Rules Question - interaction between slave combat and Voice of Madness

This came up in JOL today - Eugenio is blocked by Anatole. Eugenio wants to untap and let Ublo-Satha take over. Anatole wants to play Voice of Madness. What happens? Current guess is that Eugenio and Anatole both lose 1 blood from the Voice (paying/burning), and that Ublo fights Anatole. Maybe though Voice of Madness can't be played in this situation?

On 28 Aug 2003 13:47:33 -0700, gf...@deckserver.net (George Finklang) scrawled: [ quoted text not captured ] 6.2.4 Slaves Some minions are identified as slaves to a specified clan. A slave cannot take a directed action if his controller doesn’t control a ready member of the specified clan. Also, if a member of the specified clan controlled by the same Methuselah is blocked, the controller can tap the slave to cancel the combat and to untap the acting vampire and have the slave enter combat with the blocking minion instead. I'd say that since the combat has already been cancelled by the slave effect (which the acting minion is allowed to do before the blocking minion can play Voice of Madness, by the Sequencing rules), then Voice of Madness would not be playable. If it was playable, I guess it would cancel the Ublo-Anatole combat, and per card text (acting vampire burns one blood), Eugenio would burn one blood. Good question.... salem domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm

In message <bpetkv45h5ummino5...@4ax.com>, salem <salem_ch...@yahoo.com> writes: >I'd say that since the combat has already been cancelled by the slave >effect (which the acting minion is allowed to do before the blocking >minion can play Voice of Madness, by the Sequencing rules), then Voice >of Madness would not be playable. Voice of Madness does not require combat to be entered, like Obedience. It only requires a successful block. It will, of course, *cancel* a combat if there is one - but that is far from necessary. e.g. I block your "leave torpor" attempt, from which there can be no combat, and play Voice of Madness to cause you burn blood. As such, there is still a successful block. But I am unsure whether there is time to slip in Voice of Madness at that point, due to the Slave effect. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D Lucky that my breasts are small and humble, EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 So you don't confuse them with mountains. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D

"salem" <salem_ch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:bpetkv45h5ummino5...@4ax.com... > On 28 Aug 2003 13:47:33 -0700, gf...@deckserver.net (George Finklang) > scrawled: > > >This came up in JOL today - > > > >Eugenio is blocked by Anatole. > > > >Eugenio wants to untap and let Ublo-Satha take over. > > > >Anatole wants to play Voice of Madness. > > > >What happens? > > > >Current guess is that Eugenio and Anatole both lose 1 blood from the > >Voice (paying/burning), and that Ublo fights Anatole. > > > >Maybe though Voice of Madness can't be played in this situation? > I'd say that since the combat has already been cancelled by the slave > effect (which the acting minion is allowed to do before the blocking > minion can play Voice of Madness, by the Sequencing rules), then Voice > of Madness would not be playable. I believe that's correct. Since the acting Methuselah has the first opportunity to play effects at every stage, when the block is successful, she may declare the use of the Slave rule before the blocking Meth can play Voice of Madness. [LSJ 8-Jan-2003] (This part I'm sure about.) http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3E1C4949.42F3D942%40white-wolf.com (That message is a followup to LSJ's own message, with a correction to one piece of his answer.) Once the Slave rule is invoked, I don't think Voice of Madness is playable; even though it doesn't use the same wording as Obedience, it does say "Only usable when this vampire successfully blocks an ally or younger vampire", and after the Slave comes into the picture, that time frame no longer exists. If you want to be really certain, though, you'll probably have to wait for LSJ to answer (and I believe he's at DragonCon for the weekend right now). Josh should be getting stuff done

gf...@deckserver.net (George Finklang) wrote in message news:<485d0894.03082...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] Vamp A: !Brujah, bleeds. Vamp B: Successfuly Blocks Vamp A: plays Blood Brother Ambush. Vamp B: Plays Voice of Madness. Is the combat involving the Ally (BBA) now cancelled, and/or does Vamp A burn the blood? Consenses was that since BBA was an Action Modifier and part of the action, the Voice cancelled the combat and Vamp A burned the blood. Any comments? LSJ? Dean Garrison

