[LSJ] React with Conviction Question
karlgs...@gmail.com
cards that place corruption counters?
Thanks,
Karl
John Flournoy
> How does React with Conviction interact with corruption counters?
Per card text: "When an effect that would change control of this
imbued is played or announced, you may burn this card to cancel that
effect."
Burning corruption counters to take control of a minion is 'an effect
that would change control' etc, so React cancels it (and the counters
are still burned.)
> And
> cards that place corruption counters?
Depends on the card providing the corruption counter.
Per card text: "Burn this card to cancel either a (D) action against
this imbued that requires Chimerstry, Dementation, Dominate, Presence
or Serpentis or a strike that requires any of those Disciplines played
by a minion opposing this imbued as it is announced."
This would work against Reformation (a Serpentis action) but not
Corruption (a Follower of Set action) or Venenation (a Serpentis
action modifier), for instance.
But in either case, you can always just burn it in response to the
corruption counters being burned to take the Imbued.
> Thanks,
>
> Karl
-John Flournoy
LSJ
Correct.
witness1
> On Feb 21, 6:45 pm, karlgschae...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > How does React with Conviction interact with corruption counters?
>
> Per card text: "When an effect that would change control of this
> imbued is played or announced, you may burn this card to cancel that
> effect."
>
> Burning corruption counters to take control of a minion is 'an effect
> that would change control' etc, so React cancels it (and the counters
> are still burned.)
Doesn't the "No cost is paid" clause on React mean that the counters
don't burn?
witness1
-beware the serpent
LSJ
Well, they're not a cost, ....
But actually, canceling the effect should also prevent the burning of Corruption
counters -- there's no provision for canceling only part of the effect.
That's a REVERSAL of the previous ruling (given for Diamond Thunderbolt).
The Corruption counter (from Corruption or Reformation or Revelation of
Despair/Wrath or Contagion) would be placed, as normal. Then, when the option to
take control is exercised (and canceled by React with Convition or Diamond
Thunderbolt), the effect of burning counters to take control doesn't occur. Not
because the counters are a cost, but because the effect that would burn them is
canceled.
LSJ
> witness1 wrote:
>> On Feb 22, 1:15 am, "John Flournoy" <carne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Feb 21, 6:45 pm, karlgschae...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> How does React with Conviction interact with corruption counters?
>>> Per card text: "When an effect that would change control of this
>>> imbued is played or announced, you may burn this card to cancel that
>>> effect."
>>>
>>> Burning corruption counters to take control of a minion is 'an effect
>>> that would change control' etc, so React cancels it (and the counters
>>> are still burned.)
>>
>> Doesn't the "No cost is paid" clause on React mean that the counters
>> don't burn?
>
> Well, they're not a cost, ....
>
> But actually, canceling the effect should also prevent the burning of
> Corruption counters -- there's no provision for canceling only part of
> the effect.
>
> That's a REVERSAL of the previous ruling (given for Diamond Thunderbolt).
Sorry. Diamond Thunderbolt doesn't cancel the effect (just prevents the change
of control). No reversal.
Today's ruling doesn't affect the DT ruling -- just React with Conviction.
Salem
> LSJ wrote:
>> The Corruption counter (from Corruption or Reformation or Revelation
>> of Despair/Wrath or Contagion) would be placed, as normal. Then, when
>> the option to take control is exercised (and canceled by React with
>> Convition or Diamond Thunderbolt), the effect of burning counters to
>> take control doesn't occur. Not because the counters are a cost, but
>> because the effect that would burn them is canceled.
and just to remind everyone, the corruption counters themselves have no
inherent way to change control of the minion. So this doesn't mean you
can just re-try the effect instantly and still get control of the
minion. You'd need to play another Corruption (etc.) card to be able to
trigger a new control-change, as it is the card text that allows it.
--
salem
http://users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/vtes/
(replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)
Tetragrammaton
news:45DE0084...@white-wolf.com...
But, per corruption's text, first you "burn" the counter, then you take
control
of the minion.
The "take control part" is after, isn't ?
This way means that react with conviction is useless with corruption-like
effect, isn't ?
Meth A burns his/her corruptions to take control of imbued B,
imbued B burns rwc - meth A then still has his/her own corruption
there, to be burned immediately again to take control of the imbued ?
thanks in advance
EMiliano, vekn prince of Rome
LSJ
> But, per corruption's text, first you "burn" the counter, then you take
> control
> of the minion.
> The "take control part" is after, isn't ?
No. Per corruption's text, there is an affect which you may apply if a certain
condition is met. That effect is: burn all of your corruption counters to take
control of the minion. That effect can be canceled with React with Conviction.
If it is canceled, then you do not burn all of your corruption counters to take
control of the minion.
Tetragrammaton
This means that the "corrupter" meth has still all of his/her corruption
counters
there to be burned again, just after the imbued burns his/her own rwc, right
?
