Bundi with Haymaker or Withering

Withering: Strike: make a hand strike. Place this card on the opposing minion. The minion with this card has -1 strength. Burn this card during his or her controller's next discard phase. Haymaker: This minion's initial strike this round will be a hand strike for strength+1 damage and the opposing minion's initial strike this round gets first strike. If either minion inflicts more damage than the other this round, that minion gets an optional press this round. How do these interact with a Bundi? I haven't seen the card, I've only read spoiler text (which may not be accurate), but it looks to me like Bundi and Withering are incompatible, but a Bundi strike after playing Haymaker should be fine.

[ quoted text not captured ] Won't work with either... Withering and Haymaker is both a strike card... You choose your strike already... Why you can't pushing the limits under a haymaker... If I think about it. I think Pushing the limit won't work on a Bundi if I played IG... I could Bundi, but if I play Pushing the limits, I would have to choose Bundi as a melee weapon, which isn't allowed in an IG... But I could be wrong... LSJ?

kula...@gmail.com wrote: > On Oct 1, 7:09 pm, Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote: >> Withering: Strike: make a hand strike. Place this card on the >> opposing minion. The minion with this card has -1 strength. Burn this >> card during his or her controller's next discard phase. >> >> Haymaker: This minion's initial strike this round will be a hand >> strike for strength+1 damage and the opposing minion's initial strike >> this round gets first strike. If either minion inflicts more damage >> than the other this round, that minion gets an optional press this >> round. >> >> How do these interact with a Bundi? I haven't seen the card, I've >> only read spoiler text (which may not be accurate), but it looks to me >> like Bundi and Withering are incompatible, but a Bundi strike after >> playing Haymaker should be fine. > > Won't work with either... Withering and Haymaker is both a strike > card... You choose your strike already... Why you can't pushing the > limits under a haymaker... Correct... > If I think about it. I think Pushing the limit won't work on a Bundi > if I played IG... I could Bundi, but if I play Pushing the limits, I > would have to choose Bundi as a melee weapon, which isn't allowed in > an IG... But I could be wrong... LSJ? No... You could use Pushing the Limit to make a melee weapon strike with the Bundi under Immortal Grapple... The Bundi melee weapon strike is a hand strike... IG doesn't stop that.

but it looks to me > >> like Bundi and Withering are incompatible, but a Bundi strike after > >> playing Haymaker should be fine. > > > Won't work with either... Withering and Haymaker is both a strike > > card... You choose your strike already... Why you can't pushing the > > limits under a haymaker... > > Correct... Haymaker is not a strike card. It does make you commit to a strike, but it is not a strike card. It makes you commit to a hand strike at str +1, which is exactly what the Bundi strike is. So after Haymaker you may use the Bundi to strike. Please clarify why I am wrong (i.e., don't just tell me I'm wrong). [ quoted text not captured ]

Malone wrote: > but it looks to me >>>> like Bundi and Withering are incompatible, but a Bundi strike after >>>> playing Haymaker should be fine. >>> Won't work with either... Withering and Haymaker is both a strike >>> card... You choose your strike already... Why you can't pushing the >>> limits under a haymaker... >> Correct... > > Haymaker is not a strike card. It does make you commit to a strike, > but it is not a strike card. It makes you commit to a hand strike at > str +1, which is exactly what the Bundi strike is. So after Haymaker > you may use the Bundi to strike. > > Please clarify why I am wrong (i.e., don't just tell me I'm wrong). Haymaker chooses (sets) your strike by explicit card text. The strike it chooses is "hand strike for strength+1 damage", not "bundi".

On Oct 2, 6:27 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Really? I don't get it. I thought a minion could only choose one strike per round (barring additionals). Bundi [LotN:C] Cardtype: Equipment Cost: 2 pool Melee weapon. Strike: make a hand strike for strength +1 damage. (This strike is both a hand strike and a melee weapon strike). Bearer may prevent 1 damage from each melee weapon strike made against him or her. Pushing the Limit Card Text: Strike: use your hand or melee weapon at +2 damage. Strike: use your hand or melee weapon at +3 damage. I've been under the impression that since each of these cards say "strike" they are mutually exclusive and cannot be used together. So Bundi can be used with Slam, Brute Force, Undead Strength, etc? -Merlin

Merlin wrote: > I've been under the impression that since each of these cards say > "strike" they are mutually exclusive and cannot be used together. Since they say "use a melee weapon" or "make a melee weapon strike", they can use Bundi. > So Bundi can be used with Slam, Brute Force, Undead Strength, etc? Anything that says "use your melee weapon", yes. Not Slam.

