[lsj] freak drive after fizzled action question

A. Saulot Noses of the Hound a tapped Ali Kar. B. Ali untaps with Black Sunrise; attempts to block. C. Block fails, as Ali doesn't have enough intercept. Everyone else declines to block. D. Nose fizzles, because now Ali is untapped. Can Saulot Freak Drive now? We ruled "no", since the action wasn't successful (negating basic FD), and Saulot was not blocked (negating the superior version). Correct? cheers, Jon

[ quoted text not captured ] The action was successful (reached resolution unblocked). Saulot can Freak.

> > Correct? > > The action was successful (reached resolution unblocked). > Saulot can Freak. I believe that if the action is canceled, that he can't though - is this correct? eg, Does something, Kiss of Ra - cancels the action. Now there is no action to play an action modifier (freak drive) on. --> J grail_pbem "at" hotmail.com

[ quoted text not captured ] Correct, for two reasons -- as you say, there is no action to modify. Moreover, in the Kiss of Ra case, the action never reached resolution.

In message <1176333952.3...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, J <gra...@hotmail.com> writes: >eg, Does something, Kiss of Ra - cancels the action. Now there is no >action to play an action modifier (freak drive) on. Point of pedantry: Kiss of Ra doesn't cancel the action, it ends it. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

If a minion is performing an action and isn't able to pay for it at the end of the action. Because of some played modifiers for exsample. Can that minion still play freakdrive at normal level? I would say yes, since: "The action was successful (reached resolution unblocked)." Does the above aply? Oortje

[ quoted text not captured ] He could, if he could pay for the Freak Drive (implying either that he pays less for Freak Drive or that the action costs pool -- if it costs blood, he has to pay as much as he can and has none left over to pay for Freak).

[ quoted text not captured ] Just triple-checking: If the action cost more blood than the vampire had, he pays as much as he can and then the resolution fizzles - but if the vamp has Perfectionist (assuming no reactions are played), he can gain a blood from that and then use that blood to Freak Drive (since both Perf and FD time in the 'after resolution' window, you can order the two as you like)? Course, then he would immediately have to hunt... -John Flournoy

John Flournoy wrote: > On Apr 12, 8:57 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> Oortje wrote: >>> If a minion is performing an action and isn't able to pay for it at >>> the end of the action. Because of some played modifiers for exsample. >>> Can that minion still play freakdrive at normal level? >>> I would say yes, since: "The action was successful (reached resolution >>> unblocked)." >>> Does the above aply? >> He could, if he could pay for the Freak Drive (implying either that he pays less >> for Freak Drive or that the action costs pool -- if it costs blood, he has to >> pay as much as he can and has none left over to pay for Freak). > > Just triple-checking: If the action cost more blood than the vampire > had, he pays as much as he can and then the resolution fizzles - but Correct. > if the vamp has Perfectionist (assuming no reactions are played), he > can gain a blood from that and then use that blood to Freak Drive > (since both Perf and FD time in the 'after resolution' window, you can > order the two as you like)? Course, then he would immediately have to > hunt... Heh. Sure. No reactions and yet he is still "surprised" by something that makes him have to play an action modifier that costs him enough blood so that he can't pay for the action. Right.

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message de news:RDrTh.9434$YL5....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... > > if the vamp has Perfectionist (assuming no reactions are played), he > > can gain a blood from that and then use that blood to Freak Drive > > (since both Perf and FD time in the 'after resolution' window, you can > > order the two as you like)? Course, then he would immediately have to > > hunt... > > Heh. Sure. No reactions and yet he is still "surprised" by something that makes > him have to play an action modifier that costs him enough blood so that he can't > pay for the action. Right. an Imbued who untaps with Angel of Berlin and gets 3 intercept with Winthrop, Unmasking and Second Sight. It wouldn't happen all the time, but it's not that far-fetched, is it? Stone

On 12 avr, 15:57, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > He could, if he could pay for the Freak Drive (implying either that he pays less > for Freak Drive or that the action costs pool -- if it costs blood, he has to > pay as much as he can and has none left over to pay for Freak). Does it mean that if the action costs pool, and that the player doesn't have enough pool at end of resolution, he doesn't have to pay as much as possible (ie : is there a difference between pool cost and blood cost) ? (I guess a scenario involves a Madness Network, a Direct Intervention and a KRCG :)).

