Stealing life from Tunnel Runner

Hi, In a recent game there came up the topic of whether a vampire stealing life from a Tunnel Runner will first steal life and then take damage? So, to provide an example a vampire with 1 blood is blocked by a Tunnel Runner. The Tunnel Runner hit's the vampire for 1 damage, and the vampire tries to steal 2 life from the Tunnel Runner. Will the vampire go to torpor for taking 1+2 damage or will he or she be left with 0 blood because all strikes unless they are first strikes or combat ends resolve simultaneously? Relevant card text: > > Name: Tunnel Runner > [EK:C] > Cardtype: Ally > Clan: Akunanse > Cost: 4 pool > Werewolf with 3 life. 1 strength, 1 bleed. > The Runner may play cards that require Animalism [ani] as a vampire and may burn 1 life to get +1 stealth. If he successfully bleeds, you may look at the target Methuselah's hand. A vampire stealing life from the Runner takes 1 damage for each point stolen. If the Runner has 2 or fewer life during your unlock phase, he gains 1 life. > Artist: Brian LeBlanc > Prince of Tikkurila, known as Teemu P in Lackey CCG

> Khalid1988 wrote: > In a recent game there came up the topic of whether a vampire stealing life from a Tunnel Runner will first steal life and then take damage? > > So, to provide an example a vampire with 1 blood is blocked by a Tunnel Runner. The Tunnel Runner hit's the vampire for 1 damage, and the vampire tries to steal 2 life from the Tunnel Runner. > > Will the vampire go to torpor for taking 1+2 damage or will he or she be left with 0 blood because all strikes unless they are first strikes or combat ends resolve simultaneously? > So, the damage Tunnel Runner inflicts isn't from a strike but let's assume similar timing. Strikes that aren't first strike or combat ends happen simultaneously, yes. The effect of a steal blood strike is to take the counters. The effect of a damage-dealing strike is to apply the damage to you. You do not burn the relevant amount of blood immediately. Why? Because damage prevention can happen. Leave Tunnel Runner alone. You are on full blood, and I am on some blood (irrelevant). I hit you with a hand strike for one damage, and you steal 2 blood from with superior Theft of Vitae. What happens? You steal the two blood, the excess drains off, and then you burn 1 blood from the hand strike, leaving you at one below capacity. From the rulebook: Cohn Rose enters combat with a mage ally. Cohn has a capacity of 5 and has 4 blood. The mage has 2 life. After determining range, Cohn steals 3 blood as his strike. The mage strikes for 2R damage. Two life counters are moved to Cohn from the mage, and Cohn sustains 2 damage. Cohn has 6 blood, but his capacity is only 5, so 1 blood is moved to the blood bank. The mage has no life counters remaining, so he is burned. Cohn has 2 damage to deal with and doesn't prevent any, so he burns 2 blood to heal the damage, leaving him with 3 blood.

Upon strike resolution: The vampire steals 2 blood and takes 2 damage. Then the vampire takes 1 damage from the Tunnel Runner's strike. The vampire ends up with 0 blood. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

Thought so as well. Thanks for confirming the hazy memory. Prince of Tikkurila, known as Teemu P in Lackey CCG

> Ankha wrote: > Upon strike resolution: > The vampire steals 2 blood and takes 2 damage. > Then the vampire takes 1 damage from the Tunnel Runner's strike. The vampire ends up with 0 blood. > While the end result is the same, this sequence is wrong and a frequent cause of confusion. 6.4.3 (...) The effects of the strikes from both minions are resolved simultaneously. The steal blood and taking damage all happen at the same time. However, the 'burn blood to heal damage' phase only happens after damage is applied, so the correct sequence is: 1. Minions declares strikes (acting minion first) 2. Both strikes resolve at the same time: - vampire steals 2 blood (move 2 counters to the vampire, remove 2 counters from Tunnel Runner) and takes 2 damage - Tunnel Runner strike deals 1 damage to the vampire (note that the vampire has accumulated 3 damage at this point, but burned no blood yet) 3. Minions plays damage prevention cards (lets assume no damage prevention is played) 4. Minions burns blood/life for each non-prevented damage (3 blood from the vampire, 0 from the Tunnel Runner) IME, this has been one of the most frequent questions in VtES games since the Jyhad days (along with 'Did I gain pool from the edge?')

