Net.primogens, I wonder about how Taste of Vitae (all the blood lost by
opposing minion during combat end up on playing minion) interacts with
Steal Blood cards (which are supposedly not conssidered damage). Let's say
Sarah Cobbler (superior Thaumaturgy) is fighting Dollface. Sarah started the
fight empty; she was trying to hunt, say, and Dollface found +1 intercept
to block. Dollface does not maneuver; Sarah maneuvers to long range; Dollface
does not counter the maneuver. Dollface does a useless hand strike; Sarah
plays Theft of Vitae. Two of Dollface's blood end up on Sarah. Neither
minion presses; combat is over. Then Sarah plays Taste of Vitae. Do two MORE
blood end up on Sarah (making her full)? Since the blood stolen from Dollface
was "lost," I suspect so, but I wonder how Taste of Vitae treats blood that
is not lost as damage (since, for example, it does not take blood the opposing
minion spent for its own cards during combat). Help would be appreciated.
Thank you!
- Neil
--
nwbe...@unix.amherst.edu, lentus in umbra | nudus ara, sere nudus...
in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
In article <475dss$3...@amhux3.amherst.edu>, nwbe...@unix.amherst.edu
(Neil Bernstein) writes:
>Sarah Cobbler (superior Thaumaturgy) is fighting Dollface...Sarah
maneuvers to long >range...Dollface does a useless hand strike; Sarah
plays Theft of Vitae. Two of >Dollface's blood end up on Sarah...Then
Sarah plays Taste of Vitae. Do two MORE
>blood end up on Sarah (making her full)?
Yes
>I wonder how Taste of Vitae treats blood that is not lost as damage
(since, for >example, it does not take blood the opposing minion spent for
its own cards during >combat)
The card says "blood lost", and that includes blood spent (though some
players dispute this, it is the "official ruling")
Could I have a netrep answer to my question (whether Taste of Vitae gives
the blood "lost" from Theft of Vitae)? Thank you.
[ quoted text not captured ]
>Could I have a netrep answer to my question (whether Taste of Vitae gives
>the blood "lost" from Theft of Vitae)? Thank you.
I am not a netrep, but the official errata released along with the V:TES
rulebook a few weeks ago stated:
"Taste of Vitae - combat: Counts all blood burned to any cause (healing,
card cost, etc.) [RTR]"
So any blood lost (or burned) for any cause by the victem is gained by the
vampire playing Taste of the Vitae, though blood stealing is not listed
above it falls under "etc."
~Biomechanoid
Biomech8 (biom...@aol.com) wrote:
: >Could I have a netrep answer to my question (whether Taste of Vitae gives
[ quoted text not captured ]
How do I get to taste the vitae you spent on Blur, Claws of the Dead, whatever?
"Loss" and "payment" are not synonomous.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Neil Bernstein (nwbe...@unix.amherst.edu) wrote:
: How do I get to taste the vitae you spent on Blur, Claws of the Dead,
: whatever? "Loss" and "payment" are not synonomous.
Don't shoot the messenger - Biomechanoid didn't make the silly rule.
However, he is correct, officially.
The way the card has been ruled to work is like this:
- Note the blood that was on the vampire at the beginning of the round (A)
- Note the blood the vampire has when the Taste is played (B)
- Play Taste of Vitae
- Gain (A) - (B) blood.
_ANY_ blood that the vampire lost for _any_ reason is therefore included
in these totals. Why? Good question - probably has something to do with
simplicity.
Shane H.W. Travis | I try to take one day at a time,
tra...@duke.usask.ca | but sometimes several days attack at once.
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan | -- Ashleigh Brilliant
-> The way the card has been ruled to work is like this:
-> - Note the blood that was on the vampire at the beginning of the
-> round (A) - Note the blood the vampire has when the Taste is played
-> (B)
-> - Play Taste of Vitae
-> - Gain (A) - (B) blood.
