Just as a point of clarification on the Potence/strikes question. If a
card says "Strike:Effect", then only one of them may be used per strike.
If a card gives a modifier to a strike (such as hand damage), then it can
be used _in addition to_ the chosen strike. Some examples:
Undead Strength is a Strike:+1/+2 hand damage. These may not be stacked,
as they are a strike. If you hit with US at superior and have no other
modifiers to your hand damage, the Vamp will hit for 3. Growing Fury
(+2/+3 on second round) and superior Mighty Grapple (+1 and press) work
the same as US.
Torn Signpost gives 2/3 hand damage until end of combat. Theoretically,
these could be stacked (to ditch cards), but there would be no effect past
the first one. This is not a strike, so an Undead Strength may be used
with it. If a Vamp plays TS at superior and then strikes with US, they
will hit for 5.
Fists of Death gives +1/+2 hand damage until end of turn (costing 1
blood). This is not a strike, and can be stacked, as well as used with TS
and a hand strike. FoD is a powerful card, as assuming superior POT, a
vamp with TS, FoD, and US strikes for 7 damage in one shot! If the Vamp
is also using Immortal Grapple, their prey will be pulped (no Dodge or
S:CE). Just don't blow your whole hand on someone with Fortitude and Skin
of Steel...
Again, if a card says "Strike:Effect", then you can only play one of them
per strike. You cannot combine two "Strike" cards in one strike, which is
why the Thrown Sewer Lid/Undead Strength bit would not work (aside from
that US says that it only works on hand strikes, and TSL is not a hand
strike...). If a Vamp uses, say, Blur for aditional strikes, each extra
strike could use a different "Strike" card, as long as they were all legal
(no TSL at close range or Cauldron of Blood on the first round of combat,
ect.).
Hope this helps.
-Peter D Bakija
In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.960208...@alfa.ist.utl.pt>,
David Pontes <l41...@alfa.ist.utl.pt> wrote:
: - Minion 1 has a piece of equipment, and is in combat with minion
: 2. M.2 burns M.1 ; What happens to the equipment? (the only part of the
: rules I saw refering to this was under 'allies', wich stated that the
: equipment is burnt. I do not see much logic in it, but does this apply to
: vamipires too?)
All cards on a vampire that is burned are also burned, unless diablerie
occurs. If diablerie occurs, the vampire doing the consuming gets all of
the blood and equipment off of the burned vamp. Of course, in most cases
a bloodhunt will be called, and the diablerizing vamp will have to survive
that to use the equipment and blood.
: - Cards that say "+X aggravated damage" make all the damage dealt
: aggravated? I mean, if not, if I play superior Skin of Rock to prevent
: the +2 agg. the Dragon's Breath does, I won't go into torpor! But I got
: the idea ammo cards replace my ammo instead of adding more ammo...
DB rounds cause 2 points of aggravated damage to be added to the base
(non-aggravated) damage a gun will normally inflict. I believe this is
also true for Burning Wrath. It does not make all of the hand dmage
aggravated, but simply adds either one or two points of aggravated damage
to the strike.
Does anyone know of a ruling different than this?
: - May I use several "Strike: use your hand or melee weapon at +X
: damage" cards (different or the same) in a strike? And what about throwing
: sewer lids with undead strenght (for 4-long range damage)?
No. For each strike you may only use one strike card. And cards that
increase hand damage or mele weapon damage (like Torn Signpost) only have
an effect if a hand strike or melee strike occurs. That bonus cannot be
added to something like a Thrown Sewer Lid or Well Aimed Car.
: - Can I destroy Equipment:locations with a 'Destroy Equipment' strike?
No. Equipment:locations are only considered equipment for the purpose of
bringing them out. After a minion equips with them, they are treated as
locations.
: - When I play a Trap, does _any_ card cancel the effect of the
: Trap?
Well, I am not sure exactly what you are asking, but I will try to
explain. A Trap provides a single neutral press to continue combat every
round until 3 consecutive rounds of combat occur where no cards are
played. Either person in combat can end the Trap by successfully pressing
to end the combat. Also a Strike: Combat Ends will end the combat as
well.
