LSJ: Sleepoing Mind-card change?
Talo...@hotmail.com
superior version has been changed.
Used to be that minions could untap nor play reaction cards during the
action.
Now you just cant untap.
Seeing as the only people that actually untap are animalsim and 2nd
trad types, this card has seriouslly gone down in stock (you mostly
see wakes/forceds out there).
Is this an error or actual card change? And if the latter, why?
(offical answer preferred thanks)
T
Derek Ray
> Used to be that minions could untap nor play reaction cards during the
> action.
the original Sabbat text for "superior" reads:
"Only usable when the acting vampire's action is announced. Minions cannot
untap during this action, and tapped minions cannot block this action."
...so you could definitely always play reaction cards. New text reads:
"...[DOM] Only usable when the acting vampire's action is announced.
Minions cannot untap during this action."
The redundant "tapped minions cannot block this action" was removed, as
tapped minions may -never- block an action.
> Now you just cant untap.
>
> Seeing as the only people that actually untap are animalsim and 2nd
> trad types, this card has seriouslly gone down in stock (you mostly
> see wakes/forceds out there).
I would object to the "mostly", unless by "mostly" you mean "more than
half". Guard Dogs/2nd Tradition are -quite- common, and Eternal Vigilance
has now joined their ranks. Even if you aren't next to a GD/2nd deck, you
can always use its inferior to shut down Kite, Anton, Cailean, etc.
> Is this an error or actual card change? And if the latter, why?
> (offical answer preferred thanks)
Wake and FA both have card text reading "This reacting vamipre can use
reaction cards and attempt to block AS THOUGH UNTAPPED", although the
vampire does not actually untap.
...Which means that even against the original Sabbat version of Sleeping
Mind, it was legal to play a Wake and attempt to block. You were untapped
as far as the attempt to block was concerned (card text of Wake/FA), yet
you didn't ACTUALLY untap (card text of Sleeping Mind).
I'd like to quote the original ruling on this, but it seems to have been
removed from the page with the arrival of the Sabbat War card text. =/
Jason Bell
"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote
> Talo...@hotmail.com wrote
>
> > Used to be that minions could untap nor play reaction cards during the
> > action.
>
> the original Sabbat text for "superior" reads:
>
> "Only usable when the acting vampire's action is announced. Minions
cannot
> untap during this action, and tapped minions cannot block this action."
>
> ...so you could definitely always play reaction cards. New text reads:
>
> "...[DOM] Only usable when the acting vampire's action is announced.
> Minions cannot untap during this action."
>
> The redundant "tapped minions cannot block this action" was removed, as
> tapped minions may -never- block an action.
Huh?
> > Now you just cant untap.
I am very curious about how Sleeping Mind at superior interacts with
Majesty played at superior or Earth Meld played at superior.
> > Is this an error or actual card change? And if the latter, why?
> > (offical answer preferred thanks)
>
> Wake and FA both have card text reading "This reacting vamipre can use
> reaction cards and attempt to block AS THOUGH UNTAPPED", although the
> vampire does not actually untap.
>
> ...Which means that even against the original Sabbat version of Sleeping
> Mind, it was legal to play a Wake and attempt to block. You were untapped
> as far as the attempt to block was concerned (card text of Wake/FA), yet
> you didn't ACTUALLY untap (card text of Sleeping Mind).
>
> I'd like to quote the original ruling on this, but it seems to have been
> removed from the page with the arrival of the Sabbat War card text. =/
Wow, that would be a most peculiar ruling indeed.
- Jason Bell
Derek Ray
news:e_dj7.192556$TM5.35...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com:
> "Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> The redundant "tapped minions cannot block this action" was removed,
>> as tapped minions may -never- block an action.
>
> Huh?
Only untapped minions may attempt to block an action [6.2.2, 6.2.3]. If
you're already tapped, you can't block, because you can't even attempt to.
Wake allows you to "attempt to block as though you were untapped",
specifically overriding this.
>> > Now you just cant untap.
>
> I am very curious about how Sleeping Mind at superior interacts with
> Majesty played at superior or Earth Meld played at superior.