Theft of Vitae vs Shambling Hordes is the stack in a stackless game. 'How much strength does Shambling Hordes hits the Tremere with?' Name: Shambling Hordes [FN:C2, LotN:PG4] Cardtype: Ally Cost: 3 blood Discipline: Necromancy Zombie with 3 life. 0 strength, 0 bleed. [nec] When Shambling Hordes enters play, remove an ally or vampire in your ash heap from the game or burn the Hordes. The Hordes gets +1 strength for each life counter it has. It can never gain life; any life it gains goes to the blood bank instead. The Hordes can enter combat with any minion as a action. [NEC] As above, with 4 life. Artist: Steve Ellis

> skimflux wrote: > > > Ankha wrote: > > Upon strike resolution: > > The vampire steals 2 blood and takes 2 damage. > > Then the vampire takes 1 damage from the Tunnel Runner's strike. The vampire ends up with 0 blood. > > > While the end result is the same, this sequence is wrong and a frequent cause of confusion. > > 6.4.3 (...) The effects of the strikes from both minions are resolved simultaneously. > > The steal blood and taking damage all happen at the same time. However, the 'burn blood to heal damage' phase only happens after damage is applied, so the correct sequence is: > > 1. Minions declares strikes (acting minion first) > 2. Both strikes resolve at the same time: > - vampire steals 2 blood (move 2 counters to the vampire, remove 2 counters from Tunnel Runner) and takes 2 damage > - Tunnel Runner strike deals 1 damage to the vampire > (note that the vampire has accumulated 3 damage at this point, but burned no blood yet) > 3. Minions plays damage prevention cards (lets assume no damage prevention is played) > 4. Minions burns blood/life for each non-prevented damage (3 blood from the vampire, 0 from the Tunnel Runner) > > IME, this has been one of the most frequent questions in VtES games since the Jyhad days (along with 'Did I gain pool from the edge?') > Thank you, but why are you saying the sequence is not correct? Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Brum wrote: > Theft of Vitae vs Shambling Hordes is the stack in a stackless game. > 'How much strength does Shambling Hordes hits the Tremere with?' > > Name: Shambling Hordes > > [FN:C2, LotN:PG4] > Cardtype: Ally > Cost: 3 blood > Discipline: Necromancy > Zombie with 3 life. 0 strength, 0 bleed. > [nec] When Shambling Hordes enters play, remove an ally or vampire in your ash heap from the game or burn the Hordes. The Hordes gets +1 strength for each life counter it has. It can never gain life; any life it gains goes to the blood bank instead. The Hordes can enter combat with any minion as a action. > [NEC] As above, with 4 life. > Artist: Steve Ellis > A good question, which would almost warrant it's own topic. Thanks for bringing it up! Prince of Tikkurila, known as Teemu P in Lackey CCG

> Khalid1988 wrote: > > > Brum wrote: > > Theft of Vitae vs Shambling Hordes is the stack in a stackless game. > > 'How much strength does Shambling Hordes hits the Tremere with?' > > > > Name: Shambling Hordes > > > > [FN:C2, LotN:PG4] > > Cardtype: Ally > > Cost: 3 blood > > Discipline: Necromancy > > Zombie with 3 life. 0 strength, 0 bleed. > > [nec] When Shambling Hordes enters play, remove an ally or vampire in your ash heap from the game or burn the Hordes. The Hordes gets +1 strength for each life counter it has. It can never gain life; any life it gains goes to the blood bank instead. The Hordes can enter combat with any minion as a action. > > [NEC] As above, with 4 life. > > Artist: Steve Ellis > > > A good question, which would almost warrant it's own topic. Thanks for bringing it up! > There is no stack involved, unless you see two consecutive events as a stack (but don't blame the rules if you see stacks where there are none!) The two consecutive events are: Minion A announces his strike (let's say: steat 2 blood). Minion B announces his strike (let's say: hand strike for 4 damage). Strikes resolve simultaneously: A steals 2 blood from B, B inflicts 4 damage on A A decides to prevent or to heal damage. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > > > skimflux wrote: > > > > > Ankha wrote: > > > Upon strike resolution: > > > The vampire steals 2 blood and takes 2 damage. > > > Then the vampire takes 1 damage from the Tunnel Runner's strike. The vampire ends up with 0 blood. > > > > > > > > While the end result is the same, this sequence is wrong and a frequent cause of confusion. > > (...) > > > Thank you, but why are you saying the sequence is not correct? > Because you wrote 'Then the vampire takes 1 damage(...)', implying a sequence.

