Discussion from the discord prompted the following questions:
1) Combat is at long range
Vampire A (of strength 1) strikes with Kerrie (R strength damage)
Vampire B strikes with Nightstick (prevent 3 damage)
Is the effect of Nightstick useable at long range against a ranged Kerrie strike and therefore vampire B doesn´t take any damage?
2) Does "Strike: prevent X damage" qualify as a "defensive strike" as S:D and S:CE? and therefore per the rules is useable at any range?
3) What other strikes qualify as "defensive strikes" other than S.D and S.CE?
Nightstick
Cardtype: Equipment
Cost: 1 pool
Melee weapon.
Strike: strength+1 damage. Or strike: prevent 3 damage to this striking minion from the opposing minion's next hand or melee weapon strike this round (including any currently-resolving hand or melee weapon strike). Only usable once each round.
Kerrie
[LoB:C/PI2]
Cardtype: Equipment
Cost: 1 pool
Melee weapon. Requires a Laibon.
Strength+1 damage each strike. Alternatively, inflict strength ranged damage as a strike and, after strike resolution, turn this weapon face down (out of play) until the end of the action.
Rulebook
Resolve Strike:
Most strikes are effective only at close range, unless the strike is identified as ranged, does “R” damage, or is a defensive strike such as dodge or combat ends.
Yep, I did point out in discord that "defensive strike" is not defined in the rulebook.
In this case, I suspect the answer is "yes" even though the rulebook doesn't support this.
Smoking craters tell no tales.
—Tex talks Battletech
> 1) Is the effect of Nightstick useable at long range against a ranged Kerrie strike and therefore vampire B doesn´t take any damage?
>
Strikes need to be described as ranged (or have R mark after damage) to work at long range - or be defensive ones. I think Nightsick "prevent" strike is not a defensive one, see below.
> 2) Does "Strike: prevent X damage" qualify as a "defensive strike" as S:D and S:CE? and therefore per the rules is useable at any range?
>
No. Defensive strike protects minion from all effects of the opposing minion's strike. Nightstick "prevent" strike doesn't protect for example from blood steal strike, "send to torpor" strikes etc.
>
> 3) What other strikes qualify as "defensive strikes" other than S.D and S.CE?
>
None in my opinion. Dodges and combat ends are the only strikes known to me that protect the minion using them from all effects of opposing minion's strike.
I get your thought process/red thread but I think you are making assumptions of what “defensive” incorporates and that it has to be an effect that protects the minion from the opposing minions strike which is questionable if S:CE does.
Dodge is to my knowledge the only effect that is explicitly defined as “protecting” the minion from the opposing minions strike.
By general definition of “offensive” and “defensive” one could easily come to the conclusion that strike effects done to the opponent are “offensive” and effects that aren’t done to the opponent are “defensive”…this could also be completely wrong in regards to vtes which by lack of definition with regards to the game has us discussing the question and asking for rulings/clarifications.
Combat Ends is not defensive by this definition. It don't pretect from other sce like catatonic fear.
Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.
Interesting. I don't see why preventing damage wouldn't work at long range: you're protecting yourself, range does not matter, basically, since you're not doing anything to the opponent: I think this qualifies as a defensive strike per the rulebook. I also see that one could argue Kerrie does not count as a melee weapon when used at range, but I would say it's a dubious argument: after all "melee weapon" is right there in the card text.
In absence of ruling, I would have ruled that Nightstick can be used to prevent Kerrie's damage.
> inm8 wrote:
> Discussion from the discord prompted the following questions:
>
> 1) Combat is at long range
> Vampire A (of strength 1) strikes with Kerrie (R strength damage)
> Vampire B strikes with Nightstick (prevent 3 damage)
>
> Is the effect of Nightstick useable at long range against a ranged Kerrie strike and therefore vampire B doesn´t take any damage?
>
No. Nightstick's strike is not effective at long range.
> inm8 wrote:
> 2) Does "Strike: prevent X damage" qualify as a "defensive strike" as S:D and S:CE? and therefore per the rules is useable at any range?
>
No. You can strike this term from the rulebook,
> inm8 wrote:
> 3) What other strikes qualify as "defensive strikes" other than S.D and S.CE?
>
Moot.
> Rulebook wrote:
> Resolve Strike:
> Most strikes are effective only at close range, unless the strike is identified as ranged, does “R” damage, or is a defensive strike such as dodge or combat ends.
>
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> Ankha wrote:
>
> > inm8 wrote:
> > Discussion from the discord prompted the following questions:
> >
> > 1) Combat is at long range
> > Vampire A (of strength 1) strikes with Kerrie (R strength damage)
> > Vampire B strikes with Nightstick (prevent 3 damage)
> >
> > Is the effect of Nightstick useable at long range against a ranged Kerrie strike and therefore vampire B doesn´t take any damage?
> >
> No. Nightstick's strike is not effective at long range.
>
Whoa!
It is totally obvious that Nightstick's "Strike: strength+1 damage" is only usable at close range, but that the "strike: prevent 3 damage to this striking minion from the opposing minion's next hand or melee weapon strike this round" would only be usable at short range sure seems odd (vs Kerrie's, a melee weapon, strike "Alternatively, inflict strength ranged damage as a strike").
I would understand that a damaging effect would require the strike to be R in order to be effective at Long Range, but a defensive effect is is rather counterintuitive (something this game seems to unfortunately excel in... :/ )
Granted this is something you do not run across all that often as neither tends to see much use!
Finnish Politics!
If this is a new direction with strike cards (special effects only effective at short range by default), I wonder if its necessary to alter Oubliette's cardtext?
Name: Oubliette
[SW:U/PL, Third:U, HttB:PKia3, SP:PoS3, POD:DTC]
Cardtype: Combat
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Obtenebration
[obt] Strike: combat ends.
[OBT] As above, and the opposing minion burns 1 blood or life after combat ends (even at long range).
Artist: Patrick Lambert
Oubliettes blood burning effect is effective at long range, but the text saying so is in brackets which is problematic. Text in brackets is interpreted as reminder text these days - as in not part of the actual card text. Reminder text could theoretically be removed without it affecting the card function.
So the current oubliette card text assumes that special effects are effective at long range without explicitly saying so.
I suggest changing this into something without brackets such as:
"As above, and the opposing minion burns 1 blood or life after combat ends at short or long range."
ps. Oubliette even saw reprint in the lasombra precon, so it is within the purview of the policy "no cardtext changes unless the card sees reprint" even.
Smoking craters tell no tales.
—Tex talks Battletech
> Bloodartist wrote:
> If this is a new direction with strike cards (special effects only effective at short range by default), I wonder if its necessary to alter Oubliette's cardtext?
>
No. And it's not a new direction.
> Bloodartist wrote:
> Oubliettes blood burning effect is effective at long range, but the text saying so is in brackets which is problematic. Text in brackets is interpreted as reminder text these days - as in not part of the actual card text. So it could be removed without it affecting the card function.
> So the current oubliette card text assumes that special effects are effective at long range without explicitly saying so.
>
Correct. Combat ends are effective at long range (rulebook).
> I suggest changing this into something without brackets such as:
> "As above, and the opposing minion burns 1 blood or life after combat ends at short or long range."
>
No need for that, it's in the rulebook.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> Ankha wrote:
> No. And it's not a new direction.
>
I thought it a new direction, since you are changing rulebook text. You DO need to remove the "defensive strike" text from the actual rulebook thats up on the black chantry site, yes?
Smoking craters tell no tales.
—Tex talks Battletech