: - Is there a sequence in wich players vote? Do all the votes come
: out at once, or is there an order of voting?
There is no set sequence for voting. Each Meth calls out votes as he or
she feels.
: - Is there an official text regarding the actual difference of
: non-Camarilla vampires?
Yes, look at L. Scott Johnson's excellent listing of Rulings and Erratta
for DS. It details all of the Non-Camarilla differences.
I hope this helps
stephen beaulieu
hi...@mail.utexas.edu
Hello :)
It is clear (and praisable) that you at WoTC printed the same
rules several times in the book. But this has made us rule-addicteds
lazy, and so if we don't find an answer at first look at the index, we
assume the book doesn't have one.
I understand making a rulesbook is difficult, but I think WoTC
should print erratas & 2nd edition-rules every so-often and distribute
them in a way they thought it was best for them and the players, since
there's always some guys that come up with some 'holes'. Furthermore, I
think every time they came up with expansion sets, they should include
some sort of text (even if it was a single sheet of card-sized paper)
on each pack explainig how the new stuff you might encounter related to the
rest of the rules.
This is all for you not to dump me the usual 'RTFM'... :)
The problems are these:
- Minion 1 has a piece of equipment, and is in combat with minion
2. M.2 burns M.1 ; What happens to the equipment? (the only part of the
rules I saw refering to this was under 'allies', wich stated that the
equipment is burnt. I do not see much logic in it, but does this apply to
vamipires too?)
- Cards that say "+X aggravated damage" make all the damage dealt
aggravated? I mean, if not, if I play superior Skin of Rock to prevent
the +2 agg. the Dragon's Breath does, I won't go into torpor! But I got
the idea ammo cards replace my ammo instead of adding more ammo...
- May I use several "Strike: use your hand or melee weapon at +X
damage" cards (different or the same) in a strike? And what about throwing
sewer lids with undead strenght (for 4-long range damage)?
- Can I destroy Equipment:locations with a 'Destroy Equipment' strike?
- When I play a Trap, does _any_ card cancel the effect of the
Trap?
- Is there a sequence in wich players vote? Do all the votes come
out at once, or is there an order of voting?
- Is there an official text regarding the actual difference of
non-Camarilla vampires?
Can't remember anything else now, but I think this is enough. :)
Hope these rules haven't been cleared before...
David Pontes
8[
>: The problems are these:
>
>: - Cards that say "+X aggravated damage" make all the damage dealt>: aggravated? I mean, if not, if I play superior Skin of Rock to prevent
>: the +2 agg. the Dragon's Breath does, I won't go into torpor! But I got
>: the idea ammo cards replace my ammo instead of adding more ammo...
Actually normal damage is APPLIED first, not PREVENTED first. You can prevent
the 2 points of agravated damage with, say, an apparition, and allow the single
point of normal damage to get through. But if you have 2 blood left and take
the 1 normal and 2 aggravated then you are ashes.
>: - May I use several "Strike: use your hand or melee weapon at +X>: damage" cards (different or the same) in a strike? And what about throwing
>: sewer lids with undead strenght (for 4-long range damage)?
Actually you CAN stack damage bonuses like Mighty Grapple and Fists of Death
since they both say add +1(2) to hand damage. You could not stack the Undead
Strength with the TSL because it is not hand damage. You could not stack a Torn
Signpost with a Bastard Sword because both change the BASE damage.
>: - Can I destroy Equipment:locations with a 'Destroy Equipment' strike?
>
The most recent ruling is that loquipment is treated as a location once brought
into play and as equipment as it is brought into play.
>
>: - When I play a Trap, does _any_ card cancel the effect of the
>: Trap?
Try a strike:combat ends card or some special card like shackles of enriku.
>: - Is there an official text regarding the actual difference of
>: non-Camarilla vampires?
>
> -Erasmus
There have been a numbr of posts on this topic. Look back no further than one
week and I'm sure you will find a full description.
