xi...@waste.org (Xian) wrote:
> vte...@wizards.com (LSJ) wrote:
> > On VTES-L, Xavier Abad wrote:
> > > If retainers recruited by a vampire with basic discipline are transferred
via
> > > Heidelburg Castle to a vampire with superior use of the discipline, can
this
> > > vampire use this retainers at the superior version althought these
retainers
> > > weren't recruited by him?
> >
> > No. The retainer's abilities are set when he is recruited. Changes in
> > the skills of the vampire he is on do not affect this.
>
> Okay...maybe I'm mis-remembering something LSJ, but I thought you said a
> couple months back that a retainer's *life* does not change when transferred
> (it is 'set' at that point), but if switched to a different vampire, if the
> vampire's skills are different, then the new level may/must be used,
> depending on the situation...[snip]
I'm positive I didn't say that. If I did, allow me to correct that now.
A retainer's abilities don't change after he's brought into play, no
matter how his employer changes.
> Also, something else that came up the other night...I was playing with *more*
> new people, and they had the (mistake, I thought) impression (luckily it
> didn't come up in the game, but as a matter of discussion about errata...)
> that damage prevention cards may be used outside of combat. This came up of
> course, while discussing the changes to Rutor's Hand. I looked through the
> RTR & such, and all I found was the following from the Revised Rulebook (and
> a similar phrase in the old rulebook...):
>
> Combat cards: These are played by minions when in combat (see Combat,
> sec. 6.4).
>
> Wasn't Rutor's hand specifically errata-ed to *allow* damage prevention
> (combat) cards to be used on it? IIRC, the original card text is 'Inferior:
> blah blah blah x aggravated damage, unpreventable; Superior: As above, but
> the damage is preventable.'
It had been so errata'ed, but that errata was overturned by the 7/7 errata:
"Superior: As above, but this vampire can pay 3 blood to prevent the damage."
> Could you shed some light on this? The only other action & action mods that
> I can think of that inflict damage all mention that the damage is
> unpreventable.
Correct, because damage outside of combat is unpreventable in general,
according to Tom Wylie [09-DEC-95].
That doesn't work out exactly that way in practice, since not all
outside-of-combat-damage-dealers remember to state that "this damage
is not preventable" and Blood Tears failed to limit its prevent-damage
effect to combat (as Tom Wylie implied that it should have in his post
of 09-DEC-95 - well before it was printed).
But, the net effect of the omissions is negligible, so no errata
has been issued to correct the situation (since there is enough
errata to go around already).
> This new group is attempting to keep current, but I couldn't
> recall what the word on damage prevention was...
It's fairly straight-forward:
Damage Prevention can be played whenever damage is taken.
Combat effects (esp. combat cards) can be played only during combat.
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and DCI (tournament) rules:
http://www.wizards.com/VTES/VTES_Rules.html
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
[ quoted text not captured ]