On Oct 2, 10:11 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Merlin wrote: > > I've been under the impression that since each of these cards say > > "strike" they are mutually exclusive and cannot be used together. > > Since they say "use a melee weapon" or "make a melee weapon strike", they can > use Bundi. Is there a functional difference anywhere due to the fact that Bundi (and Waxen Poetica and Garrotte) read "Strike: (fnord) damage (etc)" rather than a standard weapon template of "(fnord) damage each strike (etc)"? Should the "Strike:" templating on those few cards not be read as indicating a choice of strike? To further clarify (or maybe muddy), I believe that despite the difference in phrasing, the intent is that "use a melee weapon" and "make a melee weapon strike" mean the same thing, and that I can't Strike: Undead Strength to "make a melee weapon strike at +1/+2 damage" where the strike I make is Growing Fury's "Strike: Use your... melee weapon at..." - that seems clear, because each minion can only play one strike card per strike, per the rules. Why, then, can you Strike with Undead Strength to use Bundi's "Strike: make a ..."? Just templating issues? - D.J.

Meej wrote: > On Oct 2, 10:11 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> Merlin wrote: >>> I've been under the impression that since each of these cards say >>> "strike" they are mutually exclusive and cannot be used together. >> Since they say "use a melee weapon" or "make a melee weapon strike", they can >> use Bundi. > > Is there a functional difference anywhere due to the fact that Bundi > (and Waxen Poetica and Garrotte) read "Strike: (fnord) damage (etc)" > rather than a standard weapon template of "(fnord) damage each strike > (etc)"? No. > Should the "Strike:" templating on those few cards not be > read as indicating a choice of strike? No. > To further clarify (or maybe muddy), I believe that despite the > difference in phrasing, the intent is that "use a melee weapon" and > "make a melee weapon strike" mean the same thing, and that I can't > Strike: Undead Strength to "make a melee weapon strike at +1/+2 > damage" where the strike I make is Growing Fury's "Strike: Use your... > melee weapon at..." - that seems clear, because each minion can only > play one strike card per strike, per the rules. Correct. > Why, then, can you > Strike with Undead Strength to use Bundi's "Strike: make a ..."? Just > templating issues? You can because Undead Strength says you can use a melee weapon to strike. Bundi is a melee weapon.

On Oct 2, 1:20 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Meej wrote: > > Is there a functional difference anywhere due to the fact that Bundi > > (and Waxen Poetica and Garrotte) read "Strike: (fnord) damage (etc)" > > rather than a standard weapon template of "(fnord) damage each strike > > (etc)"? > No. > > Should the "Strike:" templating on those few cards not be > > read as indicating a choice of strike? > > No. I'm interpreting from the above that you're saying "The Strike: templating on Bundi, Waxen Poetica, and so on is *not* meant to indicate that using them *is* your strike. It's just different templating to mean the same thing as usual." Which is what I figured; better to confirm, though. Does this extend to Nightstick's prevent-damage strike? IE, is that also simply outlining how that weapon works in a strike, rather than committing that particular strike with the weapon? Could you use Undead Strength to add damage to it? If not, as I think the case is, is that because it's already a strike, or is is because the Nightstick's prevent-strike isn't a damage- dealing strike, and thus a "+x damage" effect won't do anything? And if it's the latter (as I think it is), could you play the Undead Strength to cycle, even though it won't add damage, as you're "making a melee weapon strike"? Nightstick [LotN:U] Cardtype: Equipment. Melee weapon. Cost: 1 pool Strike: strength +1 damage. Or strike: prevent 3 damage from the opposing minion's next hand or melee weapon strike this round (including any currently-resolving hand or melee weapon strike). Only usable once each round. (Sorry if I'm coming across as pedantic, here - I'm just trying to sort out the implications, if any, of the wording, or if there is no implication, trying to point out ambiguities.) - D.J.

