Does canceling a Maneuver from a card like aid form bats cancel the entire card, or is only the maneuver canceled, and the strike still locked on?
There seem to be two possibly conflicting rulings on this:
LSJ20050228 suggests that only the maneuver is canceled and the strike is still locked in, but technically only is about rigor mortis vs magnum and co.
RTR20040501 says if a strike is canceled, the entire strike card (if any) is cancelled, including all other (simultaneous or future) effects.
This is of course not about maneuver cancelling directly, but about strike cancelling cancelling a future maneuver or press.
In general, in the discord we felt that these rulings are possibly in conflict, and would like a resolution/update/new ruling about this.
Aid From Bats
Rigor Mortis
AFAIK, with Rigor Mortis on THA, you simply cancel a maneuver, no matter the source - it can come from .44 Magnums, for example. So in your example, you just cancel one of the effects of the strike, it doesn't interfere with Aid from Bats in any other way.
If you cancel (e.g. with Primal Insticts) the whole strike, on the other hand, all of its effects are cancelled. Furthermore, if you used AfB to maneuver and then cancel your AfB with PI, you cannot choose another strike, as you are committed to use AfB's strike - as explained in RTR20040501.
> Hobbesgoblin wrote:
> Does canceling a Maneuver from a card like aid form bats cancel the entire card, or is only the maneuver canceled, and the strike still locked on?
>
The latter.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Why is this logically different than canceling a strike?
> If the strike is canceled, the rest of the effect is also canceled. [RTR 20040501]
>
Why does canceling a maneuver that is attached to other (future) things, not also cancel those things?
> kschaefer wrote:
> Why is this logically different than canceling a strike?
>
> > If the strike is canceled, the rest of the effect is also canceled. [RTR 20040501]
> >
> Why does canceling a maneuver that is attached to other (future) things, not also cancel those things?
>
Because you're using a maneuver provided by a strike, not a strike provided by a maneuver.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> Ankha wrote:
> Because you're using a maneuver provided by a strike, not a strike provided by a maneuver.
>
is there a card where the strike is provided by a maneuver?
> Ankha wrote:
>
> > kschaefer wrote:
> > Why is this logically different than canceling a strike?
> >
> > > If the strike is canceled, the rest of the effect is also canceled. [RTR 20040501]
> > >
> > >
> > Why does canceling a maneuver that is attached to other (future) things, not also cancel those things?
> >
> Because you're using a maneuver provided by a strike, not a strike provided by a maneuver.
>
This would in turn mean, if a card provides "Maneuver with [x]" (usually a press) cancelling the manuver cancels all other effects as well, correct?
resist earth's grasp
> Hobbesgoblin wrote:
>
> > Ankha wrote:
> >
> > > kschaefer wrote:
> > > Why is this logically different than canceling a strike?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > If the strike is canceled, the rest of the effect is also canceled. [RTR 20040501]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Why does canceling a maneuver that is attached to other (future) things, not also cancel those things?
> > >
> > >
> > Because you're using a maneuver provided by a strike, not a strike provided by a maneuver.
> >
> This would in turn mean, if a card provides "Maneuver with [x]" (usually a press) cancelling the manuver cancels all other effects as well, correct?
>
Correct. Rigor Mortis doesn't prevent the opposing minion from using maneuvers (like it prevents additional strikes), it cancels it (with any effects that depent on it).
It's not a prohibition as described here :
> LSJ wrote:
> The prohibition on strikes prevents you from using strike effects (.44 magnum,
> hands, Aid from Bats, etc.)
>
> The prohibition on additional strikes prevents you from using additional strike
> effects (Blur, Acrobatics, Jacko's special, etc.)
>
> Similarly, a prohibition on presses would prevent you from using presses (Hawg,
> Boxed In, etc.)
>
Please note that the question was already asked on the newsgroup, but I think it was overlooked by LSJ (so the answer provided by Jozxyqk is not a "correct answer")
groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/7oK-hKbOs9g/m/tTvJtSfRYg4J
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director