Another Sabbat question for Jon

Pheersum

unread,

Oct 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/29/96

to

Another Sabbat question---
Combat, Fleshcraft states "Strike: 1 damage. Put this card on the
opposing minion. The minion with this card has -1 stealth. He or she may
burn this card as a +1 stealth action."

Isn't the -1 stealth applied to the +1 stealth action to bring the
action to burn down to no stealth?
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
pheersum inhabits the mortal shell of eric schultheis. one
channels mailto://phee...@sb.net. pheersum manifests at
http://www.sb.net/pheersum/Pheerpage.htm . nature says,"go ahead, have
as many babies as you want. something will eat them."
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorrow

unread,

Oct 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/30/96

to

> Combat, Fleshcraft states "Strike: 1 damage. Put this card on the
>opposing minion. The minion with this card has -1 stealth. He or she may
>burn this card as a +1 stealth action."
> Isn't the -1 stealth applied to the +1 stealth action to bring the
>action to burn down to no stealth?

Yeah, I saw this one and thought it made no sense as well.

Sorrow
--
I don't want to be alone | I hurt, therefore I am
anymore |--------------------------------
I don't want to be anyone | "What are you looking at...?
anymore | you never seen anyone try to
I don't need a reason to kill myself | commit suicide before?" - Anon
------------------------------------------------------------------------

James Hamblin

unread,

Oct 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/30/96

to

Sorrow wrote:
>
> > Combat, Fleshcraft states "Strike: 1 damage. Put this card on the
> >opposing minion. The minion with this card has -1 stealth. He or she may
> >burn this card as a +1 stealth action."
> > Isn't the -1 stealth applied to the +1 stealth action to bring the
> >action to burn down to no stealth?

Well, if they had said "a 0 stealth action", you would have been
wondering whether the -1 stealth applies to it...

The minion has -1 stealth on all actions, including the +1 stealth
action to burn.
So, yes, when attempting that action, they have base 0 stealth.

James

--
+-------------------+ Cornell University
| James Hamblin | Senior Math/CS Major
| je...@cornell.edu | TA, CS 212
+-------------------+ Geek

Alec Chang

unread,

Oct 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/31/96

to

On 30 Oct 1996 15:19:29 GMT, cbo...@apdi.net (Sorrow) wrote:

>> Combat, Fleshcraft states "Strike: 1 damage. Put this card on the
>>opposing minion. The minion with this card has -1 stealth. He or she may
>>burn this card as a +1 stealth action."
>> Isn't the -1 stealth applied to the +1 stealth action to bring the
>>action to burn down to no stealth?

Yes, it is. However, this is the normal way that stealth is phrased;
if the card stated that the action to burn it was at no stealth, then
it would actually be at -1 stealth(or -2 at superior) because of the
"this minion has -1 stealth" clause. So in effect, the action is at
no stealth, but it isn't necessarily at negative stealth, so that
keeping it unblocked against the Tzimisce wouldn't become even more
impossible than it already is.

>Yeah, I saw this one and thought it made no sense as well.

Does the above make any more sense? If not, just ask me or someone
else to clarify.

Alec Chang

L. Scott Johnson

unread,

Feb 24, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/24/97

to

On 29-Oct-96, Pheersum <phee...@sb.net> wrote:

>Combat, Fleshcraft states "Strike: 1 damage. Put this card on the
>opposing minion. The minion with this card has -1 stealth. He or she may
>burn this card as a +1 stealth action."

>Isn't the -1 stealth applied to the +1 stealth action to bring the
>action to burn down to no stealth?

Yes.

--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@regency.wizards.com)
Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
(*) - Subject to review by Rules Team