Michael Kelly
dliv...@bronte.helios.nd.edu (daniel livingston) writes:
>David Pontes (l41...@alfa.ist.utl.pt) wrote:
>: The problems are these:
>: - Cards that say "+X aggravated damage" make all the damage dealt
>: aggravated? I mean, if not, if I play superior Skin of Rock to prevent
>: the +2 agg. the Dragon's Breath does, I won't go into torpor! But I got
>: the idea ammo cards replace my ammo instead of adding more ammo...> ** Ammo cards DO add damage, and in the case of Dragonsbreath
>rounds only the extra two damage is aggravated. However, normal damage
>must be prevented before aggravated damage, so you must prevent all the
>damage from the weapon plus the two agg. from the rounds to prevent
>yourself from going to torpor. **
Normal Damage is applied before aggravated damage, but you may prevent
whiever you want (typically preventing the agg before moving on to
prevent the normal).
>: - Can I destroy Equipment:locations with a 'Destroy Equipment' strike?> ** Only against people who are real pushovers or always love to
>take cards absolutely literally... against the rest of Jyhad-playing
>humanity, no. **
The official errata is that Locquipment is only Equipment when
played. Once it is on a vampire, it ceases to be Equipment and
is simply a Location.
>: - When I play a Trap, does _any_ card cancel the effect of the
>: Trap?> ** Any "Strike" card played resets the three round press deal. **
You could Press to End (after the Trap's Press to Continue).
You could also Strike: Combat Ends to end the combat (and the Trap).
You could tap the Elysium Arboretum.
>: - Is there an official text regarding the actual difference of
>: non-Camarilla vampires?> ** What do you mean by "official text"? If you want to know the
>game effects, the only difference between them is when a card says it
>affects only Camarilla vampires or Non-Camarilla vampires. As far as what
>"non-Camarilla" means, it is the polite way of saying that the "big
>seven" clans run the political show and the other clans can only play if
>the "big seven" lets them. **
Official Text (summary):
Non-Camarilla vampires.
Cannot be princes, although they can become primogen members. If a
non-Camarilla begins with votes and later gains a title, he loses the
votes he started with, just as if he had lost a title. [RTR]
Cannot call Praxis Seizures, Justicar Retribution, Command of the Harpies,
Masquerade Enforcement, nor a vote to burn Elysium: the Arboretum. [RTR]
Cannot call Camarilla Exemplary. [TOM 951227]
Cannot call a vote to burn Masquerade Enforcement. [TOM 960206]
Can call any votes not listed above. [TOM 960102]
Cannot be chosen as an Archon or Camarilla Exemplary. [RTR]
Suffer the effects of blocking an Archon or Camarilla Exemplary. [RTR]
--
L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Smith & Wesson: the original
http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | "point and click" interface.
Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |
David Pontes <l41...@alfa.ist.utl.pt> wrote:
> I understand making a rulesbook is difficult, but I think WoTC
>should print erratas & 2nd edition-rules every so-often and distribute
>them in a way they thought it was best for them and the players, since
>there's always some guys that come up with some 'holes'. Furthermore, I
>think every time they came up with expansion sets, they should include
>some sort of text (even if it was a single sheet of card-sized paper)
>on each pack explainig how the new stuff you might encounter related to the
>rest of the rules.
Apparently you were not playing Magic when the Legends expansion came out.
Each and every booster of Legends had a rules card listing the rules that
were new to Legends. Which meant that each and every serious collector
of the expansion had a foot-high pile of rules cards by the time they were
done, all with redundant information. And people complained about it left
and right, or at the very least mocked it. Basically, rules cards are not
a good idea.
Printing updated rulebooks can be, though. For example, Darkness
Unveiled has a rulebook with all of the corrections we knew about at
the time it went to press (which was most of them).
> - Minion 1 has a piece of equipment, and is in combat with minion
>2. M.2 burns M.1 ; What happens to the equipment? (the only part of the
>rules I saw refering to this was under 'allies', wich stated that the
>equipment is burnt. I do not see much logic in it, but does this apply to
>vamipires too?)
If a minion is burned, all the cards on it are burned as well.
