LSJ - Heroic Might strike requiring Potence
Vincent
According to the thread :
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/browse_frm/thread/7b63cd0e983e97f7/03bf028920cebf2e?lnk=gst&q=heroic+might+increased+strength+-authro%3Alsj#03bf028920cebf2e
LSJ wrote:
>>> 4) Heroic Might [sup] - Does the 2R strike count as a "strike that requires
>>> Potence", for purposes of Increased Strength? (Precedent: Improvised
>>> Tactics' strike _does_ count)
>> The strike comes from a card requiring Potence, so it would be a
>> strike that requires Potence.
> Correct.
Let's consider that I have a vampire *without* Potence but that has a
superior Heroic Might on him (using for example two Agent of Power
that have burn since). Since the 2R strike from Heroic Might requires
Potence, he can't use it, right? (because he doesn't fulfill the
requirement).
Or is there an error in the answer above as I believe? If the strike
really requires Potence, it should write "and this vampire with
Potence can strike for 2R..." (just as Bowl of Convergence restricts
its use).
The parallel with Improvised Tactics isn't good I guess.
Heroic Might
Type: Action
Requires: Potence
Cost: 3 blood
+3 stealth action.
[pot] Put this card on this vampire. This vampire has +1 strength.
This vampire may destroy equipment as a strike. A vampire can have
only one Heroic Might. Burn this card if this vampire goes to torpor.
[POT] As above, with an additional +1 strength, and this vampire can
strike for 2R damage.
Bowl of Convergence
Type: Equipment
Unique equipment.
If the bearer is a vampire who has Auspex [aus], the bearer gets +1
intercept. If the bearer has superior Auspex [AUS], he or she can burn
1 blood once during each action to get an additional +1 intercept for
the current action.
OldFan
First - IANLSJ
Second - I believe once Heroic Might is on the vamp legally (i.e. 2x
Agent of Power for example), you get the benefits of whatever level it
was attached at. In this case, since the acting minion had POT when
Heroic Might was put on, xer is now free to use the 2R strike whenever
xer wants in combat.
Counter example: a minion employs a Raptor at "ani". Later in the
game, said minion gets "ANI". That Raptor does NOT now force
opponents to discard 1 card when in combat - the subsequent change in
discipline spread by the controlling minion does not change the effect
of cards previously attached to said minion at a different discipline
spread.
-Asif Chaudhry
Izaak
>Agent of Power for example), you get the benefits of whatever level it
>was attached at. In this case, since the acting minion had POT when
>Heroic Might was put on, xer is now free to use the 2R strike whenever
>xer wants in combat.
To put it on legally, you would have to find some other way than Agent of
Power since Agent of Power is unique.
A hand of Conrad that gets stolen or destroyed would work, I guess.
Wez
If he does not have potence anymore how can he play increased
strength???
So... if it has potence where is the issue?
Blooded Sand
No one said anything about the vampire playing increased strength.
Unless you read the original thread on this query, where LSJ ruled
that the 2R strike is a strike requiring potence, and thus gets a
boost from increased strength. But no one in this thread, from the OP
onwards have even mentioned IS. So put down the crack pipe, m'kay? :)
>
> So... if it has potence where is the issue?
Um, the original question was what happens to a minion who had POT,
played Heroic might, and then lost said POT.
There is the issue...
Jarkko Suvela
really requires Potence, it should write "and this vampire with
Potence can strike for 2R..." (just as Bowl of Convergence restricts
its use). <<
Why should Heroic Might have a restriction like that. Discipline-
related retainers doesn't have it.
Improvised Tactics require potence, auspex or protean -so any
discipline related cards/specials apply there.
-as a related to Heroic, you can get Sword of Nuln with tremere and
move it afterwards to brujah.
Getting something doesn't mean that you need to maintain that
requirement.
So if the question is why HM doesn't have the same restriction as
BoC, my answer is why should it? Why cream tastes different from tooth
paste? ;)
Vincent
I'm not telling that HM should have any further restriction (the text
was given as an alternate example).
The question is: since LSJ ruled that HM 2R strike "requires
Potence" (and thus is eligible for increased damage thanks to
Increased Strength), can a minion without Potence (anymore) use it?
(Thanks for pointing out the error with Agent of Power. What really
matters is that the minion doesn't have Potence anymore).
