Just a few questions that keep coming up...
1) The 'claws' cards, say that "For the remainder of the round, the
vapire's hand damage is aggrivated. Does this imply that I can play this
card at anytime during the round? (i.e. After strikes have been
declared, but before Strike Resolution)
2) A vampire that has a natural +2 bleed declares a bleed attempt. (3
bleed). The action is blocked and mask of 1000 faces is played to switch
the action to a vampire with a natural +1 bleed. Is the bleed now at 2;
the new vamps base, 3; the original vamp's base, or 4; the original
vamps base, plus the bonus of the new vamp?
3) Is this new unlimited stealth thing for real? Like I mentioned
yesterday, I built the deck I mentioned (30 plus to bleed, 60 plus to
stealth), and won a 3 player game in less than 20 minutes. The only
thing that kept me paused was one of my grand preditor's vamps had a
nasty Guardian Angel/Sport's Bike/KRCG News Radio going for a base 3
intercept. This didn't really matter, though, as I let one of my younger
vaps hunt with additional stealth until I got +5 stealth worth of
different cards. I promised my friends to distroy this deck and never
play with it again. (In much the same promise I gave to them when I
built a weenie vote before there was a "replace burn votes at the end of
the turn" rule.)
--
rob. (rfle...@ix.netcom.com)
"I really hate it when I play a Madness of the Bard, and then get a call
from my Mom."
- me
HELP STOP SPAM
NOTE: If you wish to respond to me via email, please remove the * from
the return address!
Rob LeGood wrote:
> 1) The 'claws' cards, say that "For the remainder of the round, the
> vapire's hand damage is aggrivated. Does this imply that I can play this
> card at anytime during the round? (i.e. After strikes have been
> declared, but before Strike Resolution)
Yes.
> 2) A vampire that has a natural +2 bleed declares a bleed attempt. (3
> bleed). The action is blocked and mask of 1000 faces is played to switch
> the action to a vampire with a natural +1 bleed. Is the bleed now at 2;
> the new vamps base, 3; the original vamp's base, or 4; the original
> vamps base, plus the bonus of the new vamp?
It is at 2. The first vampire's bleed bonus applies only to him, and
is removed when he is not the acting vampire.
> 3) Is this new unlimited stealth thing for real? Like I mentioned
> yesterday, I built the deck I mentioned (30 plus to bleed, 60 plus to
> stealth), and won a 3 player game in less than 20 minutes. The only
> thing that kept me paused was one of my grand preditor's vamps had a
> nasty Guardian Angel/Sport's Bike/KRCG News Radio going for a base 3
> intercept. This didn't really matter, though, as I let one of my younger
> vaps hunt with additional stealth until I got +5 stealth worth of
> different cards. I promised my friends to distroy this deck and never
> play with it again. (In much the same promise I gave to them when I
> built a weenie vote before there was a "replace burn votes at the end of
> the turn" rule.)
It is for real: a direct result of the RT ruling that the rulebook
limitation on increasing stealth and increasing intercept only applies
during block attempts.
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@regency.wizards.com)
Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
(*) - Subject to review by Rules Team
Rob LeGood wrote:
>
> Just a few questions that keep coming up...
>> 1) The 'claws' cards, say that "For the remainder of the round, the
> vapire's hand damage is aggrivated. Does this imply that I can play this
> card at anytime during the round? (i.e. After strikes have been
> declared, but before Strike Resolution)
Yes, you can play claws after you have found out what your opponents
strike will be. This eliminates the chance that they will dodge but not
prevent the aggro damage.
> 2) A vampire that has a natural +2 bleed declares a bleed attempt. (3
> bleed). The action is blocked and mask of 1000 faces is played to switch
> the action to a vampire with a natural +1 bleed. Is the bleed now at 2;
> the new vamps base, 3; the original vamp's base, or 4; the original
> vamps base, plus the bonus of the new vamp?
Not sure how you possibly came to this conclusion. The card states
that another untapped vampire takes over the action where the original
vampire left off. It says nothing about assuming its abilities only the
action. When you take over the action you do JUST that, in this case you take
over an uncarded bleed. The new vampire bleeds as if he had started the
action in the first place. (in this case bleed for 2)
> 3) Is this new unlimited stealth thing for real? Like I mentioned
> yesterday, I built the deck I mentioned (30 plus to bleed, 60 plus to
> stealth), and won a 3 player game in less than 20 minutes. The only
> thing that kept me paused was one of my grand preditor's vamps had a
> nasty Guardian Angel/Sport's Bike/KRCG News Radio going for a base 3
> intercept. This didn't really matter, though, as I let one of my younger
> vaps hunt with additional stealth until I got +5 stealth worth of
> different cards. I promised my friends to distroy this deck and never
> play with it again. (In much the same promise I gave to them when I
> built a weenie vote before there was a "replace burn votes at the end of
> the turn" rule.)
Hmm, well there has never been a restriction on the amount of stealth
you can use in a deck. Personally I find that Stealth bleed is rather
boring, and if you face prepared opponents, sometimes even harmful. There are
three main ways to deal with stealth, Rush, Intercept, and Bounce.
I see that someone in your group used intercept. What I don't
understand is how you could possibly expect to survive without any combat
defence. Any good Rush combat deck would have no problem torpering every
vampire you brought out, and no amount of stealth cards would help. The same
goes for a bounce deck, you are denied the ability to excercise your hand and
you end up bleeding your grandprey at stealth and strengthening your own
preys position.
There is no need to run in fear from these ridiculous one-trick
ponys. Nor is there any need for you to refrain from using them, if you and
your fellow Methuselas don't mind snoring through your turns the entire game.
>2) A vampire that has a natural +2 bleed declares a bleed attempt. (3
>bleed). The action is blocked and mask of 1000 faces is played to switch
>the action to a vampire with a natural +1 bleed. Is the bleed now at 2;
>the new vamps base, 3; the original vamp's base, or 4; the original
>vamps base, plus the bonus of the new vamp?
I thought that the amount of a bleed is not determined until the action
goes unblocked, at which point you total up all modifiers (including
Counters) to find the final bleed. Thus, the bleed would be at 2.
---
Liam Burke
"So when are they coming out with Golconda by Day, anyway?"
-overheard