Rules Question - interaction between slave combat and Voice of Madness
George Finklang
Eugenio is blocked by Anatole.
Eugenio wants to untap and let Ublo-Satha take over.
Anatole wants to play Voice of Madness.
What happens?
Current guess is that Eugenio and Anatole both lose 1 blood from the
Voice (paying/burning), and that Ublo fights Anatole.
Maybe though Voice of Madness can't be played in this situation?
salem
scrawled:
6.2.4 Slaves
Some minions are identified as slaves to a specified clan. A slave
cannot take a directed action if his controller doesn’t control a
ready
member of the specified clan. Also, if a member of the specified clan
controlled by the same Methuselah is blocked, the controller can
tap the slave to cancel the combat and to untap the acting vampire
and have the slave enter combat with the blocking minion instead.
I'd say that since the combat has already been cancelled by the slave
effect (which the acting minion is allowed to do before the blocking
minion can play Voice of Madness, by the Sequencing rules), then Voice
of Madness would not be playable.
If it was playable, I guess it would cancel the Ublo-Anatole combat,
and per card text (acting vampire burns one blood), Eugenio would burn
one blood.
Good question....
salem
domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm
James Coupe
<salem_ch...@yahoo.com> writes:
>I'd say that since the combat has already been cancelled by the slave
>effect (which the acting minion is allowed to do before the blocking
>minion can play Voice of Madness, by the Sequencing rules), then Voice
>of Madness would not be playable.
Voice of Madness does not require combat to be entered, like Obedience.
It only requires a successful block. It will, of course, *cancel* a
combat if there is one - but that is far from necessary. e.g. I block
your "leave torpor" attempt, from which there can be no combat, and play
Voice of Madness to cause you burn blood.
As such, there is still a successful block. But I am unsure whether
there is time to slip in Voice of Madness at that point, due to the
Slave effect.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D
Lucky that my breasts are small and humble, EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2
So you don't confuse them with mountains. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D
Joshua Duffin
"salem" <salem_ch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bpetkv45h5ummino5...@4ax.com...
> On 28 Aug 2003 13:47:33 -0700, gf...@deckserver.net (George Finklang)
> scrawled:
>
> >This came up in JOL today -
> >
> >Eugenio is blocked by Anatole.
> >
> >Eugenio wants to untap and let Ublo-Satha take over.
> >
> >Anatole wants to play Voice of Madness.
> >
> >What happens?
> >
> >Current guess is that Eugenio and Anatole both lose 1 blood from the
> >Voice (paying/burning), and that Ublo fights Anatole.
> >
> >Maybe though Voice of Madness can't be played in this situation?
> I'd say that since the combat has already been cancelled by the slave
> effect (which the acting minion is allowed to do before the blocking
> minion can play Voice of Madness, by the Sequencing rules), then Voice
> of Madness would not be playable.
I believe that's correct.
Since the acting Methuselah has the first opportunity to play
effects at every stage, when the block is successful, she may
declare the use of the Slave rule before the blocking Meth
can play Voice of Madness. [LSJ 8-Jan-2003] (This part I'm
sure about.)
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3E1C4949.42F3D942%40white-wolf.com
(That message is a followup to LSJ's own message, with a
correction to one piece of his answer.)
Once the Slave rule is invoked, I don't think Voice of Madness
is playable; even though it doesn't use the same wording as
Obedience, it does say "Only usable when this vampire
successfully blocks an ally or younger vampire", and after the
Slave comes into the picture, that time frame no longer exists.
If you want to be really certain, though, you'll probably have
to wait for LSJ to answer (and I believe he's at DragonCon for
the weekend right now).
Josh
should be getting stuff done
DeanGarrison
Vamp A: !Brujah, bleeds.
Vamp B: Successfuly Blocks
Vamp A: plays Blood Brother Ambush.
Vamp B: Plays Voice of Madness.
Is the combat involving the Ally (BBA) now cancelled, and/or does Vamp
A burn the blood?
Consenses was that since BBA was an Action Modifier and part of the
action, the Voice cancelled the combat and Vamp A burned the blood.
Any comments?
LSJ?
Dean Garrison
DeanGarrison
Dean
dfgar...@msn.com (DeanGarrison) wrote in message news:<7a282380.03083...@posting.google.com>...