Meej wrote: > Does this extend to Nightstick's prevent-damage strike? > IE, is that also simply outlining how that weapon works in a strike, > rather than committing that particular strike with the weapon? Nightstick can be used in two different ways. > Could you use Undead Strength to add damage to it? You could select the non-damage-dealing strike when using the melee weapon Nightstick with Undead Strength, sure. As always, adding damage to a strike that doesn't deal damage has no effect, so the strike still won't do damage. > If not, as I think the case is, is that because it's already a strike, > or is is because the Nightstick's prevent-strike isn't a damage- > dealing strike, and thus a "+x damage" effect won't do anything? The latter. > And if it's the latter (as I think it is), could you play the Undead > Strength to cycle, even though it won't add damage, as you're "making > a melee weapon strike"? Yes.

So can you augment a Bundi strike with Undead Strength, etc, whilst grappling/grappled?

On Oct 3, 10:58 am, noodle...@iprimus.com.au wrote: > So can you augment a Bundi strike with Undead Strength, etc, whilst > grappling/grappled? That's crazy. So Jacques Molay can rush with built-in, grapple, play Sword of the Righteous at basic val, then push the limit with his Bundi for like, what, 7 aggravated damage? (2 strength, bundi +1, sword for +1, push the limit for +3 more). Holy crap. Finally a melee weapon which actually, like, works. Hooray!! This guy can now burn vampires like nobody's business. If only he was titled; then the whole Red List / Trophy thing could actually work.

On Oct 3, 11:41 am, Dasein <dasein2...@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 3, 10:58 am, noodle...@iprimus.com.au wrote: > > > So can you augment a Bundi strike with Undead Strength, etc, whilst > > grappling/grappled? > > That's crazy. > So Jacques Molay can rush with built-in, grapple, play Sword of the > Righteous at basic val, then push the limit with his Bundi for like, > what, 7 aggravated damage? (2 strength, bundi +1, sword for +1, push > the limit for +3 more). Holy crap. Finally a melee weapon which > actually, like, works. Hooray!! Don't forget Signpost and Fists for another +4. --> J grail_pbem "at" hotmail.com

[ quoted text not captured ] Don't forget Jaroslav Pascek with a Bundi - cardless strikes for 4 that work under IG. Actually playing any other cards would almost be cruel. Appolonius.

> Don't forget Jaroslav Pascek with a Bundi - cardless strikes for 4 that > work under IG. Actually playing any other cards would almost be cruel. Of course, he's got a Depravity and Preternatural Strength on him as well... so the combat involves Grapples and Prevent. :D [ quoted text not captured ]

Hektor with a Preternatural Strength, Depravity and a Forger's Hammer on his Bundi. 6 agg cardless strikes under IG. He can play Freak Drives and Forced Marches too. PH3@R T3H 1337 MULTI RU5HZORZ

[ quoted text not captured ] But then only "damage from Hektor's hand strikes is aggravated". I don't think any vampire has the ability to set their weapon on fire... yet.

In message <1191392927....@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>, eyj...@gmail.com writes: >On Oct 3, 3:29 pm, noodle...@iprimus.com.au wrote: >> Hektor with a Preternatural Strength, Depravity and a Forger's Hammer >> on his Bundi. 6 agg cardless strikes under IG. He can play Freak >> Drives and Forced Marches too. >> >> PH3@R T3H 1337 MULTI RU5HZORZ > >But then only "damage from Hektor's hand strikes is aggravated". Hitting with Bundi is a hand strike, as well as a melee weapon strike. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

[ quoted text not captured ] Sure there is. Like I said, Jacques Molay with Sword of the Righteous. Bundi agg damage in a grapple. but yeah its probably easier to use Jaroslav with Grapples and Pursuits (either to go to close for grapple, or for additional). Cardless strikes for 4 that work in or out of a grapple is crazy. Pushing the Limit or whatever just makes it silly. Plus Jaro can't be PTOed, can play 2nd Trad, has +1 intercept, etc.

