Quick questions which I seem to fail to find a proper rulings for:
If Vamp A is already under the effect of Undead Persistence (will not go to torpor until combat ends), what happens if Vamp B plays Entombment at superior against Vamp A (send the opposing vampire to torpor)?
Slight corollary to this:
If Vamp A is under the effect of Undead Persistence and ends up about to be burned due to, say, aggravated damage... what happens if he plays Ashes to Ashes at outferior level (Only usable by a vampire being burned; he or she is sent into torpor instead)?
I suspect that the Undead Persistence effect will, err, persist against both Entombment and Ashes to Ashes, but just wanted a solid confirmation on these.
Thanks!
I think neither are legal to play. The vampire can not go to torpor, so opposing minions can not strike Entombment, likewise he can not play Ashes to Ashes to prevent burning. It makes since to me, so I must be wrong.
Relevant cardtext, I colorized the specific sections related to my inquiry:
Undead Persistence
[for] Only usable when this vampire should go into torpor. This vampire gets an optional press and will not go to torpor until combat ends (although he or she is still considered wounded and can be burned as normal). If three rounds of combat pass with no cards played, combat ends. This vampire is sent into torpor after combat.
[FOR] Prevent 1 or 2 damage.
Entombment
[obt] Strike: burn the opposing ally.
[OBT] Strike: send the opposing vampire into torpor.
Ashes to Ashes
[for] Only usable by a vampire being burned; he or she is sent into torpor instead.
[thn] Prevent all damage. This vampire untaps and goes to torpor (ending combat).
[THN] As [thn] above, and this vampire gains 2 blood from the blood bank.
> Toad wrote:
> Quick questions which I seem to fail to find a proper rulings for:
>
> If Vamp A is already under the effect of Undead Persistence (will not go to torpor until combat ends), what happens if Vamp B plays Entombment at superior against Vamp A (send the opposing vampire to torpor)?
>
Vamp A remains in combat, due to the protection of Undead Persistence.
[LSJ 20100218]
>
> LSJ wrote:
> > Another scenario, I might have asked this one before though not in
> > these specific terms:
> > Vampire A strikes Coma on Vampire B (no dodge etc)
> > Vampire B plays undead persistance and continues combat with a press
>
> ... Vampire B is wounded at this point.
>
> > Vampire A strikes Coma again on Vampire B (no dodge etc)
>
> Wounding B again (which B ignores because of Undead Persistence).
>
> Toad wrote:
> If Vamp A is under the effect of Undead Persistence and ends up about to be burned due to, say, aggravated damage... what happens if he plays Ashes to Ashes at outferior level (Only usable by a vampire being burned; he or she is sent into torpor instead)?
>
At thanatosis, Vamp A does not go to torpor, but the rest of Ashes to Ashes functions as normal (such as untapping and blood gain).
[LSJ 20020211]
> LSJ wrote:
> > 1-if a vamp plays undead persistence when about to go to torpor, and
> > then in a later round plays ashes to ashes what happens?
> >
> > Does ATA end combat? Or does the ATA effect only kick in when the
>
> > vamp finally goes to torpor after the 3+rounds of undead persistence?
>
> ATA doesn't end combat per se. It sends the vampire to torpor. Undead
> Persistence prevents that effect. The rest of A2A's effect occurs normally.
>
At Fortitude, the "go to torpor" effect would just be ignored, making it basically a free card to cycle.
So Undead Persistence really protects the vampire from going to torpor until the combat ends then, check...
> jamesatzephyr wrote:
> At Fortitude, the "go to torpor" effect would just be ignored, making it basically a free card to cycle.
>
... a free card to cycle which prevents the vampire from burning and continues the Undead Persistence combat, though, right? assuming there's presses to continue the combat further?
> Toad wrote:
>
> > jamesatzephyr wrote:
> > At Fortitude, the "go to torpor" effect would just be ignored, making it basically a free card to cycle.
