L. Scott Johnson#
harm...@futures.wharton.upenn.edu (ALEX HARMON) writes:
>Vamp A is in torpor with 5 life and attempts to rescue itself.
>Vamp B blocks with the necessary intercept.
>Q: Can Vamp A play Kiss of Ra (granted it has sup For and Vamp B doesnt
>have For)?
Yes.
>Is it a question of whether or not Vamp B decides to diablerize Vamp A in
>which case Vamp A gets the option of playing Kiss of Ra since it was
>indeed blocked but wasnt diablerized? Or could it be that Vamp A can be
>diablerized while at the same time sending Vamp B to torpor via Kiss of Ra?
The latter.
The former alternative is unworkable because it relies on giving
the blocker the first option to do something.
The only other alternative would be to disallow Vamp B's diablerie
option if Vamp A plays Kiss of Ra, but card text doesn't support
this line of reasoning, although I think it is closer to the WoD.
But, since this is just a card game...
--
L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Voyager:
http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | To boldly get lost where no
Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. | one has been lost before!