Actions, combat, for beginners

> DanielG wrote: > Going through the 2017 rulebook, The easiest part to understand, on the minion phase, was the stealth /intercept, politics, the action types broadly speaking > > Most difficult is definitely combat and the timing structure of actions > > Going in more detail about combat the most difficult aspects were maneuvers (using weapons), damage resolution (aggravated and damage prevention) while additional strikes and strike effects (except steal blood) were easier to grasp. > > I still struggle on my play group when a combat happens that involves maneuvers and / or press. That's why I sometimes opt to play with the simple rules detailed on the original VTES rulebook > > One common complaint was the amount of iconography and other memory issues like: > Card Icons (disciplines, actions, clans, etc.) Titles & Votes Phases of a turn Transfers > But the above was heavily mitigated by having a reference card > So..... Actions: I declare an action.im going to say the action is a Govern the unaligned with Jephta Hester[a !ventrue with ](I po it the card next to the now locked minion, and more the beads (if any) required for the cost from minion to action card) this is also the time to play anything stating "only usable as the action is announced" , like Seduction. Impulse goes out to the table to play cards that cancel the action, such as Direct Intervention or Dark influences. Lets assume they don't cancel the action. It's a bleed action directed at my prey. So, my prey gets the impulse to block me. They do. I choose to play Bonding at for +1 stealth and +1 bleed. Let's look at the 3 likely outcomes from here: 1. My prey has no way to get intercept. They ask "how much?" Which is then closing the window to block, passing the impulse. (Also, effects that let another player block ANY action, such as Eagles Sight would be played here, when normal blocker declines). I tell them "just 4" since Bonding prevents anything else from increasing the bleed amount. They burn 4 pool, I gain the edge. The action is ending, I may play freak drive if I choose. 2. Let's skip to the part above where they say "how much?" . I say 4, and they play Telepathic Misdirection and say "to my prey". I'm now bleeding my preys prey for 4 at one stealth, and they have the option to block, etc. 3. I play bonding, my preys Felicia Mostrom ( Toreador, ) plays a card granting +2 intercept (Eyes of Argus) . We are in combat. I'm the acting minion. That means I have the impulse first in combat. Combat starts with the window of time called "before range is determined " also known as pre range. The slang for cards played here is "pres" for simplicities sake, I'll say I play none of these cards. My prey now has the impulse and plays concealed weapon. This is a pre with no cost or requirement. It allows a minion to equip a non-unique weapon that costs 3 or less pool that does less than 4 damage and no aggravated damage. Felicia equips a 44 magnum. 2 pool is paid by her controller. The impulse passes back to me. I still have nothing and move on. We are in the manuever stage. I don't manuever. She goes to long with the 44 magnum. (Having used this manuever, her initial strike this round now is committed to the 44 magnum). I regain impulse, still do nothing, and declare my strike (hands. At long range. So I'm waving as I'm being shot at) Felicia shoots for 2R with gun. I play Indomitability to prevent one damage with an optional press. (I had 5 blood starting with, since my Govern was blocked) Felicia plays Blur for 2 additional strikes. Each is 2R with gun. I'm out of blood, but not in torpor. I press to end. (That's the step after additional strikes) combat is ending. Felicia plays Psyche! A new combat starts. She goes to long. This time, she plays Dragons Breath Rounds. Her gun now does +2 aggravated damage. The first single point of aggravated damage sends me to torpor. To prevent my own demise, I must burn one blood for each additional point of aggravated damage after the first one. But I'm out of blood, and have 3 aggravated damage to deal with, so I burn. It helps to actually play, but i hope I've given something usable. Maybe let us know what you have and we can explain what they do and when they do it.

> ReverendRevolver wrote: > So..... > > Actions: > I declare an action.im going to say the action is a Govern the unaligned with Jephta Hester[a !ventrue with ](I po it the card next to the now locked minion, and more the beads (if any) required for the cost from minion to action card) this is also the time to play anything stating "only usable as the action is announced" , like Seduction. > Impulse goes out to the table to play cards that cancel the action, such as Direct Intervention or Dark influences. > Actually, the window to cancel Govern is before Seduction is played. There is a silent "as announced" phase that happens after playing govern where you play seduction (or other cards that are "only usable as the action is announced") Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