> >
> ... a free card to cycle which prevents the vampire from burning and continues the Undead Persistence combat, though, right?
>
Yeah, early morning brain fart.
An important thing when reading the following is that the previous scenario had already had Vamp A play Undead Persistence due to being wounded (by something). So the second one isn't playable, because the vampire is never going to torpor in combat (due to the first UP's text). But it confirms you can play AtA in that situation, and stay in combat.
[LSJ 20020622]
> LSJ wrote:
> > Ok, but i was meaning a different thing:
> > vamp A is being burned due aggro damage in combat,
> > vamp A plays Ashes to Ashes at the fortitude version
> > (then vampire A is not burned, but sent to torpor instead), can
> > vamp A plays undead persistence at that point (going into torpor
> > due AtA, and keeping himself in combat with UP)?
>
> No, since AtA won't send him to torpor - the previously-played UP
> is keeping him out of torpor, as The Lasombra said. The
> previously-played UP keeps him in combat
>
Correct answers.
UP keeps the vampire from going to torpor. If an effect would send a vampire under UP to torpor in that combat, it has no effect (regarding the sending to torpor - other effects are, orf course, kept). This applies to Entombment, Rowan Ring, Ashes to Ashes, Mummify, etc.
Correct answers.
UP keeps the vampire from going to torpor. If an effect would send a vampire under UP to torpor in that combat, it has no effect (regarding the sending to torpor - other effects are, orf course, kept). This applies to Entombment, Rowan Ring, Ashes to Ashes, Mummify, etc.
Correct answers.
UP keeps the vampire from going to torpor. If an effect would send a vampire under UP to torpor in that combat, it has no effect (regarding the sending to torpor - other effects are, orf course, kept). This applies to Entombment, Rowan Ring, Ashes to Ashes, Mummify, etc.
[LSJ 20100218]
>
> LSJ wrote:
> > Another scenario, I might have asked this one before though not in
> > these specific terms:
> > Vampire A strikes Coma on Vampire B (no dodge etc)
> > Vampire B plays undead persistance and continues combat with a press
>
> ... Vampire B is wounded at this point.
>
> > Vampire A strikes Coma again on Vampire B (no dodge etc)
>
> Wounding B again (which B ignores because of Undead Persistence).
>
I never knew this from the rulebook:
> Wounded: A vampire who has received damage that he has not healed or a vampire in torpor or on his way to torpor is said to be wounded.
>
A vampire struck with a "send a vampire to torpor" strike is wounded. Huh.
That would mean that if your vampire struck with superior Coma, Entombment, or Rowan Ring and you had a Ghould Retainer and the Ivory Bow, the opposing vampire would be burned unless he could prevent the aggravated damage.
It also means that UP won't prevent the vampire from eventually going to torpor because of Coma or Entombment whenever combat ends, and I would have thought that would be the case.
> AaronC wrote:
> [LSJ 20100218]
> >
> > LSJ wrote:
> > > Another scenario, I might have asked this one before though not in
> > > these specific terms:
> > > Vampire A strikes Coma on Vampire B (no dodge etc)
> > > Vampire B plays undead persistance and continues combat with a press
> >
> > ... Vampire B is wounded at this point.
> >
> > > Vampire A strikes Coma again on Vampire B (no dodge etc)
> >
> > Wounding B again (which B ignores because of Undead Persistence).
> >
> I never knew this from the rulebook:
>
> > Wounded: A vampire who has received damage that he has not healed or a vampire in torpor or on his way to torpor is said to be wounded.
> >
> A vampire struck with a "send a vampire to torpor" strike is wounded. Huh.
>
> That would mean that if your vampire struck with superior Coma, Entombment, or Rowan Ring and you had a Ghould Retainer and the Ivory Bow, the opposing vampire would be burned unless he could prevent the aggravated damage.