Jarkko Suvela
My intuition would relate this to Infernal Pact:
-minion doesn't have the discipline, but can use cards requiring it
anyway.
So Heroic Might by itself grants ability to strike at 2R damage.
Since HM doesn't read the same text as BoC, requirements do not need
to be checked (-like in the case of Mata Hari's special text ..."this
vampire" vs. "this [clan]")
Perhaps that Mata Hari relation was better than Infernal Pact
relation
LSJ
>
> According to the thread :http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/browse_f...
>
> LSJ wrote:
> >>> 4) Heroic Might [sup] - Does the 2R strike count as a "strike that requires
> >>> Potence", for purposes of Increased Strength? (Precedent: Improvised
> >>> Tactics' strike _does_ count)
> >> The strike comes from a card requiring Potence, so it would be a
> >> strike that requires Potence.
> > Correct.
>
> Let's consider that I have a vampire *without* Potence but that has a
> superior Heroic Might on him (using for example two Agent of Power
> that have burn since). Since the 2R strike from Heroic Might requires
> Potence, he can't use it, right? (because he doesn't fulfill the
> requirement).
No, he can use it, by card text on the card in play.
Vincent
So, the strikes requires Potence, but a vampire not fulfilling the
requirement can use it?
There's something wrong.
I guess a reversal on Improvised Tactics + Increased Strength should
be more intuitive.
Or changing the text of Increased Strength so it states: "
[pot] For the remainder of combat, all damaging strikes {provided by a
card} that require Potence made by this vampire inflict +1 damage."
LSJ
A vampire can play Unded Strength and have xer Potence skill card
burned with first strike and still strike with Undead Peristence
(perhaps even modified by Increased Strength) when the normal strike
resolution step comes around.
Vincent
That beer was as strong one, hey? ;)
I guess you mean "Undead Strength" when you say "Undead
Peristence" (?!)
1/ Basically, you say <a strike provided by [a card that requires
Potence]> = <a strike that requires Potence>.
Correct?
2/ I guess that if I replace "strike" by "political action" and
"Potence" by "Melpominee", it's still right. So "a political action
provided by [a card that requires Melpominee]> = <a political action
that requires Melpominee>
Correct?
3/ So, the political action provided by Echo of Harmonies requires
Melpominee right? (even though it doesn't require Melpominee to be
called later). It could matter if a vampire had +1 stealth on
Melpominee actions.
Echo of Harmonies [BL:R2, LoB:R]
Cardtype: Action Modifier
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Melpominee/Presence
Only usable during a referendum.
[pre] If you burn the Edge for a vote, this vampire gains 2 votes.
[mel] Usable by a ready vampire other than the acting minion. This
vampire gains 2 votes.
[MEL] Usable by a ready vampire other than the acting minion. After
the referendum, move the political action card used to call the
referendum from your ash heap to this vampire, face down. This vampire
may play the political action card as if from your hand (requirements
and cost apply as normal).
4/ Does Slow Withering cause the "political action card" played on a
superior EoH to cost an additional blood, since it "requires" superior
Melpominee.
The Slow Withering [Gehenna:R]
Cardtype: Event
Gehenna. Do not replace until a vampire commits diablerie.
Requires at least one other Gehenna card in play. Cards that require
any superior Disciplines cost an additional blood. Any vampire who
commits diablerie is immune to this effect until the next Gehenna card
is played.
LSJ
> On Sep 28, 12:41 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 28, 3:46 am, Vincent <v.rip...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > So, the strikes requires Potence, but a vampire not fulfilling the
> > > requirement can use it?
> > > There's something wrong.
>
> > A vampire can play Unded Strength and have xer Potence skill card
> > (perhaps even modified by Increased Strength) when the normal strike
> > resolution step comes around.
> 1/ Basically, you say <a strike provided by [a card that requires
> Potence]> = <a strike that requires Potence>.
> Correct?
Sure.
> 2/ I guess that if I replace "strike" by "political action" and
> "Potence" by "Melpominee", it's still right. So "a political action
> provided by [a card that requires Melpominee]> = <a political action
> that requires Melpominee>
> Correct?
Perhaps.
> 3/ So, the political action provided by Echo of Harmonies requires
> Melpominee right? (even though it doesn't require Melpominee to be
> called later). It could matter if a vampire had +1 stealth on
> Melpominee actions.