> Ankha wrote: > > > Khalid1988 wrote: > > > > > Brum wrote: > > > Theft of Vitae vs Shambling Hordes is the stack in a stackless game. > > > 'How much strength does Shambling Hordes hits the Tremere with?' > > > > > > Name: Shambling Hordes > > > > > > [FN:C2, LotN:PG4] > > > Cardtype: Ally > > > Cost: 3 blood > > > Discipline: Necromancy > > > Zombie with 3 life. 0 strength, 0 bleed. > > > [nec] When Shambling Hordes enters play, remove an ally or vampire in your ash heap from the game or burn the Hordes. The Hordes gets +1 strength for each life counter it has. It can never gain life; any life it gains goes to the blood bank instead. The Hordes can enter combat with any minion as a action. > > > [NEC] As above, with 4 life. > > > Artist: Steve Ellis > > > > > > > > A good question, which would almost warrant it's own topic. Thanks for bringing it up! > > > There is no stack involved, unless you see two consecutive events as a stack (but don't blame the rules if you see stacks where there are none!) > The two consecutive events are: > Minion A announces his strike (let's say: steat 2 blood). > Minion B announces his strike (let's say: hand strike for 4 damage). > Strikes resolve simultaneously: A steals 2 blood from B, B inflicts 4 damage on A > A decides to prevent or to heal damage. > I understand the sequence. The issue is when does the Total Strength of the Minion counts for the damage. It is not really clear for new players. Between strike declaration and damage resolution the Horde looses strength. (if it dies, that's a whole different point). But that's ok, 'cause the strike's original strength is previously saved in a 'you might call it a stack or paralymbus or Azoressaurus or anything else'.

> Ankha wrote: > > > Khalid1988 wrote: > > > > > Brum wrote: > > > Theft of Vitae vs Shambling Hordes is the stack in a stackless game. > > > 'How much strength does Shambling Hordes hits the Tremere with?' > > > > > > Name: Shambling Hordes > > > > > > [FN:C2, LotN:PG4] > > > Cardtype: Ally > > > Cost: 3 blood > > > Discipline: Necromancy > > > Zombie with 3 life. 0 strength, 0 bleed. > > > [nec] When Shambling Hordes enters play, remove an ally or vampire in your ash heap from the game or burn the Hordes. The Hordes gets +1 strength for each life counter it has. It can never gain life; any life it gains goes to the blood bank instead. The Hordes can enter combat with any minion as a action. > > > [NEC] As above, with 4 life. > > > Artist: Steve Ellis > > > > > > > > A good question, which would almost warrant it's own topic. Thanks for bringing it up! > > > There is no stack involved, unless you see two consecutive events as a stack (but don't blame the rules if you see stacks where there are none!) > The two consecutive events are: > Minion A announces his strike (let's say: steat 2 blood). > Minion B announces his strike (let's say: hand strike for 4 damage). > Strikes resolve simultaneously: A steals 2 blood from B, B inflicts 4 damage on A > A decides to prevent or to heal damage. > Agreed, there is no need for a stack here. However you are missing the window 'before strike resolution' in your example, so I would clarify it like this: 1. Choose strike: 1.a Minion A announces his strike (steal 2 blood) 1.b Minion B (Shambling Hordes) announces his strike (hand strike for damage equals to his life - 4) 2. 'Before strike resolution' window can modify strike effects (eg, if Blood to Water is played the SH burns and combat ends) 3. Resolve Strike (both strikes resolve at the same time): 3.a. Determine strike effects (for both strikes: so the SH are hitting for 4, and Minion A is stealing 2 blood) 3.b. Apply strike effects 4. (If damage exists) Resolve damage 4.a Play/use damage prevention 4.b Heal/apply damage Note that 3.a and 3.b are atomic (meaning no effects can change the game state between them) and not in the rulesbook, but I would argue that this breakdown exists implicitly, otherwise the results of the SH strike are undetermined/ambiguous (because during the Strike Resolution they will be both at 4 and 2 life)