>
No. He would be burned if he couldn't burn as much blood as he takes damage (to "prevent destruction")
For example, a vampire with 2 blood struck by a Rowan Ring and taking 2 damage from a .44 Magnum handled by a Ghoul Retainer wouldn't burn (ending in torpor with 0 blood). If he had only 1 blood, he would burn (aggravated or not, since because of the Rowan Ring he is "wounded").
> AaronC wrote:
> It also means that UP won't prevent the vampire from eventually going to torpor because of Coma or Entombment whenever combat ends
>
No, why do you say that?
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> Ankha wrote:
> For example, a vampire with 2 blood struck by a Rowan Ring and taking 2 damage from a .44 Magnum handled by a Ghoul Retainer wouldn't burn (ending in torpor with 0 blood). If he had only 1 blood, he would burn (aggravated or not, since because of the Rowan Ring he is "wounded").
>
How do you figure that? The rules (section 6.4.6) say
>
> If a vampire is wounded, he goes to torpor after all the damage is handled.
>
So unless your Rowan Ring is hitting with first strike, you would handle the damage as normal. (And if you are hitting with the ring with first strike then there is no other damage to handle. )
> Mael wrote:
>
> > Ankha wrote:
> > For example, a vampire with 2 blood struck by a Rowan Ring and taking 2 damage from a .44 Magnum handled by a Ghoul Retainer wouldn't burn (ending in torpor with 0 blood). If he had only 1 blood, he would burn (aggravated or not, since because of the Rowan Ring he is "wounded").
> >
> How do you figure that? The rules (section 6.4.6) say
> >
> > If a vampire is wounded, he goes to torpor after all the damage is handled.
> >
> So unless your Rowan Ring is hitting with first strike, you would handle the damage as normal. (And if you are hitting with the ring with first strike then there is no other damage to handle. )
>
Sorry, vampires can't burn because of non-aggravated damage, even if they're wounded (but it has nothing to do with the text you quoted. Relevant text is "6.4.6 Aggravated damage differs from normal damage in two ways: Aggravated damage cannot be healed, and aggravated damage can burn a vampire if that vampire is already wounded."). I chose a wrong example (replace the .44 Magnum by a Flamethrower to get it right).
But anyway, Aaron's assessment is still wrong.
> AaronC wrote:
> <snip>
> That would mean that if your vampire struck with superior Coma, Entombment, or Rowan Ring and you had a Ghould Retainer and the Ivory Bow, the opposing vampire would be burned unless he could prevent the aggravated damage.
>
-> the opposing vampire is burned only if he has no blood in that example.
cf. rulebook 6.4.6 "For each point of aggravated damage that is successfully inflicted on a wounded vampire, he must burn a blood to prevent his destruction."
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> Mael wrote:
> The rules (section 6.4.6) say
> >
> > If a vampire is wounded, he goes to torpor after all the damage is handled.
> >
> So unless your Rowan Ring is hitting with first strike, you would handle the damage as normal. (And if you are hitting with the ring with first strike then there is no other damage to handle. )
>
Not exactly as normal. Going to torpor after the damage is handled means you can play prevention card, but you're still wounded before that. It doesn't change anything for normal damage, but it does for aggravated since being wounded by the Entombments happens before handling the damage. See the 3 different examples below:
In all three examples, A has a Ghoul Retainer and B is at 1 blood
Ex. I. A strikes with an Entombment, GR strikes for 2 damage, B strikes for 1.
a) B is wounded.
b) B has to handle 2 damage -> burns 1 blood and can't heal the other damage
c) B goes to torpor, empty
Ex. II. A strikes with an Entombment, GR strikes for 2 aggravated damage, B strikes for 1.
a) B is wounded.
b) B has to handle 2 agg. damage -> burns 1 blood and can't "burn blood to prevent destruction" from the other damage => he is burned
Ex. III. A strikes for 2 aggravated damage (GR isn't used), B strikes for 1.
a) B has to handle 2 agg. damage -> the first damage wounds him, then B burns 1 blood and "to prevent destruction"
b) B goes to torpor, empty
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director