rule question - nephandus [LSJ]
pallando
Nephandus (Mage) [SAB] - Ally (TreA) (2)
Each strike or other damaging effect made against Nephandus by the opposing
minion is at -1 damage. [LSJ 19970224]
i assume this does not enclude environmental damage like weather control,
wolf retainer or carrion crows. so a vampire with 1 strenght would do no
damage to mr. nephandus but carrion crows at sup. would kill him in 1 round?
thanks for the help.
pallando
LSJ
>i need to check this one:
>
>Nephandus (Mage) [SAB] - Ally (TreA) (2)
>Each strike or other damaging effect made against Nephandus by the opposing
>minion is at -1 damage. [LSJ 19970224]
>
>i assume this does not enclude environmental damage like weather control,
>wolf retainer or carrion crows. so a vampire with 1 strenght would do no
Right. The "by the opposing minion" takes care of that.
>damage to mr. nephandus but carrion crows at sup. would kill him in 1 round?
Yes, assuming he hasn't gained a life.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Johan Lundstrom
>"pallando" <pall...@gmx.at> wrote:
>>i assume this does not enclude environmental damage like weather control,
>>wolf retainer or carrion crows. so a vampire with 1 strenght would do no
>
>Right. The "by the opposing minion" takes care of that.
Why isn't Carrion Crows an effect made by the opposing minion? He's
the one who played it, after all.
And just what cards falls under "damaging effects made by the opposing
minion"?
-----------------------------------------------------------
Johan Lundstrom <jo...@algonet.se>
"Knowledge is power. Power corrupts."
James Coupe
<jo...@algonet.se> writes
>Why isn't Carrion Crows an effect made by the opposing minion? He's
>the one who played it, after all.
Because it isn't damage done by the minion. A strike is, for instance,
or something that states that it is by card text.
See the rulings:
"Damage is only considered to have come from a minion if the damage is
from a strike or if an effect specifically states that the damage is
dealt by the minion. Damage from other effects is considered
"environmental," and has no particular source. [RTR 19970630] "
One wonders how you can continue to lecture us about how combat defence
etc. have been powered up (or not) when you clearly don't understand the
game. :(
--
James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D
"You reinstall Dial-Up Networking. The Elf screams and becomes EBD690ECD7A1F
an icon. *** CONGRATULATIONS! *** You completed the BT Internet B457CA213D7E6
Helpdesk training course in 15 out of a possible 9000 moves." 68C3695D623D5D
Johan Lundstrom
>"Damage is only considered to have come from a minion if the damage is
>from a strike or if an effect specifically states that the damage is
>dealt by the minion. Damage from other effects is considered
>"environmental," and has no particular source. [RTR 19970630] "
>
>One wonders how you can continue to lecture us about how combat defence
>etc. have been powered up (or not) when you clearly don't understand the
>game. :(
If memorizing the specific wording of four year old rulings as
applicable to an effect particular to a single card in the game was a
prerequisite for posting here, we wouldn't see many posts, I think.
That's what we have LSJ for. :-)
(And let me take the opportunity to thank LSJ for doing a great work.
Do you get paid at all for it?)
James Coupe
<jo...@algonet.se> writes
>If memorizing the specific wording of four year old rulings as
>applicable to an effect particular to a single card in the game was a
>prerequisite for posting here, we wouldn't see many posts, I think.
Environmental damage is a large concept, covering many cards.
When in hole, stop digging.
Henke
>In message <3b38ef6e...@news.algonet.se>, Johan Lundstrom
><jo...@algonet.se> writes
>>Why isn't Carrion Crows an effect made by the opposing minion? He's
>>the one who played it, after all.
>
>Because it isn't damage done by the minion. A strike is, for instance,
>or something that states that it is by card text.
>
>See the rulings:
>
>"Damage is only considered to have come from a minion if the damage is
>from a strike or if an effect specifically states that the damage is
>dealt by the minion. Damage from other effects is considered
>"environmental," and has no particular source. [RTR 19970630] "
>
>One wonders how you can continue to lecture us about how combat defence
>etc. have been powered up (or not) when you clearly don't understand the
>game. :(
>
I'd like an example or two of damaging effects made by a minion that is not
a strike!
/Henke
James Coupe
<d98...@stud.hh.se> writes
>I'd like an example or two of damaging effects made by a minion that is not
>a strike!
Pulled Fangs was.
LSJ
> (And let me take the opportunity to thank LSJ for doing a great work.
Thanks and you're welcome.
> Do you get paid at all for it?)
I didn't used to, but am happy to report that I do now.
LSJ
>
> In message <9hb5ps$4r$1...@taliesin.netcom.net.uk>, Henke
> <d98...@stud.hh.se> writes
> >I'd like an example or two of damaging effects made by a minion that is not
> >a strike!
>
> Pulled Fangs was.
Twisting the Knife is the other.
Madman2001
> Environmental damage is a large concept, covering many cards.
> When in hole, stop digging.
Are we a little cranky today, James?? I think the question was very
legitimate. It is not at all obvious that "effects by the opposing
minion" is translated as non-environmental damage.
As with any sufficiently old card game (like V:tes or Magic), there
are bound to be multiple terms to describe the same "thing", and it's
up to folks like LSJ to heroically try to straighten up the
terminology.
Madman
James Coupe
<4fis...@compuserve.com> writes
>Are we a little cranky today, James?? I think the question was very
>legitimate. It is not at all obvious that "effects by the opposing
>minion" is translated as non-environmental damage.
Certainly a legitimate question.
When someone is attempting to lecture us all on exactly how combat
works, however, it seems strange that they aren't aware of something so
intrinsic - regarding, say, the whole "IG used against dodge" thing,
where environmental damage doesn't get dodged, etc.
He's probably lucky I replied when I did. Had it been later, I'd have
probably exploded, as I just did at one fuckwit at my students' union.
Johan Lundstrom
>He's probably lucky I replied when I did. Had it been later, I'd have
>probably exploded, as I just did at one fuckwit at my students' union.
And then, I'd be in *real* trouble. Oh yes.
Raille
LSJ wrote:
>
> Johan Lundstrom wrote:
> > (And let me take the opportunity to thank LSJ for doing a great work.
>
> Thanks and you're welcome.
>
> > Do you get paid at all for it?)
>
> I didn't used to, but am happy to report that I do now.
>
Huzzah! About time. So now what? Planning on quitting your day job to
become a full time VTES representative?
Man, now thats a job I'd like.
Raille