Re-posting for LSJ comment. Dean dfgar...@msn.com (DeanGarrison) wrote in message news:<7a282380.03083...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ]

DeanGarrison wrote: > Re-posting for LSJ comment. > Dean > dfgar...@msn.com (DeanGarrison) wrote in message news:<7a282380.03083...@posting.google.com>... >>gf...@deckserver.net (George Finklang) wrote in message news:<485d0894.03082...@posting.google.com>... >>>This came up in JOL today - >>>Eugenio is blocked by Anatole. >>>Eugenio wants to untap and let Ublo-Satha take over. >>>Anatole wants to play Voice of Madness. >>>What happens? >>> >>>Current guess is that Eugenio and Anatole both lose 1 blood from the >>>Voice (paying/burning), and that Ublo fights Anatole. Correct. >>>Maybe though Voice of Madness can't be played in this situation? >> >>Vamp A: !Brujah, bleeds. >>Vamp B: Successfuly Blocks >>Vamp A: plays Blood Brother Ambush. >>Vamp B: Plays Voice of Madness. >> >>Is the combat involving the Ally (BBA) now cancelled, and/or does Vamp >>A burn the blood? >> >>Consenses was that since BBA was an Action Modifier and part of the >>action, the Voice cancelled the combat and Vamp A burned the blood. Both BBA and Voice cancel the block combat. The blocker enters combat with the BBA. -- 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/

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3F57ADA3...@white-wolf.com... > DeanGarrison wrote: > > Re-posting for LSJ comment. > > Dean > > dfgar...@msn.com (DeanGarrison) wrote in message news:<7a282380.03083...@posting.google.com>... > >>gf...@deckserver.net (George Finklang) wrote in message news:<485d0894.03082...@posting.google.com>... > >>>This came up in JOL today - > >>>Eugenio is blocked by Anatole. > >>>Eugenio wants to untap and let Ublo-Satha take over. > >>>Anatole wants to play Voice of Madness. > >>>What happens? > >>> > >>>Current guess is that Eugenio and Anatole both lose 1 blood from the > >>>Voice (paying/burning), and that Ublo fights Anatole. > > Correct. So the line of argument below is wrong? "Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:binufr$bcmg3$1...@ID-121616.news.uni-berlin.de... > > "salem" <salem_ch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:bpetkv45h5ummino5...@4ax.com... > > On 28 Aug 2003 13:47:33 -0700, gf...@deckserver.net (George Finklang) > > scrawled: > > > > >This came up in JOL today - > > > > > >Eugenio is blocked by Anatole. > > > > > >Eugenio wants to untap and let Ublo-Satha take over. > > > > > >Anatole wants to play Voice of Madness. > > > > > >What happens? > > > > > >Current guess is that Eugenio and Anatole both lose 1 blood from the > > >Voice (paying/burning), and that Ublo fights Anatole. > > > > > >Maybe though Voice of Madness can't be played in this situation? > > > I'd say that since the combat has already been cancelled by the slave > > effect (which the acting minion is allowed to do before the blocking > > minion can play Voice of Madness, by the Sequencing rules), then Voice > > of Madness would not be playable. > > I believe that's correct. > > Since the acting Methuselah has the first opportunity to play > effects at every stage, when the block is successful, she may > declare the use of the Slave rule before the blocking Meth > can play Voice of Madness. [LSJ 8-Jan-2003] (This part I'm > sure about.) > > http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3E1C4949.42F3D942%40white-wolf.com > > (That message is a followup to LSJ's own message, with a > correction to one piece of his answer.) > > Once the Slave rule is invoked, I don't think Voice of Madness > is playable; even though it doesn't use the same wording as > Obedience, it does say "Only usable when this vampire > successfully blocks an ally or younger vampire", and after the > Slave comes into the picture, that time frame no longer exists. In the second situation: > >>Vamp A: !Brujah, bleeds. > >>Vamp B: Successfuly Blocks > >>Vamp A: plays Blood Brother Ambush. > >>Vamp B: Plays Voice of Madness. > >> > >>Is the combat involving the Ally (BBA) now cancelled, and/or does Vamp > >>A burn the blood? > >> > >>Consenses was that since BBA was an Action Modifier and part of the > >>action, the Voice cancelled the combat and Vamp A burned the blood. > > Both BBA and Voice cancel the block combat. > > The blocker enters combat with the BBA. This seems somewhat odd to me. Blood Brother Ambush: "Only usable when an action is blocked. Combat does not occur. Put this card into play. While in play, this card represents an ally with 3 life and 2 strength who can strike for 2R damage; this ally enters combat with the blocking minion. Blood Brothers may play cards requiring basic Potence as a vampire with a capacity of 3. Any cost in blood is paid with life. If a card would give them blood, give them life instead. Burn this card at the end of combat or if the combat is canceled." Voice of Madness: "Only usable when this vampire successfully blocks an ally or younger vampire. [dem] Tap this reacting vampire. Combat does not occur. [DEM] As above, and the acting minion burns 1 blood or life." I would think that the play of Blood Brother Ambush makes Voice of Madness unplayable (since it has already started a combat and Voice of Madness has to be played when the block occurs - BBA has already been played in that time slot and started a combat). Josh double checking