->
-> _ANY_ blood that the vampire lost for _any_ reason is therefore
-> included in these totals. Why? Good question - probably has
-> something to do with simplicity.
...but suppose the vampire has also GAINED blood inbetween the start of
the round and when taste is played? Does that subtract from what the
Tasting vamp gains? (Card text would suggest no, but the A minus B
rule would mean yes...) If so, icky situations would develop if both
vamps wanted to Taste each other after strike resolution; it would lead
to a 'game of slap' where the player who throws the first Taste gets the
blood.
Tom????
tony.r...@swcbbs.com (TONY RICARDI) writes:
>...but suppose the vampire has also GAINED blood inbetween the start of
>the round and when taste is played? Does that subtract from what the
>Tasting vamp gains? (Card text would suggest no, but the A minus B
>rule would mean yes...) If so, icky situations would develop if both
>vamps wanted to Taste each other after strike resolution; it would lead
>to a 'game of slap' where the player who throws the first Taste gets the
>blood.
Taste of Vitae says lost
it says nothing about counting gained blood
so if you weel aimed car for 5
and they lose five
you can taste five
if they have well aimed car you as well
then you have lost five
and they can taste you
These effects resolve because the vampire has lost that much blood this round of combat
they may have gained it all back
but they "LOST" it before tthey gained it back
In short
blood lost adds up for each round of combat
just put it into a different pile than the blod bank
So when the damage hits
the blood is spent(lost) to heal and placed inthe 'tastable blood pile'
if a vamp plays a card that requires paying a cost that blood goes here too.
Then this pile contains the blood that a taste would garner the opposing minion
Not terrbily complicated especially if it isn't two Brujah in combat
That situation has arisen before
and believe me Imm/grappl/Trap/TornSignpost/Fist of Death/Blur (superior)
/Undead Strengths and tastes
Makes combat slow and methodical
That also brought up the concet of playing more than one taste of vitae
in a single round of combat. After blurring for two add strikes
and finding the need to taste the blood that you've now punched out of him.
Tom?
Stu
>Tom????
--
Stu Pieloch TLTT Players-Lord High And Mighty Potentate of the Known Universe
DramaTech Theatre Improv Troupe http://photobooks.gatech.edu/~zync/lttp.html
GE/T/S d++(--) H(-) s++:- g+(-) p2 au++ a- w+++(--) v++ C++ U N++ W---() M+ V--
po+++(---) t--- 5+++ G+++ B--- e++ u++ f+ r++ n--- y*
In article uu...@swcbbs.com, tony.r...@swcbbs.com (TONY RICARDI) writes:
> -> The way the card has been ruled to work is like this:
> -> - Note the blood that was on the vampire at the beginning of the
> -> round (A) - Note the blood the vampire has when the Taste is played
> -> (B)
> -> - Play Taste of Vitae
> -> - Gain (A) - (B) blood.
> ->
> -> _ANY_ blood that the vampire lost for _any_ reason is therefore
> -> included in these totals. Why? Good question - probably has
> -> something to do with simplicity.
>> ....but suppose the vampire has also GAINED blood inbetween the start of> the round and when taste is played? Does that subtract from what the
> Tasting vamp gains? (Card text would suggest no, but the A minus B
> rule would mean yes...) If so, icky situations would develop if both
> vamps wanted to Taste each other after strike resolution; it would lead
> to a 'game of slap' where the player who throws the first Taste gets the
> blood.
>> Tom????
I think the official rules are pretty clear, though not liked by some.
The card text is "The vampire gains all the blood lost during the current
round of combat by the opposing vampire."
Lost means just that" (from websters) "No longer possessed", all the blood
you lose for any reason, be it damage, stollen blood, or burned to pay for cards.
The rules say nothing about gaining blood canceling the effect.