No. Echo doesn't provide a political action. It allows the vampire to
use another card.
"may use [that card] as if played from hand" and moreover
"requirements apply as normal".
> Echo of Harmonies [BL:R2, LoB:R]
> Cardtype: Action Modifier
> Cost: 1 blood
> Discipline: Melpominee/Presence
> Only usable during a referendum.
> [pre] If you burn the Edge for a vote, this vampire gains 2 votes.
> [mel] Usable by a ready vampire other than the acting minion. This
> vampire gains 2 votes.
> [MEL] Usable by a ready vampire other than the acting minion. After
> the referendum, move the political action card used to call the
> referendum from your ash heap to this vampire, face down. This vampire
> may play the political action card as if from your hand (requirements
> and cost apply as normal).
>
> 4/ Does Slow Withering cause the "political action card" played on a
> superior EoH to cost an additional blood, since it "requires" superior
> Melpominee.
No.
Vincent
> > 3/ So, the political action provided by Echo of Harmonies requires
> > Melpominee right? (even though it doesn't require Melpominee to be
> > called later). It could matter if a vampire had +1 stealth on
> > Melpominee actions.
>
> No. Echo doesn't provide a political action. It allows the vampire to
> use another card.
> "may use [that card] as if played from hand" and moreover
> "requirements apply as normal".
Ok. Does the action provided by Constant Revolution to burn itself is
considered to be "requiring an anarch" since Constant Revolution
required an anarch in the first place?
(The idea behind is that the action is provided by a card that
requires an anarch -- analog for me as a strike provided by a card
that requires Potence.)
Constant Revolution [TR:R]
Cardtype: Action
+1 stealth action. Requires an anarch. Unique.
Put this card in play with 1 counter. During your untap phase, put a
counter on this card. During each other Methuselah's untap phase, he
or she must burn X pool and/or cards at random from his or her hand,
where X is the number of counters on this card. Any vampire may burn
this card as a (D) action that costs 1 pool.
LSJ
> > > 3/ So, the political action provided by Echo of Harmonies requires
> > > Melpominee right? (even though it doesn't require Melpominee to be
> > > called later). It could matter if a vampire had +1 stealth on
> > > Melpominee actions.
>
> > No. Echo doesn't provide a political action. It allows the vampire to
> > use another card.
> > "may use [that card] as if played from hand" and moreover
> > "requirements apply as normal".
>
> Ok. Does the action provided by Constant Revolution to burn itself is
> considered to be "requiring an anarch" since Constant Revolution
> required an anarch in the first place?
No.
Likewise the action to burn Army of Rats doesn't require Animalism.
(So Cock Robin wouldn't get his untap after burning an Army).
Vincent
Fine with me, but I really can't see the difference with Heroic
Might's 2R strike requiring Potence, since both (the action to burn CR
and the strike from HM) are provided by cards in play that have a
requirement.
Am I missing something?
(Sorry for the nitpicking but I *really* don't see it).
Izaak
>Might's 2R strike requiring Potence, since both (the action to burn CR
>and the strike from HM) are provided by cards in play that have a
>requirement.
>Am I missing something?
>
>(Sorry for the nitpicking but I *really* don't see it).
You're not alone.
I'm confused why Heroic Might's strike would be a "Strike that requires
Potence". It's an ability provided by a card in play (that required potence
to get into play). If I read this all right the 2R that Heroic Might
provides is a Strike that requires potence, that doesn't actually requires
you to have potence. Isn't that a little bit odd at the very least?
And since it apparently is perfectly logical, then why isn't Army of Rat's
burn clause not an "Action that requires Animalism". Surely it's an action
that is provided by a card in play (that required animalism to get into
play), but you don't actually need to have animalism to remove the card.
What's the difference?
Vincent
So noone h
Vincent
So no one has an answer to the "why"?
John P.
>
> Fine with me, but I really can't see the difference with Heroic
> Might's 2R strike requiring Potence, since both (the action to burn CR
> and the strike from HM) are provided by cards in play that have a
> requirement.
> Am I missing something?
>
> (Sorry for the nitpicking but I *really* don't see it).
How about this.
Smudge the ignored goes and gets the hand of conrad, getting superior
potence from the equipment.
Next turn he goes and gets Heroic Might.
Hand of Conrad is contested cross table. Smudge no longer has potence
but he still has heroic might.