> Brum wrote: > The issue is when does the Total Strength of the Minion counts for the damage. > It is not really clear for new players. Between strike declaration and damage resolution the Horde looses strength. (if it dies, that's a whole different point). > But that's ok, 'cause the strike's original strength is previously saved in a 'you might call it a stack or paralymbus or Azoressaurus or anything else'. > A stack means that you have a last-in-first-out (LIFO) logic - this is not the case here (I think you'd have a much stronger case arguing for the existence of stacks in VtES when discussing Sudden Reversal/Direct Intervention). There is a 'memory register' for this effect, yes, but this is neither a stack nor at all strange in VtES - all action cards work on the same principle, where you play the card to have an effect at a later point in the play sequence and this effect can be modified between those two points.

> skimflux wrote: > > > Brum wrote: > > The issue is when does the Total Strength of the Minion counts for the damage. > > It is not really clear for new players. Between strike declaration and damage resolution the Horde looses strength. (if it dies, that's a whole different point). > > But that's ok, 'cause the strike's original strength is previously saved in a 'you might call it a stack or paralymbus or Azoressaurus or anything else'. > > > A stack means that you have a last-in-first-out (LIFO) logic - this is not the case here (I think you'd have a much stronger case arguing for the existence of stacks in VtES when discussing Sudden Reversal/Direct Intervention). > > There is a 'memory register' for this effect, yes, but this is neither a stack nor at all strange in VtES - all action cards work on the same principle, where you play the card to have an effect at a later point in the play sequence and this effect can be modified between those two points. > A Stack in card games can be LIFO and FIFO, depending on the game. Stacks in VtES are running jokes between some folks. Ever since Bundi (my big contention with LSJ) even the words 'and' and 'or' have different definitions than in Math or IT. I've had 2 hours of real life conversation with people who know much more than me of the topics of card game design and VtES, about this particular case (theft vs SH). It led nowhere because the game rules are broken (we enumerated some of the things that make it broken in a consensus). And that's the whole point here. The life total of the SH changes between strike declaration and strike resolution. Vincent's use of the word 'sequence' in the Tunnel Runner example is correct. First you move the blood or life and then the minion is dealt 2+1 damage. BTW guys, even if the SH would die as a result of the Theft of Vitae, it would STILL deal its 2 hand damage. The only counter intuitive thing here is if the minion playing superior Theft had no blood. There's 'memory' of what the strike was. But there's no stack.

> skimflux wrote: > However you are missing the window 'before strike resolution' in your example, so I would clarify it like this: > <snip detailed description> > I appreciate the effort, but the purpose of this thread is to answer the original question in which there is no prevention involved (otherwise, I would say that you are missing the DI window on the Blood to Water ), not to exhaust all possible scenarios for the sake of completeness Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> skimflux wrote: > > > Ankha wrote: > > > > > skimflux wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ankha wrote: > > > > Upon strike resolution: > > > > The vampire steals 2 blood and takes 2 damage. > > > > Then the vampire takes 1 damage from the Tunnel Runner's strike. The vampire ends up with 0 blood. > > > > > > > > > > > While the end result is the same, this sequence is wrong and a frequent cause of confusion. > > > (...) > > > > > Thank you, but why are you saying the sequence is not correct? > > > Because you wrote 'Then the vampire takes 1 damage(...)', implying a sequence. > Good catch. I'm well aware of the strike resolution being simultaneous, but is the damage from the Tunnel's Runner special ability added to the batch of damage of the hand strike, or not? That is the question. For instance, damage inflicted by Blood of Acid isn't (although it's a consequence of the strike). I think it should be added (making the 3 damage preventable with a single Soak), but I have to think about other scenarios (including the infamous: "what if the blood is stolen before range is determined, and the Tunnel Runner somehow manages to play an Outside the Hourglass at superior?") > Brum wrote: > Vincent's use of the word 'sequence' in the Tunnel Runner example is correct. > First you move the blood or life and then the minion is dealt 2+1 damage. > The "then" is ambiguous because both sources of damage would be inflicted at the same time. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > > > skimflux wrote: > > However you are missing the window 'before strike resolution' in your example, so I would clarify it like this: > > <snip detailed description> > > > I appreciate the effort, but the purpose of this thread is to answer the original question in which there is no prevention involved (otherwise, I would say that you are missing the DI window on the Blood to Water ), > Of course, I forgot about DI! Which opens up a window for Sudden Reversal, which is then countered by Wash... > not to exhaust all possible scenarios for the sake of completeness > Given the complexity of some scenarios, I find it is sometimes necessary to explore them quite extensively in order to be clear on why a certain result is achieved. No need to bring up Blood to Water here though, I'll give you that.

