Anathema?

I'm told that in order to get the pool from the vampire with this card, you need to reduce them to exactly 0 blood, without sending them to torpor. Is this true? My reading of the card leads me to believe otherwise, but I've certainly been wrong before. It would seem to me that no matter how much damage you take past the point putting you in torpor, you'd always be reduced to 0 blood, and the card should kick in. I fail to see how torpor would save you. -- /\ Jasper Phillips /VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|~"~"~"~"~"~"----------........____ jaz j^^^^^^^^^^^^^\/"~"~"~"~-----------........._____ ~"~--. * http://www.engr.orst.edu/~philljas/ "~"~'--`

In article <6gluqn$m63$1...@news.NERO.NET>, Jasper Phillips wrote: >I'm told that in order to get the pool from the vampire with >this card, you need to reduce them to exactly 0 blood, without >sending them to torpor. > >Is this true? My reading of the card leads me to believe otherwise, >but I've certainly been wrong before. It would seem to me that no >matter how much damage you take past the point putting you in >torpor, you'd always be reduced to 0 blood, and the card should >kick in. I fail to see how torpor would save you. Your reading makes sense to me. There is however, the following consideration, which may have caused someone to get confused: To be burned with Anathema, it is not merely required that one be reduced to 0 blood in combat. It is also required that the opposing minion is the one that does the reducing by inflicting damage, stealing blood or whatever. He will not be burned if he reduces himself to 0 by paying blood costs, or whatever. If the minion is already at 0 blood for some reason, and you hit him, he will not be burned as a result. Lupus Australis ____ ____ \ \----/ / |()__()| __\ __ /__ / __\()/__ \ |/ \==/ \| | || |

In article <slrn6it4ct....@amanda.dorsai.org>, John Whelan <jbwh...@dorsai.org> wrote: >In article <6gluqn$m63$1...@news.NERO.NET>, Jasper Phillips wrote: [My bit about Anathema snipped] >Your reading makes sense to me. > >There is however, the following consideration, which may have caused >someone to get confused: > >To be burned with Anathema, it is not merely required that one be reduced >to 0 blood in combat. It is also required that the opposing minion is the >one that does the reducing by inflicting damage, stealing blood or >whatever. He will not be burned if he reduces himself to 0 by paying blood >costs, or whatever. If the minion is already at 0 blood for some reason, >and you hit him, he will not be burned as a result. Yah, I'd noticed that way out, but figure I'll try to avoid it by going after vamps with plenty of blood left. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <6gm9ep$pga$1...@news.NERO.NET>, Jasper Phillips wrote: >In article <slrn6it4ct....@amanda.dorsai.org>, >John Whelan <jbwh...@dorsai.org> wrote: >>In article <6gluqn$m63$1...@news.NERO.NET>, Jasper Phillips wrote: > >[My bit about Anathema snipped] > >>Your reading makes sense to me. >> >>There is however, the following consideration, which may have caused >>someone to get confused: >> >>To be burned with Anathema, it is not merely required that one be reduced >>to 0 blood in combat. It is also required that the opposing minion is the >>one that does the reducing by inflicting damage, stealing blood or >>whatever. He will not be burned if he reduces himself to 0 by paying blood >>costs, or whatever. If the minion is already at 0 blood for some reason, >>and you hit him, he will not be burned as a result. > >Yah, I'd noticed that way out, but figure I'll try to avoid it by >going after vamps with plenty of blood left. My point was that people who reduce themselves to 0 blood generally get sent into Torpor by opponent's strikes. Someone observing this process in the course of play may have misinterpreted why it was occurring, and assumed that if you inflict more damage than a person has blood (sending them to torpor) then Anathema does not kick in. -- [ quoted text not captured ]

Jasper Phillips wrote: > > I'm told that in order to get the pool from the vampire with > this card, you need to reduce them to exactly 0 blood, without > sending them to torpor. > > Is this true? My reading of the card leads me to believe otherwise, > but I've certainly been wrong before. It would seem to me that no > matter how much damage you take past the point putting you in > torpor, you'd always be reduced to 0 blood, and the card should > kick in. I fail to see how torpor would save you. No, it is not true. The RT has added errata that the victim must be reduced to zero by combat effects (like damage and steal blood), not by paying costs to play cards. But this errata has nothing to do with over-doing the damage needed. If he is reduced to zero, even if he would then go to Torpor normally, the Anathema text takes effect and he is burned (without going to Torpor). -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team