Sorry, I'm still a bit confused. Why was Bundi worded in such a LSJ- awful way? Why does it say 'Make a hand strike at +1 strength'? With that wording it makes it sound like you can't play undead strength etc, and get the + 1 strength from bundi, because both of them are asking you to make a strike in the same fashion. It's very similar to Camera Phone and Computer Hacking - you'd only be able to bleed with one or the other, because both are bleed action declarations, just as Bundi and undead strength both seem to be strike declarations, and in both cases you are only allowed to make one strike declaration. >From the reading of the card it more sounds like you should be able to play undead strength with bundi (because it is a melee weapon, so you can select it), but you would sacrifice the additional point of damage from the bundi, as that is part of the declared strike using the weapon. As far as I can see, a much better wording for bundi would've been the way that both Anarch Revolt and Fragment seem to incorrectly list them (unless there already has been an errata made on the card that I'm unaware of) - that is to say: Strike: hand strike for strength+1 damage. (This strike is both a hand strike and a melee weapon strike). Bearer may prevent 1 damage from each melee weapon strike made against him or her. Instead of what is printed on the card, which is: Strike: *make a* hand strike for strength + 1 damage [etc] [emphasis mine] I cannot see why those two extra words were added to the card, other than to confuse the hell out of players. You don't see bastard sword saying "Make a strike for strength + 1 damage" or even "Make a melee strike for strength +1 damage" or whatever. Sorry, I may be moaning about this because I made an incorrect ruling about it at our tournament today, and I *hate* making mistakes like that when I feel the argument is a justified one. The wording seems to add extra words for no apparant reason, and it breaks the current template of wording, which seems to suggest that the change in words is done for a reason. Am I missing something? Do those extra two words actually fulfill a purpose that I'm not seeing? Someone please clear this up for me.

On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 09:47:11 -0700, The Name Forgotten <tex...@telkomsa.net> wrote: > Sorry, I'm still a bit confused. Why was Bundi worded in such a LSJ- > awful way? Why does it say 'Make a hand strike at +1 strength'? With > that wording it makes it sound like you can't play undead strength > etc, and get the + 1 strength from bundi, because both of them are > asking you to make a strike in the same fashion. Bundi is a melee weapon that allows you to strike for strength+1 damage. Undead Strength allows you to strike for +1/+2 damage with your hand/melee weapon. If you use Undead Strength to strike with Bundi (a melee weapon) you inflict Strength +1 +1/+2 damage. If you use Undead Strength to strike with your hand, then you will only strike for Strength +1/+2, even if you have a Bundi that would allow you to strike for Strength +1 damage. > It's very similar to Camera Phone and Computer Hacking - you'd only be > able to bleed with one or the other, because both are bleed action > declarations, just as Bundi and undead strength both seem to be strike > declarations, and in both cases you are only allowed to make one > strike declaration. If Undead Strength would not allow you to strike with a Melee weapon, then you would indeed be limited to choose either the Bundi strike, or the Undead Strength strike. The only reason you can combine them is because you can use Undead Strength to strike with a Melee Weapon. [...] > The wording seems to add extra words for no apparant reason, and it > breaks the current template of wording, which seems to suggest that > the change in words is done for a reason. Am I missing something? Do > those extra two words actually fulfill a purpose that I'm not seeing? > Someone please clear this up for me. In general I agree that if we are anyway using wording templates, we might as well stick to them. Deviations only create confusion. -- Regards, Daneel

The Name Forgotten wrote: > As far as I can see, a much better wording for bundi would've been the > way that both Anarch Revolt and Fragment seem to incorrectly list them > (unless there already has been an errata made on the card that I'm > unaware of) - that is to say: > > Strike: hand strike for strength+1 damage. (This strike is both a hand > strike and a melee weapon strike). Bearer may prevent 1 damage from > each melee weapon strike made against him or her. > > Instead of what is printed on the card, which is: > Strike: *make a* hand strike for strength + 1 damage [etc] [emphasis > mine] http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=Cardlist_B#Bundi The online text was clarified since some players seem confused by the old style wording (which is not new to Bundi). Anarch Revolt and Fragment both used the official CSV, so they both used the text found there.