> ReverendRevolver wrote: > I'm out of blood, but not in torpor. I press to end. (That's the step after additional strikes) combat is ending. Felicia plays Psyche! A new combat starts. She goes to long. This time, she plays Dragons Breath Rounds. Her gun now does +2 aggravated damage. > > The first single point of aggravated damage sends me to torpor. To prevent my own demise, I must burn one blood for each additional point of aggravated damage after the first one. But I'm out of blood, and have 3 aggravated damage to deal with, so I burn. > DBR does +2 aggravated damage, on top of 2 normal damage. The base damage (the normal damage from .44 Magnum) doesn't inherit the properties of the additional damage. You're not taking 4 agg damage. Since you're already empty, the first point of normal damage will send you to torpor because you cannot heal it. The second point of normal damage is irrelevant. The first point of aggravated damage will now just burn you - it doesn't send you to torpor, because you're already on your way to torpor. The second point of agg damage is irrelevant.

> brandonsantacruz wrote: > Actually, the window to cancel Govern is before Seduction is played. There is a silent "as announced" phase that happens after playing govern where you play seduction (or other cards that are "only usable as the action is announced") > I was under impression that seduction is played practically at the same time as govern, and neither card is replaced until it is clear that no direct intervention is coming. I'm bit busy right now so I'm not going to waste time digging up the post where I saw it as reference.. I'm saying this because if no cards are replaced, its relatively easy to backtrack what happened (a DI is played), even if players made a mistake in the ordering. If I'm mistaken, it sorta just proves that these things are too hard to remember and too complex. For the record, I was severely confused when I learned that "as the action is announced" and "As the card is played" are two separate phases, and announcing the action phase comes AFTER playing the card. That makes no sense to me, and is also opposite how it is done in Magic btw. In magic you first state your intent, and THEN play the card. Smoking craters tell no tales. —Tex talks Battletech

> Bloodartist wrote: > > > brandonsantacruz wrote: > > Actually, the window to cancel Govern is before Seduction is played. There is a silent "as announced" phase that happens after playing govern where you play seduction (or other cards that are "only usable as the action is announced") > > > I was under impression that seduction is played practically at the same time as govern, and neither card is replaced until it is clear that no direct intervention is coming. I'm bit busy right now so I'm not going to waste time digging up the post where I saw it as reference.. > Even if you find it, your reference is wrong. > Bloodartist wrote: > I'm saying this because if no cards are replaced, its relatively easy to backtrack what happened (a DI is played), even if players made a mistake in the ordering. > Ordering? You mean if the player didn't leave the time for other players to cancel the action card? Otherwise, the order is : play the action card, replace, play the Seduction, replace. > Bloodartist wrote: > For the record, I was severely confused when I learned that "as the action is announced" and "As the card is played" are two separate phases, and announcing the action phase comes AFTER playing the card. > That makes no sense to me, and is also opposite how it is done in Magic btw. In magic you first state your intent, and THEN play the card. > I think you are mixing up "All details of the action are declared when the action is announced, including the target(s), the cost, the effects, etc." (6.2.1. Announce the Action) and "as the action is announced" additional effects. 1. Play the action card. 1' Declare the details of the action. 2. Cancel ? 3. Replace 4. Play an "as the action is announced" effect 4'. Declare the details of that effect (the vampire who is being Seduced) 5. Cancel ? 6. Replace Repeat 4. as many times as desired 1. and 1". can be done simultaneously (= in any order as nothing is really simultaneous). That's where your Magic analogy fits. 4. + 4'. happen a long time after. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > > 1. Play the action card. > 1' Declare the details of the action. > 2. Cancel ? > 3. Replace > 4. Play an "as the action is announced" effect > 4'. Declare the details of that effect (the vampire who is being Seduced) > 5. Cancel ? > 6. Replace > Repeat 4. as many times as desired > > 1. and 1". can be done simultaneously (= in any order as nothing is really simultaneous). That's where your Magic analogy fits. > > 4. + 4'. happen a long time after. > I wasn't aware that DIs (or Power of All, etc) are resolved before players replace their cards. This would mean that: Player A plays Mind Rape and announces Player B's star minion, who he will tell to Abactor and vote to burn himself next turn Player B says "Fuck that, DI" (neither have replaced yet) Player C says "I like where this is going, let's get non-consensual" and Suddens player B's DI (none have replaced) Player D is playing a shitty deck and all he does this game is play Power of All once, on player C's Sudden. No one cancels Power of All because they have never seen it before, are in awe. Everyone redraws. Player B breathes a sigh of relief until the second Mind Rape hits the table.... Sound about right? Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