Joshua Duffin wrote: > So the line of argument below is wrong? > "Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message [re: [!]Tre invokes slave rule to have slave Gargoyle enter combat] >>Since the acting Methuselah has the first opportunity to play >>effects at every stage, when the block is successful, she may >>declare the use of the Slave rule before the blocking Meth >>can play Voice of Madness. [LSJ 8-Jan-2003] (This part I'm >>sure about.) This is correct. >>Once the Slave rule is invoked, I don't think Voice of Madness >>is playable; even though it doesn't use the same wording as >>Obedience, it does say "Only usable when this vampire >>successfully blocks an ally or younger vampire", and after the >>Slave comes into the picture, that time frame no longer exists. The vampire has still blocked the ally or younger vampire. [ quoted text not captured ] Certainly plausible. BBA could be slightly different than the invocation of the slave rule by virtue of starting combat as part of its effect rather than swapping combat. It seemed to be close enough to use a parallel ruling however (i.e., ruling that it swaps combat just like the invocation of the slave rule for uniformity). [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3F57DD08...@white-wolf.com... > Joshua Duffin wrote: [re: Voice of Madness versus slave-rule use/combat] > The vampire has still blocked the ally or younger vampire. That's true. But my intuition is that when the slave rule is invoked or Blood Brother Ambush is played, combat is entered immediately without time for more reaction cards to be played (since reaction cards aren't generally playable during combat). I would also expect that in the case where Jing Wei attempts a bleed, a tapped Bear Paw plays Forced Awakening and blocks, and Saxum steps in to fight via the slave rule, Bear Paw would not then be able to play Rat's Warning to untap. Could he in fact do that? Josh this is the voice... of madness

