don't have card text infront of me, but I seem to recall that its simply a
> tap effect to cause the additional point of damage, not unlike an additional
> point of damage from a retainer.
The card text is online, of course.
It says "you" inflict it, so it isn't from the minion (and is therefore
environmental). But does any effect care about whether damage done outside
of combat is done by an ally or is environmental?
[ quoted text not captured ]
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:cakigf$ktj$1...@hartwell.cse.sc.edu...
> "Raille" <rai...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:db6f929164f8a52c...@news.teranews.com...
> > "Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > -Now if you really want to know, this damage comes from the ally
itself
> > (in
> > > case some newly printed vampire would be unaffected by damage done
from
> > > allies)
> >
> > Is this correct? LSJ?
> >
> > I don't have card text infront of me, but I seem to recall that its
simply a
> > tap effect to cause the additional point of damage, not unlike an
additional
> > point of damage from a retainer.
>
> The card text is online, of course.
> It says "you" inflict it, so it isn't from the minion (and is therefore
> environmental). But does any effect care about whether damage done outside
> of combat is done by an ally or is environmental?
Card text is online, true, but I do all my posting from work and the web
page is blocked. I don't have the current elder library loaded yet. Maybe
later today.
A need to care about whether or not damage outside of combat is done by an
ally or is enviromental damage may or may not currently needed. Future card
text is always subject to change the need to make this determination, so its
always good to start looking forward to game changes.
Raille
I'd like to ask a couple of questions refering slightly to this topic.
I play Tzimisce deck so I have quite a zoo with me, cats, dogs, rats, crows
etc %). And I'm not entirely sure about some cards usage.
First of all - enviromental damage (like carrion crows, blood of acid or
murder of crows) is this damege dodgeable? Or strike: dodge only dodges
strikes, and the damage inflicted by the env. dam. does still apply?
What about "combat ends" then?
Exactly... "combat ends" - my personal nightmare. I have heard that
Telepathic Tracking can cancel the effect of "combat end". Is that true?
Because the meaning and usage of TT is not entirely clear to me (at superior
lvl %)). Could you explain it?
And the celerity-combat-decks. Do any of you, fellow Tzimisce, have an idea
how to shred them into pieces? %) Ass-mites, for example. Not mentionig
Brujah. Skintraps, Fast Reactions and my preciouss Blood of Acid is still
not enough. Even warghouls got tired. %)
Regards.
dIABEU
Piotr Wyskok wrote:
> I'd like to ask a couple of questions refering slightly to this topic.
> I play Tzimisce deck so I have quite a zoo with me, cats, dogs, rats, crows
> etc %). And I'm not entirely sure about some cards usage.
>
> First of all - enviromental damage (like carrion crows, blood of acid or
> murder of crows) is this damege dodgeable? Or strike: dodge only dodges
> strikes, and the damage inflicted by the env. dam. does still apply?
The latter.
> What about "combat ends" then?
It ends combat before strike resolution stuff (like Carrion Crows and
retainer damage) is applied.
> Exactly... "combat ends" - my personal nightmare. I have heard that
> Telepathic Tracking can cancel the effect of "combat end". Is that true?
Yes. Card text.
> Because the meaning and usage of TT is not entirely clear to me (at superior
> lvl %)). Could you explain it?
When combat would end, TT is played to go to the next round instead.
[ quoted text not captured ]
<snip>
> Card text is online, true, but I do all my posting from work and the web
> page is blocked. I don't have the current elder library loaded yet. Maybe
> later today.
>
Try www.vekn.nu then and then click on Search. It also has latest card
text and hopefully that isn't blocked.
Archibald Zimonyi
Malkavian Prince of Gothenburg
http://www.vekn.nu
Reyda expounded:
[ quoted text not captured ]
Could we have an answer to this one?
It seems rather odd. I imagine that the 'uncancelled press' is reminder
text (it's in brackets) and so TT is usable in this case. Correct? (now
you can just say yes or no ;)
LSJ wrote:
> Telepathic Tracking can only be used when both minions are still ready,
> by card text.
The question was, IIRC, blocked Dawn Op, Trap (or some other press to
continue), Pulled Fangs, Rotschreck.