So rwc would be useless in front of corruption/venenation with
this new ruling - not a big deal for the imbued, IMHO
regards
Emiliano
Emiliano Imeroni
> "LSJ" <vtes...@white-wolf.com> ha scritto nel messaggionews:3C_Dh.704$BE2...@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
Well, not exactly useless, since the "corrupter" would need *another*
Corruption / Venenation card to get the counters to burn and take
control
of the minion. It doesn't happen "just after" RwC is burned as you
say.
Ciao,
the other Emiliano ;-)
Tetragrammaton
"Emiliano Imeroni" <emiliano...@gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:1172404250.8...@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
? why should he needs another corrption card ?
AFAIK, the situation is:
- meth A has X corruption counter on the imbued B with a rcw.
- Meth A "burns his corruption counters to take control"
- imbued B burn his/her rwc to avoid the effect ->
- meth A still has, per the rule given by lsj here, all of his corruption
counters
still on imbued B (that burned his own rwc)
- meth A can, therefore, still burn again his/her corruption counters to
take control
of the imbued.
Am i missing something ?
sutekh_23
> "Emiliano Imeroni" <emiliano.imer...@gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggionews:1172404250.8...@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
All of the "corruption effects" can only be triggered by the use of a
"corruption" card (corruption, venenation, reformation, etc). The
amount of corruption counters present on a minion only determines
weather a minion can be stolen or not, they don't create the "steal
minon" effect, that effect is created by the "corruption" card. As
react with conviction cancels the "corruption" card, you then need
another such card to get the effect again.
Hope that helps
Sutekh_23
Tetragrammaton
"sutekh_23" <bec...@aapt.net.au> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:1172421764.4...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
But the corruption card doesn't stay in game.... then the effect
could be triggered by each the corruption/venenation/reformation
cards you used to put the counters on the imbued...
Does this means that by burning just *one* react ywith convinction
cancels the "effect" of *all* of the previously-played (corruption etc)
cards ?
Maybe i remember a ruling that stated you need a least corruption
placed via the card "activate" counters put via nefertiti's special but,
in this case, you just have X counters there that were placed via the
cards, so why you should need another more ?
> react with conviction cancels the "corruption" card, you then need
> another such card to get the effect again.
>
Indeed, but (maybe) it should cancel just *one*, not all of them.
Afaik, per corruption (and the like) card text you *don't* have even to
burn all the counters as soon as they are enough of them on the minion
for you to take control of him/her - you can wait for a later moment, so it
just make little sense to cancel an effect *card* that actually, is not in
the
game.
The Lasombra
wrote:
>Afaik, per corruption (and the like) card text you *don't* have even to
>burn all the counters as soon as they are enough of them on the minion
>for you to take control of him/her - you can wait for a later moment, so it
>just make little sense to cancel an effect *card* that actually, is not in
>the game.
This is where you are wrong.
There is no delay possible.
With Corruption, you either place a counter and take control or you
don't. There is no lingering effect other than the counter.
LSJ 10-22-1997
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/71b3612b6320a4c3
"Since the Corruption action card doesn't remain in play (only the
counter does), you can only burn the counters during the action
resolution. "
LSJ 07-23-2001
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/5fe84b11004127ce
"Card text, not the counter's inherent power, allows you to
take control. You must therefore use it when the action resolves (or
when you play Venenation)."
CthuluKitty
> > another such card to get the effect again.
>
> Indeed, but (maybe) it should cancel just *one*, not all of them.
> Afaik, per corruption (and the like) card text you *don't* have even to
> burn all the counters as soon as they are enough of them on the minion
> for you to take control of him/her - you can wait for a later moment, so it
> just make little sense to cancel an effect *card* that actually, is not in
> the
> game.
You're misunderstanding how the corruption mechanic works. This isn't
really your fault. The wording is pretty much totally unclear.
Here's the text:
Corruption
Requires Follower of Set.
+1 stealth action.
(D) Put a corruption counter on a minion controlled by your prey. If
the number of your corruption counters on the minion equals or exceeds
the blood capacity of that vampire or the cost of that ally, you may
burn all of your corrruption counters on that minion to gain control
of him or her.
The part that's confusing is that the second sentence seems to be tied
to the the corruption counter, which stays in place. In fact, it is
only tied to the action, which goes away as soon as it resolves. So
the minion stealing effect is part of the action. It is not
automatically enabled by the presence of Corruption Counters, nor does
the game remember that at some point in the past one or more of those
counters was placed by Corruption actions.
So, if you try to steal an Imbued with Corruption, and the Imbued
player burns React with Conviction, the counters remain in place, but
the minion is not stolen. You would then need another Corruption (or
Venenation, or whatever) to use those same Corruption Counters.
By the same token, if you have 10 Corruption Counters on Arika, and
someone plays Wormwood (reducing her capacity to 10), you do not
immediately have the oppurtunity to burn those counters. The counters
by themselves don't do anything in fact. They require the card text
of another action or effect to do anything at all.