> Heh. Sure. No reactions and yet he is still "surprised" by something that makes > him have to play an action modifier that costs him enough blood so that he can't > pay for the action. Right. A minion could attempt to block, possibly gaining intercept from effects on the table, without playing any reaction cards. The acting minion could then play some kind of blood costing stealth or block fails effect to avoid combat with the blocking minion, even though the action will fail. Granted this would be a pretty stupid move, since the possibility of it occuring should be obvious from the table state, but it is certainly possible. Another intereresting possibility is that an Imbued could untap or equip with a Sport Bike via Angel of Berlin. No reaction cards played, and not immediately obvious from table state.

v.ri...@gmail.com wrote: > On 12 avr, 15:57, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> He could, if he could pay for the Freak Drive (implying either that he pays less >> for Freak Drive or that the action costs pool -- if it costs blood, he has to >> pay as much as he can and has none left over to pay for Freak). > > Does it mean that if the action costs pool, and that the player > doesn't have enough pool at end of resolution, he doesn't have to pay > as much as possible (ie : is there a difference between pool cost and > blood cost) ? No, it means the opposite. Pay as much as possible (and be ousted). Giving rise to a whole new option of why Freak Drive can't be played -- ousted Methuselahs cannot play cards.

[ quoted text not captured ] What Stone said. Or a nasty-combat vampire burning a Zillah's Tears to untap and block the bleed action, prompting the use of costs-blood stealth/unblockable modifiers to avoid the combat. Or any of several other non-reaction 'play this/burn blood to untap' cards (Glutton, Special Report, Trophy: Domain and Eternal Vigilance, for instance, or Hannbial or Torvus or General Dios' specials) for that matter. Alternately still, being blocked and burning the last blood on superior Form of Mist to succeed at the action while fizzling the resolution (which might be a useful thing if that vampire can Freak and then hunt for multiple blood.) -John Flournoy

On Apr 12, 9:47 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Such as Special Report, Eternal Vigilance, Zillah's Tears, the specials of Torvus/Hannibal/General Dios, or Trophy:Domain followed by needing to spend blood for extra stealth, for instance. Or spending your last blood on a superior Form of Mist so that the action is successful (even if the resolution fizzles), which might still be worth it if you intend to Freak and then can hunt for >1 blood. -John Flournoy

On Apr 12, 11:10 am, "Stone" <mc_judge_st...@yahoo.fr> wrote: > "LSJ" <vtes...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message denews:RDrTh.9434$YL5....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... [ quoted text not captured ] You wanting to Freak Drive (and then hunt) afterward kinda is. witness1 -believe the lie

On Apr 12, 11:10 am, "Stone" <mc_judge_st...@yahoo.fr> wrote: > an Imbued who untaps with Angel of Berlin and gets 3 intercept with > Winthrop, Unmasking and Second Sight. It wouldn't happen all the time, but > it's not that far-fetched, is it? Huh. This raised a tangential question for me, and I couldn't find an answer for it when I searched the newsgroup. If a vampire with Perfectionist is acting, and successfully completes an action during which no reaction cards were played but an imbued power that acts as a reaction card is used, does that vampire gain blood from the Perfectionist? My hunch would be that he doesn't, due to the explanations of how imbued-reaction powers work in relation to On the Qui Vive and Blind Spot, but I dunno... John Eno

