LSJ: more undead persistence rules craziness (sorry)

the gist of this question is: is there time to play other cards after a vampire receives a "critical" agg wound but before burning blood to prevent his destruction? Example: Thetmes is in combat with Stravinsky, who has gained Fortitude from a Master discipline card. Each vamp has 6 blood on him. Stravinsky's methuselah realizes she can win the game somehow (perhaps via Minion Tap) if only Stravinsky had 2 more blood. She hopes to get Stravinsky that blood in the following manner. First round, each vampire employs a hand strike at close range. Since Thetmes' hand damage is aggravated, Stravinsky is sent to torpor - but wait! Stravinsky plays Undead Persistence to prevent himself from going to torpor for a while. He still has one unhealed damage, however. Next round, each vampire employs a hand strike at close range. Since Thetmes' hand damage is aggravated, and Stravinsky already has unhealed damage, Stravinsky is destroyed (burned) - but wait! Stravinsky has plenty of blood, so he must burn a blood to prevent his destruction - but wait! Couldn't he just play superior Reform Body to a) end this maddening combat, b) go to torpor, and c) gain those 2 precious blood his methuselah needs? It seems he has 2 options - burn a blood or play a card. But *can* he play the card, or is this a time when such a card can't be played? -davey!

[ quoted text not captured ] On a completely different note but it needs a ruling anyway, we were chatting about blessings of chaos and noted that it states if this vampire attempts to block does this count even if you are accross the table and say had sup. Auspex. Would you need to play an eagle sight or merely state you were intending to block ? Thanks,

radiophonic oddity wrote: > > the gist of this question is: is there time to play other cards after a > vampire receives a "critical" agg wound but before burning blood to > prevent his destruction? Yes. But see below. > Example: Thetmes is in combat with Stravinsky, who has gained Fortitude > from a Master discipline card. Each vamp has 6 blood on him. > Stravinsky's methuselah realizes she can win the game somehow (perhaps via > Minion Tap) if only Stravinsky had 2 more blood. She hopes to get > Stravinsky that blood in the following manner. > First round, each vampire employs a hand strike at close range. > Since Thetmes' hand damage is aggravated, Stravinsky is sent to torpor - > but wait! Stravinsky plays Undead Persistence to prevent himself from > going to torpor for a while. He still has one unhealed damage, however. > Next round, each vampire employs a hand strike at close range. > Since Thetmes' hand damage is aggravated, and Stravinsky already has > unhealed damage, Stravinsky is destroyed (burned) - but wait! Stravinsky > has plenty of blood, so he must burn a blood to prevent his destruction - Right - so he is not "being burned" at all. He is preventing destruction. > but wait! Couldn't he just play superior Reform Body to a) end this > maddening combat, b) go to torpor, and c) gain those 2 precious blood his > methuselah needs? It seems he has 2 options - burn a blood or play a > card. But *can* he play the card, or is this a time when such a card > can't be played? Reform Body cannot be played, since Stravinsky is not being burned. Just as a vampire who has blood with which to heal damage is not "going to torpor" when he takes damage (and cannot be Amaranthed, for example). -- LSJ (vte...@wizards.com) V:TES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.wizards.com/VTES/rules.asp

ne...@doughty-engineering.co.uk wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Jan 2000 16:06:13 -0600, radiophonic oddity > <dhat...@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote: > > > > >the gist of this question is: is there time to play other cards after a > >vampire receives a "critical" agg wound but before burning blood to > >prevent his destruction? > > > >Example: Thetmes is in combat with Stravinsky, who has gained Fortitude > >from a Master discipline card. Each vamp has 6 blood on him. > >Stravinsky's methuselah realizes she can win the game somehow (perhaps via > >Minion Tap) if only Stravinsky had 2 more blood. She hopes to get > >Stravinsky that blood in the following manner. > > First round, each vampire employs a hand strike at close range. > >Since Thetmes' hand damage is aggravated, Stravinsky is sent to torpor - > >but wait! Stravinsky plays Undead Persistence to prevent himself from > >going to torpor for a while. He still has one unhealed damage, however. > > Next round, each vampire employs a hand strike at close range. > >Since Thetmes' hand damage is aggravated, and Stravinsky already has > >unhealed damage, Stravinsky is destroyed (burned) - but wait! Stravinsky > >has plenty of blood, so he must burn a blood to prevent his destruction - > >but wait! Couldn't he just play superior Reform Body to a) end this > >maddening combat, b) go to torpor, and c) gain those 2 precious blood his > >methuselah needs? It seems he has 2 options - burn a blood or play a > >card. But *can* he play the card, or is this a time when such a card > >can't be played? > > > >-davey! > > > On a completely different note but it needs a ruling anyway, we were <Netiquette rant on> When starting a completely different note, please start a new thread (i.e., "post new" instead of "follow up" or "reply"). If you must "follow up" to an unrelated article, then please do not quote the unrelated article. </rant> > chatting about blessings of chaos and noted that it states if this > vampire attempts to block does this count even if you are accross the > table and say had sup. Auspex. Would you need to play an eagle sight > or merely state you were intending to block ? You cannot "attempt to block" actions you can't block. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2000, LSJ wrote: > > Next round, each vampire employs a hand strike at close range. > > Since Thetmes' hand damage is aggravated, and Stravinsky already has > > unhealed damage, Stravinsky is destroyed (burned) - but wait! Stravinsky > > has plenty of blood, so he must burn a blood to prevent his destruction - > > Right - so he is not "being burned" at all. He is preventing > destruction. well that's a little confusing. Neither "destroy" nor "destruction" are defined in the rules, and in every case where something is destroyed, such as the text describing destroy equipment, the something is always burned. should destruction of a card be considered "an effect that causes that card to burn"?

radiophonic oddity wrote: > > On Wed, 19 Jan 2000, LSJ wrote: > > > > Next round, each vampire employs a hand strike at close range. > > > Since Thetmes' hand damage is aggravated, and Stravinsky already has > > > unhealed damage, Stravinsky is destroyed (burned) - but wait! Stravinsky > > > has plenty of blood, so he must burn a blood to prevent his destruction - > > > > Right - so he is not "being burned" at all. He is preventing > > destruction. > > well that's a little confusing. Neither "destroy" nor "destruction" are > defined in the rules, and in every case where something is destroyed, > such as the text describing destroy equipment, the something is always > burned. Right. A vampire destroyed is a vampire burned. I don't see the confusion. > should destruction of a card be considered "an effect that causes > that card to burn"? No. Destruction is burning. A vampire who burns a blood to prevent his destruction is not burned, since the burning is prevented. Since he is not being destroyed/burned, he cannot play Reform Body. If he was unable to prevent his destruction (i.e., he didn't have enough blood to prevent his destruction), then he would be burned. In the process, he could play Reform Body, since he would be "being burned" under those conditions. [ quoted text not captured ]