On Oct 6, 10:53 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > The Name Forgotten wrote: [snip] > http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=Cardlist_B#Bundi > > The online text was clarified since some players seem confused by the old style > wording (which is not new to Bundi). > > Anarch Revolt and Fragment both used the official CSV, so they both used the > text found there. Chalk me up as one of the confused players. It may not be new to Bundi, but it was changed to the current template for clarity. It's like printing out a weapon card now that refers to hand damage instead of strength. It would really confuse players unless the change was specifically mentioned.

[ quoted text not captured ] No. When it was printed, it used the then-current template. Unlike the premise of printing a new card that refers, in an old-template way, to hand damage.

On Oct 6, 8:26 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > No. When it was printed, it used the then-current template. > Why was Concealed Weapon taken off-template? -- - Gregory Stuart Pettigrew

gpett...@gmail.com wrote: > On Oct 6, 8:26 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> No. When it was printed, it used the then-current template. >> > > Why was Concealed Weapon taken off-template? It wasn't.

On Oct 8, 10:31 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] "more than X": Archon Investigation Master Bloodwork Action Call the Great Beast Action Caseless Rounds Combat Cat Burglary Action Concealed Weapon Combat (previous text) Concordance Action Contingency Planning Master Dive into Madness Action Dragon's Breath Rounds Combat Free States Rant Political Action Glaser Rounds Combat Illegal Search and Seizure Master Inveraray, Scotland Equipment Kraken's Kiss Combat Last Stand Master Legwork Reaction Manstopper Rounds Combat Night Moves Action Orun Master Protected Resources Master Quick Jab Combat Recalled to the Founder Event Retribution Master Revelation of Wrath Combat Sabbat Threat Political Action Scattershot Combat Secret Must Be Kept, The Political Action Speed of Thought Action Stake Equipment Swarm Retainer Trophy: Library Master Vendetta Reaction Web of Knives Recruit Action Wooden Stake Demdemeh Tzimisce Earl "Shaka74" Deams Visionary Franciscus Caitiff Gaël Pilet Daughter of Cacophony Monty Coven Assamite "less than X": Antithesis Action Aranthebes, The Immortal Action Auto-da-fé Political Action Black Spiral Buddy Ally Brinksmanship Political Action Chair of Hades Action Charisma Master Dr. Marisa Fletcher, CDC Event Eldest Command Undeath, The Political Action Filchware's Pawn Shop Master Foreshadowing Destruction Action Modifier Gargoyle Slave Ally Harass Action Herald of Topheth Ally High Top Ally Hostile Takeover Master Lesser Boon Master Liberty Club Intrigue Action Missing Voice, The Action Modifier Nest of Eagles Reaction New Management Action Notorious Brutality Action Modifier Ohoyo Hopoksia (Bastet) Ally Powerbase: Madrid Master Predator's Mastery Action Modifier Project Power Puppeteer (Wraith) Ally Rabble Razing Political Action Redcap Wilder Retainer Renegade Garou Ally Respire Power Rock Cat Ally Samuel Haight Ally Set's Curse Action Sleep of Reason Action Snipe Hunt Political Action Sunset Strip, Hollywood Master Thin-Blooded Seer Action Thirst Event Wendell Delburton (Hunter) Ally Young Bloods Ally Anisa Marianna Lopez Harbinger of Skulls Barth Toreador Black Cat Brujah David Morgan, The Scourge Malkavian Durga Syn Ravnos Ignazio Giovanni Giovanni Lucina Toreador Lucita (Advanced) Lasombra Melinda Galbraith (Advanced) Toreador antitribu Pentweret Follower of Set Regina Giovanni, The Right Hand of Augustus Giovanni Sha-Ennu Tzimisce Victorine Lafourcade Ventrue "X or more" (excluding X=1 as that is a special case): Concealed Weapon Combat (current text) Conservative Agitation Political Action Entrenching Action High Aye Action Modifier High Orun Action Modifier Justicar Retribution Political Action Khazar's Diary (Endless Night) Action Kine Resources Contested Political Action Madness Network Master Path of Tears, The Master Reckless Agitation Political Action Twisting the Knife Combat "or fewer/or less/or smaller": ZERO [ quoted text not captured ]