> - Cards that say "+X aggravated damage" make all the damage dealt
>aggravated? I mean, if not, if I play superior Skin of Rock to prevent
>the +2 agg. the Dragon's Breath does, I won't go into torpor! But I got
>the idea ammo cards replace my ammo instead of adding more ammo...
If a card adds +X aggravated to a strike, then only the added damage is
aggravated. If it intends to change the base damage to aggravated, it
will say so. So yes, you can Skin of Rock the added damage from Dragon
Breath Rounds, and not go into torpor (unless, of course, you took too
much damage in the first place).
> - May I use several "Strike: use your hand or melee weapon at +X
>damage" cards (different or the same) in a strike? And what about throwing
>sewer lids with undead strenght (for 4-long range damage)?
You can only play one strike whenever you choose a strike. "Thrown Sewer Lid"
is a strike, as is "Undead Strength", so there's no possibility of playing
them at the same time. Besides, the sewer lid isn't a hand or melee weapon
strike, so can't be boosted by the strenght's effect. This also means that
you can't play several Lucky Blows, Undead Strengths, and so on as a single
strike; you will have to use presses and/or additional strikes.
> - Can I destroy Equipment:locations with a 'Destroy Equipment' strike?
No; they only count as locations once in play (errata).
> - When I play a Trap, does _any_ card cancel the effect of the
>Trap?
Playing any card at all causes the Trap to "reset".
> - Is there a sequence in wich players vote? Do all the votes come
>out at once, or is there an order of voting?
There is no strict sequence, no.
> - Is there an official text regarding the actual difference of
>non-Camarilla vampires?
Non-Camarilla vampires cannot be princes, although they can become
primogen members. If a Non-Camarilla vampire begins with votes and later
gains a title, she loses the votes she started with, just as if the
vampire had lost a title.
Non-Camarilla vampires cannot call Praxis Seizures. They cannot call
Justicar Retribution or Command of the Harpies, or call a vote to burn
Elysium: the Arboretum. In addition, Non-Camarilla vampires cannot be
chosen as an Archon or Camarilla Exemplary.
Non-Camarilla vampires still suffer the effects of blocking a vampire who
is an Archon or Camarilla Exemplary, even though they may become neither.
Non-Camarilla vampires cannot play Masquerade Enforcement, nor can they
call the vote to burn it.
Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote:
>Printing updated rulebooks can be, though. For example, Darkness
>Unveiled has a rulebook with all of the corrections we knew about at
>the time it went to press (which was most of them).
When?>-
>
>Non-Camarilla vampires still suffer the effects of blocking a vampire who
>is an Archon or Camarilla Exemplary, even though they may become neither.>Non-Camarilla vampires cannot play Masquerade Enforcement, nor can they
>call the vote to burn it.>Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
>aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Is Camirilla Exemplery stackable? How about Archon(Ithink of that as
a title)? Aching Beauty?
Rory
REF <refp...@best.com> wrote:
>>Printing updated rulebooks can be, though. For example, Darkness
>>Unveiled has a rulebook with all of the corrections we knew about at
>>the time it went to press (which was most of them).>When?>-
I don't remember, exactly, but relatively little of the errata came
after the print date. The recent stuff about the active region is most
of what's not in there.
>Is Camirilla Exemplery stackable? How about Archon(Ithink of that as
>a title)? Aching Beauty?
All of these are cumulative. While making Archon a "title" is an interesting
idea, there's no such rule about it in the game.
[ quoted text not captured ]
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote:
>REF <refp...@best.com> wrote:>>>Printing updated rulebooks can be, though. For example, Darkness
>>>Unveiled has a rulebook with all of the corrections we knew about at
>>>the time it went to press (which was most of them).>>When?>->I don't remember, exactly, but relatively little of the errata came
>after the print date. The recent stuff about the active region is most
>of what's not in there.>>Is Camirilla Exemplery stackable? How about Archon(Ithink of that as
>>a title)? Aching Beauty?>All of these are cumulative. While making Archon a "title" is an interesting
>idea, there's no such rule about it in the game.>Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
>aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Thank you, although when I asked when I meant when is the book
actually going to be on the shelves?