Joshua Duffin wrote: > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message >>Joshua Duffin wrote: > > [re: Voice of Madness versus slave-rule use/combat] >>The vampire has still blocked the ally or younger vampire. > > That's true. But my intuition is that when the slave rule is > invoked or Blood Brother Ambush is played, combat is entered > immediately without time for more reaction cards to be played > (since reaction cards aren't generally playable during combat). Yes. The intuition would be fine for BBA in isolation, but doesn't fit with the wording of the slave rule. I'll put it on the RT list for review. > I would also expect that in the case where Jing Wei attempts > a bleed, a tapped Bear Paw plays Forced Awakening and blocks, > and Saxum steps in to fight via the slave rule, Bear Paw would > not then be able to play Rat's Warning to untap. Could he in > fact do that? Rat's Warning cannot be played after the action is blocked. This is true whether the slave rule is invoked (which can only be done when a block is successful) or not. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3F58A174...@white-wolf.com>... > Joshua Duffin wrote: > > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message > >>Joshua Duffin wrote: > > > > [re: Voice of Madness versus slave-rule use/combat] > >>The vampire has still blocked the ally or younger vampire. > > > > That's true. But my intuition is that when the slave rule is > > invoked or Blood Brother Ambush is played, combat is entered > > immediately without time for more reaction cards to be played > > (since reaction cards aren't generally playable during combat). > > Yes. The intuition would be fine for BBA in isolation, but > doesn't fit with the wording of the slave rule. > > I'll put it on the RT list for review. While we're clarifying, remember that the wording of Conscripted Statue is almost identical to Blood Brother Ambush, so it needs to be part of this as well. Also, I guess I'm not clear why Josh's intuition doesn't fit with the current wording of the slave rule. Looking at it: [From 6.2.4] Also, if a member of the specified clan controlled by the same Methuselah is blocked, the controller can tap the slave to cancel the combat and to untap the acting vampire and have the slave enter combat with the blocking minion instead. This seems to indicate that a) combat is cancelled right now, preventing the playing of any other combat-cancelling reaction cards and b) the slave "enters combat", which is exactly the same wording as BBA and CS. The only phrase missing from the slave rule that is on the cards is - "Combat does not occur." My question is whether this is a significantly different effect from "cancel combat", and I'm inclined to think it isn't. Anyway, review on. I just think it's clear enough as is. Eric Simon Prince of Chicago

Eric Simon wrote: > While we're clarifying, remember that the wording of Conscripted > Statue is almost identical to Blood Brother Ambush, so it needs to be > part of this as well. Also, I guess I'm not clear why Josh's Thanks. > intuition doesn't fit with the current wording of the slave rule. > Looking at it: > > [From 6.2.4] Also, if a member of the specified clan controlled by the > same Methuselah is blocked, the controller can tap the slave to cancel > the combat and to untap the acting vampire and have the slave enter > combat with the blocking minion instead. > > This seems to indicate that a) combat is cancelled right now, > preventing the playing of any other combat-cancelling reaction cards > and b) the slave "enters combat", which is exactly the same wording as The slave enters combat "instead", indicating that the combat replaces the normal block combat. So things playable post-block, pre-block-combat would be playable pre-slave-combat, since the one is merely substituted for the other. > BBA and CS. The only phrase missing from the slave rule that is on > the cards is - "Combat does not occur." My question is whether this > is a significantly different effect from "cancel combat", and I'm > inclined to think it isn't. Right. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3F58E3C4...@white-wolf.com... > Eric Simon wrote: > > While we're clarifying, remember that the wording of Conscripted > > Statue is almost identical to Blood Brother Ambush, so it needs to be > > part of this as well. Also, I guess I'm not clear why Josh's > > Thanks. Malleable Visage also has a very similar effect, in case you hadn't already considered it. It doesn't shed much light on the question, though, since its ruling vs Obedience doesn't answer the Voice of Madness issue. Josh no future

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3F58A174...@white-wolf.com... > Joshua Duffin wrote: > > I would also expect that in the case where Jing Wei attempts > > a bleed, a tapped Bear Paw plays Forced Awakening and blocks, > > and Saxum steps in to fight via the slave rule, Bear Paw would > > not then be able to play Rat's Warning to untap. Could he in > > fact do that? > > Rat's Warning cannot be played after the action is blocked. > This is true whether the slave rule is invoked (which can only > be done when a block is successful) or not. Is this because in the "when the action is blocked" time frame, only reactions that specify to play them when a block succeeds are legal? Parallel to the "when an action is announced" action modifiers, which are the only ones legal during the "announce-the-action" period? Or if not, is there another reason for it? Card text doesn't seem to provide any obvious guidance here. Josh would kind of like having a comprehensive set of rules with more precision than the printed rulebook ;-)

Joshua Duffin wrote: > Or if not, is there another reason for it? Card text > doesn't seem to provide any obvious guidance here. Most action modifiers are for modifying the action before it resolves. Likewise reaction cards. > would kind of like having a comprehensive set of rules > with more precision than the printed rulebook Anyone who has compiled such a thing is welcome to let me know so that it can be archived/compiled on the web site. The last time someone attempted such a thing, the reception to the effort was not great. [ quoted text not captured ]