LSJ
> Re-posting for LSJ comment.
> Dean
> dfgar...@msn.com (DeanGarrison) wrote in message news:<7a282380.03083...@posting.google.com>...
>>gf...@deckserver.net (George Finklang) wrote in message news:<485d0894.03082...@posting.google.com>...
>>>This came up in JOL today -
>>>Eugenio is blocked by Anatole.
>>>Eugenio wants to untap and let Ublo-Satha take over.
>>>Anatole wants to play Voice of Madness.
>>>What happens?
>>>
>>>Current guess is that Eugenio and Anatole both lose 1 blood from the
>>>Voice (paying/burning), and that Ublo fights Anatole.
Correct.
>>>Maybe though Voice of Madness can't be played in this situation?
>>
>>Vamp A: !Brujah, bleeds.
>>Vamp B: Successfuly Blocks
>>Vamp A: plays Blood Brother Ambush.
>>Vamp B: Plays Voice of Madness.
>>
>>Is the combat involving the Ally (BBA) now cancelled, and/or does Vamp
>>A burn the blood?
>>
>>Consenses was that since BBA was an Action Modifier and part of the
>>action, the Voice cancelled the combat and Vamp A burned the blood.
Both BBA and Voice cancel the block combat.
The blocker enters combat with the BBA.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Joshua Duffin
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3F57ADA3...@white-wolf.com...
> DeanGarrison wrote:
> > Re-posting for LSJ comment.
> > Dean
> > dfgar...@msn.com (DeanGarrison) wrote in message
news:<7a282380.03083...@posting.google.com>...
> >>gf...@deckserver.net (George Finklang) wrote in message
news:<485d0894.03082...@posting.google.com>...
> >>>This came up in JOL today -
> >>>Eugenio is blocked by Anatole.
> >>>Eugenio wants to untap and let Ublo-Satha take over.
> >>>Anatole wants to play Voice of Madness.
> >>>What happens?
> >>>
> >>>Current guess is that Eugenio and Anatole both lose 1 blood from the
> >>>Voice (paying/burning), and that Ublo fights Anatole.
>
> Correct.
So the line of argument below is wrong?
"Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:binufr$bcmg3$1...@ID-121616.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> "salem" <salem_ch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bpetkv45h5ummino5...@4ax.com...
> > On 28 Aug 2003 13:47:33 -0700, gf...@deckserver.net (George Finklang)
> > scrawled:
> >
> > >This came up in JOL today -
> > >
> > >Eugenio is blocked by Anatole.
> > >
> > >Eugenio wants to untap and let Ublo-Satha take over.
> > >
> > >Anatole wants to play Voice of Madness.
> > >
> > >What happens?
> > >
> > >Current guess is that Eugenio and Anatole both lose 1 blood from the
> > >Voice (paying/burning), and that Ublo fights Anatole.
> > >
> > >Maybe though Voice of Madness can't be played in this situation?
>
> > I'd say that since the combat has already been cancelled by the slave
> > effect (which the acting minion is allowed to do before the blocking
> > minion can play Voice of Madness, by the Sequencing rules), then Voice
> > of Madness would not be playable.
>
> I believe that's correct.
>
> Since the acting Methuselah has the first opportunity to play
> effects at every stage, when the block is successful, she may
> declare the use of the Slave rule before the blocking Meth
> can play Voice of Madness. [LSJ 8-Jan-2003] (This part I'm
> sure about.)
>
> http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3E1C4949.42F3D942%40white-wolf.com
>
> (That message is a followup to LSJ's own message, with a
> correction to one piece of his answer.)
>
> Once the Slave rule is invoked, I don't think Voice of Madness
> is playable; even though it doesn't use the same wording as
> Obedience, it does say "Only usable when this vampire
> successfully blocks an ally or younger vampire", and after the
> Slave comes into the picture, that time frame no longer exists.
In the second situation:
> >>Vamp A: !Brujah, bleeds.
> >>Vamp B: Successfuly Blocks
> >>Vamp A: plays Blood Brother Ambush.
> >>Vamp B: Plays Voice of Madness.
> >>
> >>Is the combat involving the Ally (BBA) now cancelled, and/or does Vamp
> >>A burn the blood?