He can still use heroic might's strike and text because the potence is
only required to put the heroic might into play (its an action not a
combat card). Once in play its effects are very clear. +2 strength or
strike 2R. Does not matter if you have potence or not.
John P.
Winnipeg
Meej
Right.
So why is the strike considered "a strike that requires Potence" for
the purposes of Undead Strength, while actions provided by cards with
requirements (c.f. Army of Rats, Constant Revolution burn clauses) do
not cause those actions to count as requiring <foo>?
- D.J.
Kevin M.
> So why is the strike considered "a strike that requires Potence" for
> the purposes of Undead Strength, while actions provided by cards with
> requirements (c.f. Army of Rats, Constant Revolution burn clauses) do
> not cause those actions to count as requiring <foo>?
Perhaps because Combat strikes =\= Card-based Actions ?
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/
Please bid on my auctions! http://shop.ebay.com/kjmergen/m.html
Izaak
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> schreef in bericht
news:i831gf$rf3$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Meej wrote:
>> So why is the strike considered "a strike that requires Potence" for
>> the purposes of Undead Strength, while actions provided by cards with
>> requirements (c.f. Army of Rats, Constant Revolution burn clauses) do
>> not cause those actions to count as requiring <foo>?
>
> Perhaps because Combat strikes =\= Card-based Actions ?
>
Obviously this little completely unrelated tidbit completely cleans up why
Heroic Might's 2R is a strike that requires potence when it, you know,
doesn't actually require potence?
I mean, *surely* Theft of Vitae is a strike that requires Obeah that doesn't
require Obeah to use it. Or hey, maybe we can make Theft a strike that
requires Necromancy too!
echia...@yahoo.com
Another historical precedent that may be helpful to remember is
Ablative Skin.
Ablative Skin [Sabbat:R, SW:R, Third:R]
Cardtype: Action
Discipline: Fortitude
+1 stealth action.
[for] Put this card on the acting vampire and put 3 ablative counters
on this card. While in combat, this vampire may remove any number of
ablative counters from this card to prevent that amount of non-
aggravated damage. Burn this card when it has no more ablative
counters.
[FOR] As above, but this vampire may also prevent aggravated damage in
combat in this way.
Cannot be used to prevent damage that cannot be prevented by cards
that require Fortitude (e.g., Blood Rage and Blood Fury). [LSJ
19990216]
Based on card text, you only need Fortitude to put it into play (not
to use it). Yet the card still requires Fortitude for purposes such as
Blood Rage/Fury (even if you no longer have Fortitude).
Aaron Clark
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm not sure this is an exact comparison.
In the case of Ablative Skin, the counters are placed on the Ablative
Skin card, not on the vampire.
I would say that the card, and not the minion, is preventing the
damage via the counters it carries. Since the card itself is a
Fortitude card, regardless of whether the minion carrying it somehow
ceases to have the Fortitude discipline, LSJ's ruling makes sense.
Vincent
> Meej wrote:
> > So why is the strike considered "a strike that requires Potence" for
> > the purposes of Undead Strength, while actions provided by cards with
> > requirements (c.f. Army of Rats, Constant Revolution burn clauses) do
> > not cause those actions to count as requiring <foo>?
>
> Perhaps because Combat strikes =\= Card-based Actions ?
>
> Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
> "Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
> you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
> "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
> Please bid on my auctions!http://shop.ebay.com/kjmergen/m.html
That could make sense if it was stated somewhere (rulebook,
errata...). That is precisely the thing I want to know in fact.
Vincent
It's not the same. Ablative Skin is a card that requires Fortitude, so
it's logical that it can't be used against Blood Fury due to the card
text :
Blood Rage
Type: Combat
Requires: Thaumaturgy
Only usable at close range.
[tha] Strike: hand strike. This damage cannot be prevented by *cards
that require Fortitude* [for]. If the opposing vampire attempts to
strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage.
[THA] As above, but for strength+1 damage.
Increased Strenght is stated differently:
Increased Strength
Type: Combat
Requires: Potence
Only usable before range is determined.
[pot] For the remainder of combat, all *damaging -strikes that require
Potence* made by this vampire inflict +1 damage.
[POT] As above, but those strikes inflict +2 damage.
It doesn't state "strikes provided by cards that require Potence"
which should fix everything (the strike itself doesn't require
Potence).