Rory
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes:
>David Pontes <l41...@alfa.ist.utl.pt> wrote:>> I understand making a rulesbook is difficult, but I think WoTC
>>should print erratas & 2nd edition-rules every so-often and distribute
>>them in a way they thought it was best for them and the players, since
>>there's always some guys that come up with some 'holes'. Furthermore, I
>>think every time they came up with expansion sets, they should include
>>some sort of text (even if it was a single sheet of card-sized paper)
>>on each pack explainig how the new stuff you might encounter related to the
>>rest of the rules.>Apparently you were not playing Magic when the Legends expansion came out.
>Each and every booster of Legends had a rules card listing the rules that
>were new to Legends. Which meant that each and every serious collector
>of the expansion had a foot-high pile of rules cards by the time they were
>done, all with redundant information. And people complained about it left
>and right, or at the very least mocked it. Basically, rules cards are not
>a good idea.>Printing updated rulebooks can be, though. For example, Darkness
>Unveiled has a rulebook with all of the corrections we knew about at
>the time it went to press (which was most of them).
Instead of placing rulecards in expansion packs,
perhaps WotC could arrange some kind of rule-swap.
Allow players to send a SASE and an out-of-date
rulebook (Jyhad or VtES - both in need of DS update
info) and ship the current rulebook back to
the player.
This is probably better than requiring that a
player buy a rulebook/players guide combo
just so that s/he can learn how to play with
the new cards s/he bought.
Just a thought.
[ quoted text not captured ]
L. Scott Johnson <sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu> wrote:
>aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes:>>David Pontes <l41...@alfa.ist.utl.pt> wrote:>>> I understand making a rulesbook is difficult, but I think WoTC
>>>should print erratas & 2nd edition-rules every so-often and distribute
>>>them in a way they thought it was best for them and the players, since
>>>there's always some guys that come up with some 'holes'. Furthermore, I
>>>think every time they came up with expansion sets, they should include
>>>some sort of text (even if it was a single sheet of card-sized paper)
>>>on each pack explainig how the new stuff you might encounter related to the
>>>rest of the rules.>
[Legends rulecard fiasco description snipped]A
The Legends rulecard was better than all of the non net-capable sitting
around scratching their heads about "non-camarilla." Of which I expect
there are a lot, from the number of new users who have been asking that
question here since DS.
>>>Printing updated rulebooks can be, though. For example, Darkness
>>Unveiled has a rulebook with all of the corrections we knew about at
>>the time it went to press (which was most of them).>>Instead of placing rulecards in expansion packs,
>perhaps WotC could arrange some kind of rule-swap.
>Allow players to send a SASE and an out-of-date
>rulebook (Jyhad or VtES - both in need of DS update
>info) and ship the current rulebook back to
>the player.
While you're at it, why not have a swap for the old player's guide.
Which, BTW, was depressingly close to useless.
gnfnrf
>
REF <refp...@best.com> wrote:
>Thank you, although when I asked when I meant when is the book
>actually going to be on the shelves?
As I understand it, there is some kind of delay in getting it back from
the printers, but that it should go out about as soon as we get it in.
[ quoted text not captured ]
sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) wrote:
>aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes:>>David Pontes <l41...@alfa.ist.utl.pt> wrote:>>> I understand making a rulesbook is difficult, but I think WoTC
>>>should print erratas & 2nd edition-rules every so-often and distribute
>>>them in a way they thought it was best for them and the players, since
>>>there's always some guys that come up with some 'holes'. Furthermore, I
>>>think every time they came up with expansion sets, they should include
>>>some sort of text (even if it was a single sheet of card-sized paper)
>>>on each pack explainig how the new stuff you might encounter related to the
>>>rest of the rules.>>Apparently you were not playing Magic when the Legends expansion came out.