Vampires may not untap during the action. Combat is still during the
action, therefore you can't untap with Majesty or Earth Meld. You'd have
to play them at inferior. (And you couldn't play Freak Drive or inferior
Cat's Guidance at all.)
>> I'd like to quote the original ruling on this, but it seems to have
>> been removed from the page with the arrival of the Sabbat War card
>> text. =/
>
> Wow, that would be a most peculiar ruling indeed.
Plain old card text. Why would it be peculiar?
James Coupe
<lor...@yahoo.com> writes
>>> > Now you just cant untap.
>>
>> I am very curious about how Sleeping Mind at superior interacts with
>> Majesty played at superior or Earth Meld played at superior.
>
>Vampires may not untap during the action. Combat is still during the
>action, therefore you can't untap with Majesty or Earth Meld. You'd have
>to play them at inferior. (And you couldn't play Freak Drive or inferior
>Cat's Guidance at all.)
With Majesty, at least, the untap is an effect that you may choose to
take up (and burn blood for) during the resolution of the strike, rather
than an inherent effect of the strike.
--
James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D
Close your eyes so you don't feel them EBD690ECD7A1F
They don't need to see you cry B457CA213D7E6
I can't promise I will heal you, but if you want to I will try 68C3695D623D5D
LSJ
> "Jason Bell" <Jason...@mail.com> wrote in
> news:e_dj7.192556$TM5.35...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com:
> > "Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >> The redundant "tapped minions cannot block this action" was removed,
> >> as tapped minions may -never- block an action.
> >
> > Huh?
>
> Only untapped minions may attempt to block an action [6.2.2, 6.2.3]. If
> you're already tapped, you can't block, because you can't even attempt to.
> Wake allows you to "attempt to block as though you were untapped",
> specifically overriding this.
Correct.
> >> > Now you just cant untap.
> >
> > I am very curious about how Sleeping Mind at superior interacts with
> > Majesty played at superior or Earth Meld played at superior.
>
> Vampires may not untap during the action. Combat is still during the
> action, therefore you can't untap with Majesty or Earth Meld. You'd have
> to play them at inferior. (And you couldn't play Freak Drive or inferior
> Cat's Guidance at all.)
Correct.
> >> I'd like to quote the original ruling on this, but it seems to have
> >> been removed from the page with the arrival of the Sabbat War card
> >> text. =/
> >
> > Wow, that would be a most peculiar ruling indeed.
>
> Plain old card text. Why would it be peculiar?
--
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/
Flux
> > >> I'd like to quote the original ruling on this, but it seems to have
> > >> been removed from the page with the arrival of the Sabbat War card
> > >> text. =/
> > >
> > > Wow, that would be a most peculiar ruling indeed.
> >
> > Plain old card text. Why would it be peculiar?
Because 'tapped vampires can't block this action' sounds more like an
extension of the inferior effect (...one untapped vampire can't block the
action...) than a restatement of the obvious. It seems that 'tapped vampires
can't block this action' would be an immediate effect, that prevents any
vampires that are tapped when SM is played from blocking the action, even if
they 'untapped' meanwhile.
While I agree that SM was probably broken under that interpretation,
especially with the old Misdirection, I'd rather have that given as a reason
to change the card than an ambiguous interpretation of the text.
Flux
Derek Ray
>> > Plain old card text. Why would it be peculiar?
>
> Because 'tapped vampires can't block this action' sounds more like an
> extension of the inferior effect (...one untapped vampire can't block
> the action...) than a restatement of the obvious. It seems that
I'll admit that since the designers CHOSE to add in "tapped vampires can't
block", it would indicate that they had a different intent for the card.
> 'tapped vampires can't block this action' would be an immediate
> effect, that prevents any vampires that are tapped when SM is played
> from blocking the action, even if they 'untapped' meanwhile.
Sloppy phrasing, though. If they wanted to prevent any untap effect from
being used, why not combine both sentences into: "Tapped vampires may not
play reaction cards during this action"?? This would prevent both Guard
Dogs-like effects *and* Wake/FA. (It wouldn't prevent Eternal Vigilance,
but that's obviously a newer 'effect' than SM. =) It would also prevent
Deflection, which is probably why they didn't.