> brandonsantacruz wrote: > Sound about right? > Pretty much. The advantage of handling it this way, in my view, is that decisions about cancellation etc. are only about what cards you have in hand. In particular, since Wakes are specifically playable in the cancellation window(*), if they were replaceable, life could get awkward in terms of players trying to calculate whether they might draw into that cancellation minion card. As it is, everyone just looks at their hand and decides whether or not they can cancel the card, simplifying things. It can get a little messy if you're in the habit of replacing cards quickly and/or other players on the table are less quick to say "Hang on a sec... Yeah, I'm going to cancel that", and so you may have to rewind things occasionally. But on balance, I think that's the better trade-off. If playing something obviously controversial, or where you really want to avoid rewinding, you can of course pause and ask the table for cancellations explicitly rather than implicitly. (*) See the rulebook, in the bit between 1.6.1.1 and 1.6.1.2: "Some effects can cancel a card "as it is played." These effects as well as wake effects (see Special Terms, sec. 11) are the only effects allowed during the "as played" time period of another card. Even drawing to replace cards comes after this time period."

OP is phrased in a way that seems to indicate impule is passed to blockers/ non actining minions automatically - rather than once the action minion passes. eg "It's a bleed action directed at my prey. So, my prey gets the impulse to block me. " important to not acting minion can chuck a bunch of things in here first if they like. i also didnt see it mentioned that as soon as anything is played by the other non-actin- players, the impulse then moves straight back to acting player.

The game suddenly got a bit more complicated

> DanielG wrote: > The game suddenly got a bit more complicated > Fortunately few interactions are as complicated as the one I described. The key is asking people if they are playing cards so that you don't have to rewind, take back cards, etc. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

> DanielG wrote: > The game suddenly got a bit more complicated > Got? It has been like that for quite a long time/always, people just tend to play bit more streamlined. If you want to be super certain you'd need to ask after every card you play if someone wants to cancel them lest they start complaining that they didn't get a chance to do so. Probably happens once in 20-30 games so it just ain't worth it. Long time ago in the EC at Heidelberg I remember playing against Kamel the first time and he did play a cancel deck magnificently, always observing what was happening on the table and then quickly, clearly and audibly saying "stop" before the player who had played a card had a chance to redraw. Then we discussed if he should use the "DI or Sudden he had in his hand". Certainly the clearest and best play I've ever seen. (Well, effectively he was also playing time as to get his Week of Nightmares hit in the late game without the game actually having progressed hat far. But perfectly within the rules.) Finnish Politics!

In magic tournaments I've noticed a pretty good mannerism to go with such cards. You say "stop!" or "wait" immediately when you have the opportunity to cancel/counter, and only THEN ponder whether you actually want to commit to countering/canceling. If not, you just say "ok, continue", otherwise "I counter/cancel that". This ensures that no backtracking is needed, and as long as this is done in moderation (not to just mess with people, in which case you would get warning for delaying the game) it keeps things both in control, within the rules, and moving along smoothly. Of course you shouldn't do this with every single card opponents play, but only when it would be meaningful for you to cancel their card. Of course, since you don't need an actual card to say "Wait. Ok, continue", this can be done to bluff people as well, and they can't be sure whether you actually HAVE a cancel card, unless you are super obvious about it. Smoking craters tell no tales. —Tex talks Battletech

> Bloodartist wrote: > In magic tournaments I've noticed a pretty good mannerism to go with such cards. > > You say "stop!" or "wait" immediately when you have the opportunity to cancel/counter, and only THEN ponder whether you actually want to commit to countering/canceling. If not, you just say "ok, continue", otherwise "I counter/cancel that". This ensures that no backtracking is needed, and as long as this is done in moderation (not to just mess with people, in which case you would get warning for delaying the game) it keeps things both in control, within the rules, and moving along smoothly. Of course you shouldn't do this with every single card opponents play, but only when it would be meaningful for you to cancel their card. > > Of course, since you don't need an actual card to say "Wait. Ok, continue", this can be done to bluff people as well, and they can't be sure whether you actually HAVE a cancel card, unless you are super obvious about it. > Magic is a lot about response to effects from the other player, much more than in V:TES. So it makes a sense in Magic to systematically ask for any response. In VTES, the only response is cancellation, and it doesn't happen a lot. So it's clearly not applicable, especially in a game where 5 players can cancel each other's cards. Sometimes, you know there a chance that the card will be cancelled, so you ask first, but most of the time, it's inevitable to rewind. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