When Pulled Fangs is played, both vampires are ready, but there is an
uncancelled press to continue. Can TT be played to keep the
Rotschreck'ed vamp from going to torpor?
--Colin McGuigan
"Colin McGuigan" <magu...@BGONEspeakeasy.net> wrote in message news:ytmdnY0eO5V...@speakeasy.net...
> LSJ wrote:
> > Telepathic Tracking can only be used when both minions are still ready,
> > by card text.
>
> The question was, IIRC, blocked Dawn Op, Trap (or some other press to
> continue), Pulled Fangs, Rotschreck.
The answer given answered that question.
> When Pulled Fangs is played, both vampires are ready, but there is an
When Pulled Fangs is played, one of the vampires has suffered (and,
in this case, not prevented, ignored, or treated as normal or anything
else out of the ordinary) an aggravated damage. He is wounded.
He is going to torpor. He is not ready.
(How, exactly, did you get to play Pulled Fangs, under those assumptions?
It can be done, sure, but it doesn't seem to "go without saying".
Puzzler #1 for this thread. This is an easy one.)
> uncancelled press to continue. Can TT be played to keep the
> Rotschreck'ed vamp from going to torpor?
No. TT can only be used when both minions are still ready, by card
text.
Also note that it is impossible to have a round ending with an uncanceled
press to continue in effect with both combatants still ready, as I've
asserted before, ...
... except in a cheeseball cornercase that would never come up in
practice anyhow (and in which TT would have no effect, besides).
Puzzler #2.
Anyone ...?
[ quoted text not captured ]
LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> ... except in a cheeseball cornercase that would never come up in
> practice anyhow (and in which TT would have no effect, besides).
> Puzzler #2.> Anyone ...?
We worked this out in the IRC channel, I think; Rubia, Bunter, me
and some others:
Dagon's Call, a press to continue, and Left for Dead.
Dagon's Call deals a damage during the press step. If this were to
burn an ally, then you could play Left for Dead, with an uncanceled
press to continue and combat would end.
"Jozxyqk" <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote in message news:0GYzc.31088$Hg2.8385@attbi_s04...
> Dagon's Call deals a damage during the press step. If this were to
> burn an ally, then you could play Left for Dead, with an uncanceled
> press to continue and combat would end.
The ally isn't ready when combat ends.
[ quoted text not captured ]
"Jozxyqk" <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote in message news:0GYzc.31088$Hg2.8385@attbi_s04...
> Dagon's Call, a press to continue, and Left for Dead.
The ally isn't ready when Left for Dead ends combat.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3CDA6AB6.1235AF9C%40white-wolf.com[ quoted text not captured ]
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:capis0$97g$1...@hartwell.cse.sc.edu...
> "Colin McGuigan" <magu...@BGONEspeakeasy.net> wrote in message news:ytmdnY0eO5V...@speakeasy.net...> > The question was, IIRC, blocked Dawn Op, Trap (or some other press to
> > continue), Pulled Fangs, Rotschreck.
>
> The answer given answered that question.
Oh, I get it. Rotschreck ends combat before he's unreadied by the damage. Duh.
I'm a little slow. Then TT. Then a new round.
Wonder why TT avoids the damage...?
Easy to see in the cae where strike resolution is skipped, but less so
in the PF case.
[ quoted text not captured ]
LSJ wrote:
> Oh, I get it. Rotschreck ends combat before he's unreadied by the damage. Duh.
> I'm a little slow. Then TT. Then a new round.
>
> Wonder why TT avoids the damage...?
>
> Easy to see in the cae where strike resolution is skipped, but less so
> in the PF case.
So the "(with no uncancelled presses to continue)" on TT is just
reminder text, and not an actual requirement to play the card?
--Colin McGuigan
LSJ wrote:
> "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:capis0$97g$1...@hartwell.cse.sc.edu...
>>>"Colin McGuigan" <magu...@BGONEspeakeasy.net> wrote in message news:ytmdnY0eO5V...@speakeasy.net...