> While I agree that SM was probably broken under that interpretation,
> especially with the old Misdirection, I'd rather have that given as a
"probably", nothin'. Imagine your only option being bleed bounce - and you
can't even leave Gloria Giovanni untapped, you must play Wake AND
Deflection on every action. Ouch.
> reason to change the card than an ambiguous interpretation of the
> text.
Actual errata is never a good idea, when avoidable. The old ruling was
just that; a ruling. The interpretation is no more ambiguous than the text
itself... hence, the reprint in Sabbat War with the ambiguous text removed.
Roger Carhult
"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns910D6AD7...@198.99.146.10...
> "Flux" <fl...@netc.pt> wrote in news:3b8e...@212.18.160.197:
>
> >> > Plain old card text. Why would it be peculiar?
> >
> > Because 'tapped vampires can't block this action' sounds more like an
> > extension of the inferior effect (...one untapped vampire can't block
> > the action...) than a restatement of the obvious. It seems that
>
> I'll admit that since the designers CHOSE to add in "tapped vampires can't
> block", it would indicate that they had a different intent for the card.
>
> > 'tapped vampires can't block this action' would be an immediate
> > effect, that prevents any vampires that are tapped when SM is played
> > from blocking the action, even if they 'untapped' meanwhile.
>
> Sloppy phrasing, though. If they wanted to prevent any untap effect from
> being used, why not combine both sentences into: "Tapped vampires may not
> play reaction cards during this action"?? This would prevent both Guard
> Dogs-like effects *and* Wake/FA. (It wouldn't prevent Eternal Vigilance,
> but that's obviously a newer 'effect' than SM. =) It would also prevent
> Deflection, which is probably why they didn't.
As well as Telepathic Counter, Ecstacy, superior Burnt Offerings etc...
Talo...@hotmail.com
>
>
>the original Sabbat text for "superior" reads:
>
>"Only usable when the acting vampire's action is announced. Minions cannot
>untap during this action, and tapped minions cannot block this action."
>
> New text reads:
>
>"...[DOM] Only usable when the acting vampire's action is announced.
>Minions cannot untap during this action."
>
>The redundant "tapped minions cannot block this action" was removed, as
>tapped minions may -never- block an action.
>
It was not redudndant though. Tapped minions can obviouslly play
wakes/forceds to react/block as if untapped. The old superior SM
stopped this, the new one does not.
So I wish to clarify with LSJ if this change was intended in the SW
reprint or if it was in error. And if intended, why?
T
LSJ
> On 29 Aug 2001 20:55:37 GMT, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >the original Sabbat text for "superior" reads:
> >
> >"Only usable when the acting vampire's action is announced. Minions cannot
> >untap during this action, and tapped minions cannot block this action."
> >
> > New text reads:
> >
> >"...[DOM] Only usable when the acting vampire's action is announced.
> >Minions cannot untap during this action."
> >
> >The redundant "tapped minions cannot block this action" was removed, as
> >tapped minions may -never- block an action.
>
> It was not redudndant though.
There exists a rule: only ready untapped minions can block. [6.2.2.1]
The statement "tapped minions cannot block this action" is redundant with
that rule, just as "vampires in your uncontrolled region cannot block this
action" would be.
> Tapped minions can obviouslly play
> wakes/forceds to react/block as if untapped. The old superior SM
> stopped this, the new one does not.
The old superior SM did not stop this. It did not prevent tapped vampires
from playing reaction cards like WwEF. WwEF allows the vampire to attempt
to block "as if untapped". Since sup SM didn't (and doesn't) restrict an
untapped vampire's ability to attempt to block, this means that the
vampire who can attempt to block when untapped can attempt to block
when he can do so "as if untapped".
> So I wish to clarify with LSJ if this change was intended in the SW
> reprint or if it was in error. And if intended, why?
The change in text (which does not change the effect of the card - it is
not a functional change) was intentional. It was done to remove the
confusion the redundant text causes. (case in point)
James Coupe
>It was not redudndant though. Tapped minions can obviouslly play
>wakes/forceds to react/block as if untapped. The old superior SM
>stopped this, the new one does not.