On Apr 12, 4:23 pm, "Kushiel" <invisibleking...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 12, 11:10 am, "Stone" <mc_judge_st...@yahoo.fr> wrote: > > > an Imbued who untaps with Angel of Berlin and gets 3 intercept with > > Winthrop, Unmasking and Second Sight. It wouldn't happen all the time, but > > it's not that far-fetched, is it? > > Huh. This raised a tangential question for me, and I couldn't find an > answer for it when I searched the newsgroup. > > If a vampire with Perfectionist is acting, and successfully completes > an action during which no reaction cards were played but an imbued > power that acts as a reaction card is used, does that vampire gain > blood from the Perfectionist? He does. No reaction cards were played. > My hunch would be that he doesn't, due to the explanations of how > imbued-reaction powers work in relation to On the Qui Vive and Blind > Spot, but I dunno... While you are able to play [timing symbol] cards, you may use [timing symbol] powers, otherwise not. It doesn't matter if you're allowed (or disallowed) by rule text or card text. witness1 -believe the truth

> > If a vampire with Perfectionist is acting, and successfully completes > > an action during which no reaction cards were played but an imbued > > power that acts as a reaction card is used, does that vampire gain > > blood from the Perfectionist? > > He does. No reaction cards were played. I think you may be correct here, but I'll wait for Scott to clarify. Activating powers requires that all the conditions under which that card type can be played be met (see below), but it does not count as playing a card. By the same token, power activations cannot be stopped by Direct Intervention or similar effects. > While you are able to play [timing symbol] cards, you may use [timing > symbol] powers, otherwise not. It doesn't matter if you're allowed (or > disallowed) by rule text or card text. Incorrect. See: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/df9843dbc7ffd17d When correcting other posters, please be sure that what you're saying is actually true. > witness1 > -believe the truth Do some research to verify that the truth is actually true, and then believe it.

CthuluKitty wrote: >>> If a vampire with Perfectionist is acting, and successfully completes >>> an action during which no reaction cards were played but an imbued >>> power that acts as a reaction card is used, does that vampire gain >>> blood from the Perfectionist? >> He does. No reaction cards were played. > > I think you may be correct here, but I'll wait for Scott to clarify. CthuluKitty is correct. The unattributed quote from witness1 is correct. Remember, keep the attribution lines for your quoted material. > Activating powers requires that all the conditions under which that > card type can be played be met (see below), but it does not count as > playing a card. By the same token, power activations cannot be > stopped by Direct Intervention or similar effects. Correct again. >> While you are able to play [timing symbol] cards, you may use [timing >> symbol] powers, otherwise not. It doesn't matter if you're allowed (or >> disallowed) by rule text or card text. > > Incorrect. See: > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/df9843dbc7ffd17d > > When correcting other posters, please be sure that what you're saying > is actually true. Correct, but I'm not sure that contradicts witness1's statement: "While you are able to play reaction cards, you may use reaction effects from powers." (Which he seems to contradict with his next statement, so I'm not sure what he meant). Anyway, the point is that the converse is also true: "While you are not able to play reaction cards, you may not use reaction effects from powers." And that's the interesting part.

On Apr 13, 8:00 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > CthuluKitty wrote: > > Incorrect. See: > >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/df98... > > > When correcting other posters, please be sure that what you're saying > > is actually true. > Correct, but I'm not sure that contradicts witness1's statement: "While you are > able to play reaction cards, you may use reaction effects from powers." Exactly. (Even if the effect that allows you to play reaction cards is a card, and not rule text). > (Which > he seems to contradict with his next statement, so I'm not sure what he meant). > > Anyway, the point is that the converse is also true: "While you are not able to > play reaction cards, you may not use reaction effects from powers." Exactly. (Even if the effect that disallows you from playing reaction cards is a card, and not rule text). > And that's the interesting part. Right. The rule on using powers piggy-backs on the rules for playing a card of the appropriate type. This doesn't make their use equivalent to playing a card for any purpose other than determining when you are (or aren't) allowed to use them. witness1

witness1 wrote: > While you are able to play [timing symbol] cards, you may use [timing > symbol] powers, otherwise not. It doesn't matter if you're allowed (or > disallowed) by rule text or card text. Oh now I see what you mean. It looked like what you were saying here was "you can use reaction-timed powers even if rules or card text says you can't play reaction cards" rather than "both rules text and card text can allow or disallow the use of powers". That's quite an ambiguous sentence you've got there.

[ quoted text not captured ] Right. Sorry about that. witness1 -believe, dammit!