MrJ
A way to start thinking of the corruption mechanic in a different
(correct) way, is by reminding oneself that Nefertiti alone cannot
steal a minion. She can place corruption counters, but can't trigger
the change of control:
Nefertiti
Independent: Nefertiti can place a corruption counter on a minion
controlled by your prey as a +1 stealth (D) action that costs 1 blood.
+1 bleed.
Tetragrammaton
"The Lasombra" <TheLa...@hotmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:eqh3u2laouh379jrh...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 18:10:18 +0100, "Tetragrammaton" <nos...@none.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Afaik, per corruption (and the like) card text you *don't* have even to
>>burn all the counters as soon as they are enough of them on the minion
>>for you to take control of him/her - you can wait for a later moment, so
>>it
>>just make little sense to cancel an effect *card* that actually, is not in
>>the game.
>
> This is where you are wrong.
> There is no delay possible.
>
> With Corruption, you either place a counter and take control or you
> don't. There is no lingering effect other than the counter.
>
> LSJ 10-22-1997
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/71b3612b6320a4c3
>
> "Since the Corruption action card doesn't remain in play (only the
> counter does), you can only burn the counters during the action
> resolution. "
>
> LSJ 07-23-2001
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/5fe84b11004127ce
>
Ok, missed that ruling in the distant past - card text seems pretty unclear
though: "... you may burn..." seems to read "you're not forced to burn the
counters when the action resolves, but you can burn them at a later stage"
Clearer text could read
"If the number of your corruption counters on the minion equals or exceeds
the blood capacity of that vampire or the cost of that ally, *burn* all of
your corrruption counters on that minion to gain control of him or her".
Getting the burn mandatory could avoid such misunderstanding.
Anyway, thanks a lot to all for the clarifications
regards
Emiliano
LSJ
>> don't. There is no lingering effect other than the counter.
>>
> though: "... you may burn..." seems to read "you're not forced to burn the
> counters when the action resolves, but you can burn them at a later stage"
"may" indicates option, not delayed resolution. As with all actions, the effect
listed on the card is the action resolution (unless the card is put in play or
explicit text specifies a delayed or lingering effect).
No ruling needed -- it's just card text.
e.g.: Siphon: "If this acting vampire is Giovanni, you may also move 1 card from
your ash heap to your hand for each blood stolen."
When can you choose to move those cards? Later? Or just when the action resolves?
Tortured Confession: how long may you wait before looking at the target hand?
Third Tradition: how much delay does the "may" provide for retrieving the
Discipline card?
Static Virtue: how much delay does the "may" provide?
> Clearer text could read
> "If the number of your corruption counters on the minion equals or exceeds
> the blood capacity of that vampire or the cost of that ally, *burn* all of
> your corrruption counters on that minion to gain control of him or her".
> Getting the burn mandatory could avoid such misunderstanding.
At the expense of losing the optionality, and there's really nothing about the
"clarified" card text that makes it any less delayed than the current card text,
so it's hard to imagine that such a change would do anything regarding the
imagined delay of the current version.
Tetragrammaton
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:N3MEh.2224$M65....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
> Tetragrammaton wrote:
>> "The Lasombra" <TheLa...@hotmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
>>> With Corruption, you either place a counter and take control or you
>>> don't. There is no lingering effect other than the counter.
>>>
>> Ok, missed that ruling in the distant past - card text seems pretty
>> unclear
>> though: "... you may burn..." seems to read "you're not forced to burn
>> the
>> counters when the action resolves, but you can burn them at a later
>> stage"
>
> "may" indicates option, not delayed resolution. As with all actions, the
> effect listed on the card is the action resolution (unless the card is put
> in play or explicit text specifies a delayed or lingering effect).
>
> No ruling needed -- it's just card text.
>
> e.g.: Siphon: "If this acting vampire is Giovanni, you may also move 1
> card from your ash heap to your hand for each blood stolen."
>
> When can you choose to move those cards? Later? Or just when the action
> resolves?
>
> Tortured Confession: how long may you wait before looking at the target
> hand?
>
> Third Tradition: how much delay does the "may" provide for retrieving the
> Discipline card?
>
> Static Virtue: how much delay does the "may" provide?
>
condition in which the effect
can be triggered "If the number of your corruption counters on the minion
equals or exceeds...." ,
you can't do that before, so you can't resolve that effect if you don't met
the condition, and by
that comes the confusion with the "you may burn" part -
In this, corruption differs from all of the other case you listed above -
So the "may" can be confusing, at least in the general meaning of the
sentence.
Emiliano
LSJ
At least one, Siphon, is exactly parallel, sorry. Unique condition in which the
effect can be triggered, and all that.
Even if there were no parallel, there's nothing in Corruption's text that
indicates the effect of the successful action may be delayed beyond action
resolution. Actions resolve at action resolution.