Mask of a Thousand Faces & bleed

Mask of a Thousand Faces [obf] Only usable by a ready, untapped vampire other than the acting minion who is capable of performing the action. Not usable if any action modifiers or other effects have been used that could not have been used if this vampire were the acting vampire. Untap the acting minion and tap this vampire instead. The action continues with this vampire as the acting minion. Minion A goes bleed. Minion B plays Mask and continues bleed in place of A. Can minion A go bleed again after that?

I don't think so. NRA... the 1st minion declared a bleed action. He cannot repeat this action again this turn.

> jAvel wrote: > Minion A goes bleed. > Minion B plays Mask and continues bleed in place of A. > Can minion A go bleed again after that? > Yes. NRA kicks in when the action resolves (successfully or if blocked). Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > > > jAvel wrote: > > Minion A goes bleed. > > Minion B plays Mask and continues bleed in place of A. > > Can minion A go bleed again after that? > > > Yes. NRA kicks in when the action resolves (successfully or if blocked). > Correct.

I am disappointed by this as a ruling. The card text of mask reveals that the acting minion was never the one originally chosen but in fact was the masked one. The concept of the Mask is that the minion playing it was just assuming the look of the other. The very spirit of the card's design is jeopardized by this ruling.

Wake with the Evening's Freshness is a Thaumaturgy Ritual of Level 1. We have millions of examples of names of cards that are badly represented in card text. Millions because we also have weird "mistakes" with multiple cards, like a riffle being more expensive or harder to get than a motor bike or a jet plane (in the US!). If you think that cards should have been better named, I agree with you. Also, vampire pictures where they are in daylight... But we must remember this: Rulings are about card text and game rules. Not the name, nor the picture, nor the expansion, nor anything else. Just the cardtext and the applying rules. In that extent, for what is worth, this ruling makes perfect sense to me.

> edminister wrote: > I am disappointed by this as a ruling. The card text of mask reveals that the acting minion was never the one originally chosen but in fact was the masked one. > I am exteremly puzzled by this response. How is the post Pascal flagged as correct in conflict with the spirit of the card? -- National Coordinator South Africa

> drnlmza wrote: > > > edminister wrote: > > I am disappointed by this as a ruling. The card text of mask reveals that the acting minion was never the one originally chosen but in fact was the masked one. > > > I am exteremly puzzled by this response. How is the post Pascal flagged as correct in conflict with the spirit of the card? > It isn't, edminister probably just didn't read or think through the response enough. @edminister: It follows the "spirit of the card" perfectly, as A is revealed to never have actually have bled (it was B all along!) and hence A is free to bleed "again". Think it through again, and I'm sure it will make sense

Oh, I misread the ruling. Fantastic, it works as I had thought it did.

Reread the ruling. A can declare a bleed attempt after B plays Mask of a Thousand Faces on A's bleed action. A could even play Mask of a Thousand Faces after B plays Mask of a Thousand Faces on A's bleed. If A declares a bleed attempt, and B plays Mask of a thousand faces, when NRA kicks in - that is, at resolution time - A is not acting, and does not get tainted - that means A can declare a(nother) bleed action that turn.

> edminister wrote: > I am not debating the ruling, it makes sense but it is just disappointing in that the implication of the card title is lost in the mechanic. Vampire A is guilty of bleeding (unsuccessfully) despite the revelation that he or she never took the action. Yes, he tapped at some point and the action was announced so it implies that no repeat action comes into effect but when Mask hits the table it becomes immediately obvious that vampire A actually had nothing to do with the result of the action but he is still considered guilty even though everyone at the table knows the culprit was vampire B all along. You might as well have just used change of target instead and packed some more versatile method of generating stealth for vampire B. > You probably want to re-read the thread again. Minion A (who started the action in the first place) may do the same action (because A didn't resolve the action, B did instead). In short: A is not considered "guilty". pckvtes.wordpress.com