>>>>>The question was, IIRC, blocked Dawn Op, Trap (or some other press to
>>>continue), Pulled Fangs, Rotschreck.>>
>>The answer given answered that question.>
>
> Oh, I get it. Rotschreck ends combat before he's unreadied by the damage. Duh.
> I'm a little slow. Then TT. Then a new round.
>
> Wonder why TT avoids the damage...?
>
> Easy to see in the cae where strike resolution is skipped, but less so
> in the PF case.
It's Rotschreck that 'avoids the damage', not TT. The damage would be
avoided even if TT hadn't been played.
Current logic seems to be: Rotschreck interrupts normal damage resolution,
TT only resumes combat in the next round so it can't resume damage resolution.
Mind you, the question then remains as to why Rotschreck is capable of doing
this.
Damage resolution can be handled outside of combat, so ending combat should
not disrupt it. That's even assuming Rotschreck resolves before PF, which is
not clear given that both cards should resolve as played and PF is played
first...
Flux
"Flux" <fl...@netc.pt> wrote in message news:2jbejrF...@uni-berlin.de...
> LSJ wrote:
> > Wonder why TT avoids the damage...?
> >
>> It's Rotschreck that 'avoids the damage', not TT. The damage would be
> avoided even if TT hadn't been played.
Good try, but no.
Rotschreck avoids the damage if it successfully ends combat, yes.
In this case, though, that was canceled by the TT. So you still have
the already-inflicted damage to handle.
> Current logic seems to be: Rotschreck interrupts normal damage resolution,
> TT only resumes combat in the next round so it can't resume damage resolution.
TT resumes combat. It says nothing about aborting damage resolution of already
inflicted yet unresolved damage.
> Mind you, the question then remains as to why Rotschreck is capable of doing
> this.
> Damage resolution can be handled outside of combat, so ending combat should
> not disrupt it. That's even assuming Rotschreck resolves before PF, which is
> not clear given that both cards should resolve as played and PF is played
> first...
That's another good question. Rotschreck normally works by resolving before
strikes resolve. But PF is resolved when played, as you say.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In article <caq3rh$qb1$1...@hartwell.cse.sc.edu>, "LSJ"
<vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
>TT resumes combat. It says nothing about aborting damage resolution of already
>inflicted yet unresolved damage.
TT does say, however, "another round starts". I was under the impression
that this meant the current round is ended anyway when TT is played and we
skip to the next round. No?
--
charles lechasseur - da...@novideospamtron.ca
Charles Lechasseur wrote:
> In article <caq3rh$qb1$1...@hartwell.cse.sc.edu>, "LSJ"
> <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
>>>TT resumes combat. It says nothing about aborting damage resolution of already
>>inflicted yet unresolved damage.>
>
> TT does say, however, "another round starts". I was under the impression
> that this meant the current round is ended anyway when TT is played and we
> skip to the next round. No?
Right, but the question is: should damage resolution be aborted because of that?
It makes some sense that damage should be cancelled if combat is interrupted
(but it could be argued otherwise), there's a weaker case for the same
applying to a round interruption.
Flux
Flux <fl...@netc.pt> wrote in message news:<2jbuq3F...@uni-berlin.de>...
*SNIP*
> Charles Lechasseur wrote:
> Right, but the question is: should damage resolution be aborted because of that?
>
> It makes some sense that damage should be cancelled if combat is interrupted
> (but it could be argued otherwise), there's a weaker case for the same
> applying to a round interruption.
>
>
> Flux
If you play TT after a S:CE the strike resolution is aborted. You will
have a new round of combat but the 'previous round' strike resolution
is lost.
RavATwoFaces
RavATwoFaces wrote:
> Flux <fl...@netc.pt> wrote in message news:<2jbuq3F...@uni-berlin.de>...
>>>Right, but the question is: should damage resolution be aborted because of that?
>>
>>It makes some sense that damage should be cancelled if combat is interrupted
>>(but it could be argued otherwise), there's a weaker case for the same
>>applying to a round interruption.
>>
>>
>>Flux>
>
> If you play TT after a S:CE the strike resolution is aborted. You will
> have a new round of combat but the 'previous round' strike resolution
> is lost.