>>Each and every booster of Legends had a rules card listing the rules that
>>were new to Legends. Which meant that each and every serious collector
>>of the expansion had a foot-high pile of rules cards by the time they were
>>done, all with redundant information. And people complained about it left
>>and right, or at the very least mocked it. Basically, rules cards are not
>>a good idea.>>Printing updated rulebooks can be, though. For example, Darkness
>>Unveiled has a rulebook with all of the corrections we knew about at
>>the time it went to press (which was most of them).>Instead of placing rulecards in expansion packs,>perhaps WotC could arrange some kind of rule-swap.
>Allow players to send a SASE and an out-of-date
>rulebook (Jyhad or VtES - both in need of DS update
>info) and ship the current rulebook back to
>the player.>This is probably better than requiring that a>player buy a rulebook/players guide combo
>just so that s/he can learn how to play with
>the new cards s/he bought.>Just a thought.
>--
>L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Smith & Wesson: the original
>http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | "point and click" interface.
>Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |
And I still say that Steve Jackson Games does it right.
Just send SASE with a request.
Rory
On 11 Feb 1996, Thomas R Wylie wrote:
>
> Apparently you were not playing Magic when the Legends expansion came out.
> Each and every booster of Legends had a rules card listing the rules that
> were new to Legends. Which meant that each and every serious collector
> of the expansion had a foot-high pile of rules cards by the time they were
> done, all with redundant information. And people complained about it left
> and right, or at the very least mocked it. Basically, rules cards are not
> a good idea.
You're right, I didn't play Magic then, and was unaware of the
fact. Nevertheless, and for your description, what you did was a *card*
that had a text of sorts. I can perfectly understant that people have
problems about throwing cards away, no matter if they are playable or
not - It's a waste of good paper (the paper that cards are made isn't the
most cheap) and for I can imagine by your style, I doubt you left
that card without some form of art. Now, if you inserted a simple,
disposable piece of paper that could be easily thrown away (like the
plastic booster packs), I doubt you'd have the same problem.
>
> Printing updated rulebooks can be, though. For example, Darkness
> Unveiled has a rulebook with all of the corrections we knew about at
> the time it went to press (which was most of them).
Yes, but please never do as another games company did (one that
starts with a 'T' and ends in 'SR' (: ), that when people have doubts and
ask the costumer service about it, you say: "If you want to know, buy the
book". :b
>
> > - Minion 1 has a piece of equipment, and is in combat with minion
> >2. M.2 burns M.1 ; What happens to the equipment? (the only part of the
> >rules I saw refering to this was under 'allies', wich stated that the
> >equipment is burnt. I do not see much logic in it, but does this apply to
> >vamipires too?)
>
> If a minion is burned, all the cards on it are burned as well.
Hmm... I know that it's too late to change the rule (you have
made cards based on this rule), but we can at least argue the logic - why
can't I snatck the shotgun of the corpse of the other guy?
>
> > - May I use several "Strike: use your hand or melee weapon at +X
> >damage" cards (different or the same) in a strike? And what about throwing
> >sewer lids with undead strenght (for 4-long range damage)?
>
> You can only play one strike whenever you choose a strike. "Thrown Sewer Lid"
> is a strike, as is "Undead Strength", so there's no possibility of playing
> them at the same time. Besides, the sewer lid isn't a hand or melee weapon
> strike, so can't be boosted by the strenght's effect. This also means that
> you can't play several Lucky Blows, Undead Strengths, and so on as a single
> strike; you will have to use presses and/or additional strikes.
Yes, I see you had to do this in ordet for rules-lawyers not to
breach the rules and come up with invincible attacks. Nevertheless I
search the logic of the game, and find that a boost of strength should
give more damage to a thrown weapon too. This is the reason why I won't
use 'Torn Signpost' with 'Wolf Claws', for it makes no sense, althoug the
TS text only mentions 'hand damage'... Nevertheless I realize my cause is
lost.
> > - When I play a Trap, does _any_ card cancel the effect of the
> >Trap?
>
> Playing any card at all causes the Trap to "reset".
I must apologise to you because when I posted this question I had
misinterpreted the card (I thought if I played a card the trap would end
[go figure :) ] ).
Thank you all for your input :)
David Pontes
8[