What if you cut cancellation? Would the world end? I assume no because it helps the Essence of VtES(tm) - Immortal Grapple. B)

> Ankha wrote: > Magic is a lot about response to effects from the other player, much more than in V:TES. So it makes a sense in Magic to systematically ask for any response. > > In VTES, the only response is cancellation, and it doesn't happen a lot. So it's clearly not applicable, especially in a game where 5 players can cancel each other's cards. Sometimes, you know there a chance that the card will be cancelled, so you ask first, but most of the time, it's inevitable to rewind. > I am not sure if you understood my post correctly. Doesn't sound like it at least. I didn't say "active player asks for responses". I said non-active player asks the active player to wait, while he ponders whether or not to react and cancel the card played by active player. This is better than the other two alternatives´: to just let active player to continue while non-active player goes through the same process, and then forces rewind if he decides upon the cancellation; Or the active player actively asking for responses after every single cancellable card he plays. This is not a rule and I don't expect it to become one. Its just a practical way of handling such situation. You are free to play your cards in whatever way you choose. Smoking craters tell no tales. —Tex talks Battletech

> Brum wrote: > What if you cut cancellation? > I'm asking you all to notice, that I wasn't first in to making this suggestion! NC Russia

> Brum wrote: > What if you cut cancellation? > Would the world end? > No, but if it was global - all cancellation - I would be particularly concerned about master cards. Being able to Wash or Sudden a powerful card is really helpful as a balancing factor. And that happens quite a bit, given that master cards are super-duper good, most of the time. If you restrict it just to not cancelling minion cards, the world wouldn't end, but it would hurt a bunch of things - the flavour of Abombwe, amongst other things. A handful of vampires have cancellation specials, which would render them overcosted.

> jamesatzephyr wrote: > > > Brum wrote: > > What if you cut cancellation? > > Would the world end? > > > No, but if it was global - all cancellation - I would be particularly concerned about master cards. Being able to Wash or Sudden a powerful card is really helpful as a balancing factor. And that happens quite a bit, given that master cards are super-duper good, most of the time. > > If you restrict it just to not cancelling minion cards, the world wouldn't end, but it would hurt a bunch of things - the flavour of Abombwe, amongst other things. A handful of vampires have cancellation specials, which would render them overcosted. > Well, there ARE other ways to go about dealing with problematic cards. Netrunner for example doesn't do reactions, but offers even more different solutions to dealing with or trashing/burning problematic cards. We also have plenty of abilities to deal with locations, arguably some of the strongest masters. It doesn't make sense to cancel MMPA liquidations or ashurs that much either. The most devastating thing usually is to cancel Villeins for ousts, which kind of boost S&B in early game and make for a weird who-shoots-first in some match ups. Granted, cancellation for silver bullets like Fear of Mekhet might be a matter of life and death for some archetype viabilities. Then again, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be that bad. You might, or might not, draw into your Sudden anyways. Pentex isn't that bad anyways, since there's always contest and begging for help. Getting ousts with an early Pentex to kill blocks would probably be as bad as it is now. Cancellation saves you only 40-60% of the time (purely a gut feeling). The DI meta game is heavily skill based however, and even if it's kind of daunting, a well played DI just might be the only thing keeping turbo Baali decks in check, and other combo monstrosities. I'd loathe to lose that, even if it's kind of out dated as a design mechanic. You can practically smell the 90's. At first glance getting rid of cancellation would hurt S&B the most, if they can't run 5-8 Suddens to seal the ousts. The rest is mostly about meta game. The DI hunt is both ancient as a mechanic, as well as a really interesting table control tool to support the multi-player aspect of the game (and offer control for every player). "Oh, to the Hades with the manners! He's a complete bastard, and calling him that insults bastards everywhere!" -Nalia De-Arnise garourimgazette.wordpress.com/ www.vekn.net/forum-guidelines

Netrunner's way to deal with problematic cards is to force players to learn how to play around them. Tempo is king in Netrunner and the game is very unforgiving to mistakes of judgement. I actually think that cancellation fosters the opposite of good play. A guy did Villen for 10 + Giant's Blood on Stanislava, without cancellation. Either the other players are forced to play well or that guy has a huge advantage and his game goes faster. Cancellation should not exist to re-balance unbalanced cards. We have a Vincent for that, now with instantaneous re-print possibilities. Cancellation instead serves as yet another tool to make the game fun, but at a high complexity cost, imo. Also it provokes a lot of attrition and discussions during tournaments. Same as Anneke/Eagle Sight.