One interpretation was that which you give.
Another, equally persuasive, interpretation was that untapped minions
could block as usual. Since untapped minions could block, and a minion
using Wake functions (for that purpose) as if untapped, they would be
able to block similarly.
Derek Ray
> On 29 Aug 2001 20:55:37 GMT, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>The redundant "tapped minions cannot block this action" was removed,
>>as tapped minions may -never- block an action.
>
> It was not redudndant though. Tapped minions can obviouslly play
> wakes/forceds to react/block as if untapped. The old superior SM
> stopped this, the new one does not.
The old superior SM also did not stop this. If you read the rest of the
thread, you'll find the answers you seek.
Talo...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>
>There exists a rule: only ready untapped minions can block. [6.2.2.1]
>The statement "tapped minions cannot block this action" is redundant with
>that rule, just as "vampires in your uncontrolled region cannot block this
>action" would be.
>
It was not redundant imo, because the old SM stopped people from
waking/forcing and blocking with tapped minions. That is the only
possible conclusion as I see it, that the card text would seem
redundant until the wake/forced was played, and then the already
present superior SM would take full effect, negating that play.
Thanks for the clarifiation though.
T
LSJ
>
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:08:37 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >There exists a rule: only ready untapped minions can block. [6.2.2.1]
> >The statement "tapped minions cannot block this action" is redundant with
> >that rule, just as "vampires in your uncontrolled region cannot block this
> >action" would be.
>
> It was not redundant imo, because the old SM stopped people from
> waking/forcing and blocking with tapped minions.
The /rules/ prevent people from blocking with tapped minions.
Wake gets around that by allowing a tapped minion to go through
the blocking process "as if untapped".
Since neither the rules nor superior SM prevented an untapped minion
from blocking, neither prevents a minion capable of blocking "as if
untapped" from blocking.
The text on superior SM stated something that was true before SM was
played - namely that tapped minions cannot block. This is, by definition,
redundant.
If WwEF gets around the basic rule (and it does), it gets around the text
on superior SM (which merely restates the rule) in exactly the same way.
> That is the only
> possible conclusion as I see it, that the card text would seem
> redundant until the wake/forced was played, and then the already
> present superior SM would take full effect, negating that play.
Except for the standard "most-recently-played effect applies" rule,
sure.
The card text failed to effect the result that the designer probably
intended. No errata was issued (and card functionality was not changed
in the new printing) to instate the assumed "designer intent" because
doing so would make the card too powerful.
James Coupe
>It was not redundant imo, because the old SM stopped people from
>waking/forcing and blocking with tapped minions.
No, the old SM (prior to the reprint) didn't - see the rulings on this.
> That is the only
>possible conclusion as I see it, that the card text would seem
>redundant until the wake/forced was played,
At which point the minion would function as if untapped.
Talo...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>The card text failed to effect the result that the designer probably
>intended. No errata was issued (and card functionality was not changed
>in the new printing) to instate the assumed "designer intent" because
>doing so would make the card too powerful.
>
Well I think the designers intent was clear(void wakes/forceds), and
it was powerful. I rather liked the card that way to be honest.
But that is a good reason to 'change' it as well, if it was too
powerful.
Thanks,
T
....salem christ....
> There exists a rule: only ready untapped minions can block. [6.2.2.1]
> The statement "tapped minions cannot block this action" is redundant with
> that rule, just as "vampires in your uncontrolled region cannot block this
> action" would be.
next you'll be telling me vampires in my crypt can't cast their votes,
either...
salem....
James Coupe
christ.... <s940...@bohm.anu.edu.au> writes
>> There exists a rule: only ready untapped minions can block. [6.2.2.1]
>> The statement "tapped minions cannot block this action" is redundant with
>> that rule, just as "vampires in your uncontrolled region cannot block this
>> action" would be.
>
>next you'll be telling me vampires in my crypt can't cast their votes,
>either...
Shush. Even vampires *on other tables* are allowed to cast votes in my
referendums. (If they support me.)