>
> RavATwoFaces
What is under discussion is the case where Rotschreck is played on Pulled
Fangs (with some effect to make the PF damage agg). In this case there is no
strike resolution to interrupt, only damage resolution.
Flux
> No. TT can only be used when both minions are still ready, by card
> text.
>
> Also note that it is impossible to have a round ending with an uncanceled
> press to continue in effect with both combatants still ready, as I've
> asserted before, ...
>
> ... except in a cheeseball cornercase that would never come up in
> practice anyhow (and in which TT would have no effect, besides).
> Puzzler #2.
>
> Anyone ...?
>
Minion A plays Conquer the Beast at inferior, giving a non.optional press to
continue
Minion B plays Terror Frenzy at inferior preventing A from using that press
No other cards are played and both minions remain ready after strike
resolution
After strikes both A and B are ready and there is an uncancelled press to
continue, yet the combat is ending.
I think :)
Frede
FC wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
No, Terror Frenzy prevents Minion A from using his press to continue.
I think I got it though:
Meth A puts a Temptation on Minion B (belonging to Meth B).
Minion A (controlled by Meth A) enters combat with Minion B. A press is
generated somehow, but for whatever reason during the press step Meth A
burns the counters on Temptation and takes control of Minion B, ending the
combat.
Flux
Flux wrote:
> FC wrote:>> Minion A plays Conquer the Beast at inferior, giving a non.optional
>> press to
>> continue
>> Minion B plays Terror Frenzy at inferior preventing A from using that
>> press
>>
>> No other cards are played and both minions remain ready after strike
>> resolution
>>
>> After strikes both A and B are ready and there is an uncancelled press to
>> continue, yet the combat is ending.>> No, Terror Frenzy prevents Minion A from using his press to continue.
Correct.
> I think I got it though:
>
> Meth A puts a Temptation on Minion B (belonging to Meth B).
> Minion A (controlled by Meth A) enters combat with Minion B. A press is
> generated somehow, but for whatever reason during the press step Meth A
> burns the counters on Temptation and takes control of Minion B, ending
> the combat.
Ding! Nice work, Flux.
[ quoted text not captured ]
LSJ expounded:
> Flux wrote:
> > FC wrote:
> >> Minion A plays Conquer the Beast at inferior, giving a non.optional
> >> press to
> >> continue
> >> Minion B plays Terror Frenzy at inferior preventing A from using that
> >> press
> >>
> >> No other cards are played and both minions remain ready after strike
> >> resolution
> >>
> >> After strikes both A and B are ready and there is an uncancelled press to
> >> continue, yet the combat is ending.
> >
> > No, Terror Frenzy prevents Minion A from using his press to continue.
>
> Correct.
>
> > I think I got it though:
> >
> > Meth A puts a Temptation on Minion B (belonging to Meth B).
> > Minion A (controlled by Meth A) enters combat with Minion B. A press is
> > generated somehow, but for whatever reason during the press step Meth A
I've never seen this happen but I don't suppose it's aas cornercase as
it sounds now that Setites have more combat...
> > burns the counters on Temptation and takes control of Minion B, ending
> > the combat.
>
> Ding! Nice work, Flux.
Is there a rule that says two of your minions can't be in combat with
each other? They can't *enter* combat with each other but I'm not aware
of anything that ends a combat already happening because one of them
changes controllers.
From the rulebook:
*****************
6.4. Combat
Combat results when a minion blocks the action of a ready minion. Also,
some cards' effects may cause combat. Whatever caused the combat, it is
important to remember that only ready minions can participate in combat
and that your minions cannot enter combat with any of your other
minions.
***********************
Timlagor wrote:
> Is there a rule that says two of your minions can't be in combat with
> each other?
Yes.
Google: "temptation combat author:LSJ"
[ quoted text not captured ]
LSJ expounded:
> Timlagor wrote:
> > Is there a rule that says two of your minions can't be in combat with
> > each other?
>
> Yes.
>
> Google: "temptation combat author:LSJ"
I suggest you modify the rulebook next time it comes out :)
No reason for it to say "cannot enter combat" if the rule is "cannot be
in combat".
I found one comment saying that you could activate the temptation during
combat "thus ending combat" and a reference to the "cannot enter combat"
rule.