> Brum wrote: > A Stack in card games can be LIFO and FIFO, depending on the game. > Can you give an example of a fifo stack in a card game? I am not aware of such. As far as I know, the concept of "stack" as a LIFO data type is relatively universal. > Ever since Bundi (my big contention with LSJ) even the words 'and' and 'or' have different definitions than in Math or IT. > > It led nowhere because the game rules are broken (we enumerated some of the things that make it broken in a consensus). > That VTES rules are 'broken' we can agree on.. Smoking craters tell no tales. —Tex talks Battletech

> Ankha wrote: > > > skimflux wrote: > > However you are missing the window 'before strike resolution' in your example, so I would clarify it like this: > > <snip detailed description> > > > I appreciate the effort, but the purpose of this thread is to answer the original question in which there is no prevention involved (otherwise, I would say that you are missing the DI window on the Blood to Water ), not to exhaust all possible scenarios for the sake of completeness > yes, but what if I'm wearing red socks at the time?

> ReverendRevolver wrote: > > Also, if Matthias plays Anaesthetic Touch while opposing minion has out crows/Groaning Corpse, he takes no damage, correct? > Strike: hand strike. Combat ends immediately after the resolution of this strike. > As [obe] above, with first strike. > At superior Obeah, he takes no damage because Groaning Corpse inflicts its damage during the "normal strike resolution". Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> ReverendRevolver wrote: > Cancels should also happen before strike addons are played, so Death Seeker goes before Target Vitals, or less often seen, it would need to cancel disguised weapon before the flamethrower is played, but that's typically a fault on the player playing both at once (and again, it's only legal in you have the weapon in hand when you play disguised weapon, but if you draw ivory bow off DW you aren't obligated to play flamethrower since you now have another option. ) > Oh, is this correct as well? I was under impression that you couldn't try to be lucky with drawing a weapon if you didn't already have a weapon in your hand when Disguised/Concealed Weapon is played? This opens card cycling opportunities. Prince of Tikkurila, known as Teemu P in Lackey CCG

Pay attention, young prince: the quote says: "--and again, it's only legal in you have the weapon in hand when you play disguised weapon, but if you draw ivory bow off DW you aren't obligated to play flamethrower since you now have another option." You do need A weapon, but you don't need to equip with THE weapon. No tricky cycling. "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

> Kraus wrote: > Pay attention, young prince: the quote says: > > "--and again, it's only legal in you have the weapon in hand when you play disguised weapon, but if you draw ivory bow off DW you aren't obligated to play flamethrower since you now have another option." > > You do need A weapon, but you don't need to equip with THE weapon. No tricky cycling. > Hehe, ok! I guess it was wishful thinking. Certainly would make relieving your hand of unnecessary CWs and DWs when you already have enough weapons easier. Prince of Tikkurila, known as Teemu P in Lackey CCG

> Kraus wrote: > Pay attention, young prince: the quote says: > > "--and again, it's only legal in you have the weapon in hand when you play disguised weapon, but if you draw ivory bow off DW you aren't obligated to play flamethrower since you now have another option." > > You do need A weapon, but you don't need to equip with THE weapon. No tricky cycling. > This in incorrect. > LSJ wrote: > > So you could play concealed weapon w/ lets say a poker in hand > > and play the .44 magnum that you draw to replace CW. > So you would have to declare the CW: "I CW to equip a Poker from my > hand" before drawing the .44, and thus end up equipping the Poker. > groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/X8Uu7Sk56P4/twUvR4ZnBBkJ Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director