Steve
Biomech8 (biom...@aol.com) wrote:
: In article <47jcn8$k...@amhux3.amherst.edu>, nwbe...@unix.amherst.edu: (Neil Bernstein) writes:
: >How do I get to taste the vitae you spent on Blur, Claws of the Dead,
: >whatever?
: >"Loss" and "payment" are not synonomous.: Though "blood lost" and "blood burned" seem to be. Blood spent as
: "payment" falls under "blood burned". I personally think taste should
: only include blood lost due to damage, but I don't write the rules.
Well, a netrep answer would clear up most of our difficulties. So here's
my third request for a netrep answer. Please, Tom? Thanks.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In article h...@newsbf02.news.aol.com, biom...@aol.com (Biomech8) writes:
> In article <8B47412.00CA...@swcbbs.com>, tony.r...@swcbbs.com> (TONY RICARDI) writes:
>
> >...but suppose the vampire has also GAINED blood inbetween the start of
> >the round and when taste is played? Does that subtract from what the
> >Tasting vamp gains? (Card text would suggest no, but the A minus B
> >rule would mean yes...) If so, icky situations would develop if both
> >vamps wanted to Taste each other after strike resolution; it would lead
> >to a 'game of slap' where the player who throws the first Taste gets the
> >blood.
>> The card says "lost", and so gaining after a loss doesn't reduce what was
> originally lost. Even if it did, there would be no game of "slap", the
> acting minion would have the first chance to play any post damage
> prevention cards before moving on to the additional strike phase (at least
> I assume that the "acting minion first" applies to all situations in
> combat including this one.)
I don't think there is a acting minion always goes first rule. I beleive if
the card worked the way Tony thought there would be a slap situation. However
there are currently no cards that work that way an no slap situations.
Steve
Taste of Vitae counts up all blood lost by the opposing vampire, for any
reason. Whether or not it *should* say this, it's what it does say.
To date, we haven't considered this to be worth errata.
Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
nwbe...@unix.amherst.edu (Neil Bernstein) writes:
>Biomech8 (biom...@aol.com) wrote:
>: In article <47jcn8$k...@amhux3.amherst.edu>, nwbe...@unix.amherst.edu
>: (Neil Bernstein) writes:
>: >How do I get to taste the vitae you spent on Blur, Claws of the Dead,
>: >whatever?
>: >"Loss" and "payment" are not synonomous.
>: Though "blood lost" and "blood burned" seem to be. Blood spent as
>: "payment" falls under "blood burned". I personally think taste should
>: only include blood lost due to damage, but I don't write the rules.>Well, a netrep answer would clear up most of our difficulties. So here's
>my third request for a netrep answer. Please, Tom? Thanks.
From: aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie)
Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad
Subject: Rules Team Rulings, 9/6/95, Jyhad/VTES
Date: 6 Sep 1995 19:55:01 GMT
Message-ID: <42kual$p...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>
7) A vampire playing Taste of Vitae gains an amount of blood equal to the
amount lost by the opposing vampire during that round of combat regardless
of the reason why the blood has been lost. The total includes stolen
blood, blood burned from damage, blood burned to play combat cards (such
as Blur), and so on.
--
L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | These opinions are mine and
http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | are subject to card text.
Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |
Steven Bauer <sba...@cso.geg.mot.com> wrote:
>> The card says "lost", and so gaining after a loss doesn't reduce what was
>> originally lost. Even if it did, there would be no game of "slap", the
>> acting minion would have the first chance to play any post damage
>> prevention cards before moving on to the additional strike phase (at least
>> I assume that the "acting minion first" applies to all situations in
>> combat including this one.)>I don't think there is a acting minion always goes first rule. I beleive if
>the card worked the way Tony thought there would be a slap situation. However
>there are currently no cards that work that way an no slap situations.
As a general rule, if multiple players are considering doing something at
any given point in time, the active player does something (or doesn't) first,
followed by the blocking player if any, followed by everyone else, going
in turn order from the active player.
[ quoted text not captured ]