> >>
> >>Consenses was that since BBA was an Action Modifier and part of the
> >>action, the Voice cancelled the combat and Vamp A burned the blood.
>
> Both BBA and Voice cancel the block combat.
>
> The blocker enters combat with the BBA.
This seems somewhat odd to me.
Blood Brother Ambush: "Only usable when an action is blocked.
Combat does not occur. Put this card into play. While in
play, this card represents an ally with 3 life and 2 strength
who can strike for 2R damage; this ally enters combat with
the blocking minion. Blood Brothers may play cards requiring
basic Potence as a vampire with a capacity of 3. Any cost in
blood is paid with life. If a card would give them blood,
give them life instead. Burn this card at the end of combat
or if the combat is canceled."
Voice of Madness: "Only usable when this vampire successfully
blocks an ally or younger vampire. [dem] Tap this reacting
vampire. Combat does not occur. [DEM] As above, and the
acting minion burns 1 blood or life."
I would think that the play of Blood Brother Ambush makes
Voice of Madness unplayable (since it has already started
a combat and Voice of Madness has to be played when the
block occurs - BBA has already been played in that time slot
and started a combat).
Josh
double checking
LSJ
> So the line of argument below is wrong?
> "Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
[re: [!]Tre invokes slave rule to have slave Gargoyle enter combat]
>>Since the acting Methuselah has the first opportunity to play
>>effects at every stage, when the block is successful, she may
>>declare the use of the Slave rule before the blocking Meth
>>can play Voice of Madness. [LSJ 8-Jan-2003] (This part I'm
>>sure about.)
This is correct.
>>Once the Slave rule is invoked, I don't think Voice of Madness
>>is playable; even though it doesn't use the same wording as
>>Obedience, it does say "Only usable when this vampire
>>successfully blocks an ally or younger vampire", and after the
>>Slave comes into the picture, that time frame no longer exists.
The vampire has still blocked the ally or younger vampire.
Certainly plausible.
BBA could be slightly different than the invocation of the slave
rule by virtue of starting combat as part of its effect rather
than swapping combat.
It seemed to be close enough to use a parallel ruling however
(i.e., ruling that it swaps combat just like the invocation of
the slave rule for uniformity).
Joshua Duffin
> Joshua Duffin wrote:
[re: Voice of Madness versus slave-rule use/combat]
> The vampire has still blocked the ally or younger vampire.
That's true. But my intuition is that when the slave rule is
invoked or Blood Brother Ambush is played, combat is entered
immediately without time for more reaction cards to be played
(since reaction cards aren't generally playable during combat).
I would also expect that in the case where Jing Wei attempts
a bleed, a tapped Bear Paw plays Forced Awakening and blocks,
and Saxum steps in to fight via the slave rule, Bear Paw would
not then be able to play Rat's Warning to untap. Could he in
fact do that?
Josh
this is the voice... of madness
LSJ
>
> [re: Voice of Madness versus slave-rule use/combat]
>>The vampire has still blocked the ally or younger vampire.
>
> That's true. But my intuition is that when the slave rule is
> invoked or Blood Brother Ambush is played, combat is entered
> immediately without time for more reaction cards to be played
> (since reaction cards aren't generally playable during combat).
Yes. The intuition would be fine for BBA in isolation, but
doesn't fit with the wording of the slave rule.
I'll put it on the RT list for review.
> I would also expect that in the case where Jing Wei attempts
> a bleed, a tapped Bear Paw plays Forced Awakening and blocks,
> and Saxum steps in to fight via the slave rule, Bear Paw would
> not then be able to play Rat's Warning to untap. Could he in
> fact do that?
Rat's Warning cannot be played after the action is blocked.
This is true whether the slave rule is invoked (which can only
be done when a block is successful) or not.
Eric Simon
> Joshua Duffin wrote:
> > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
> >>Joshua Duffin wrote:
> >
> > [re: Voice of Madness versus slave-rule use/combat]
> >>The vampire has still blocked the ally or younger vampire.
> >
> > That's true. But my intuition is that when the slave rule is
> > invoked or Blood Brother Ambush is played, combat is entered
> > immediately without time for more reaction cards to be played
> > (since reaction cards aren't generally playable during combat).
>
> Yes. The intuition would be fine for BBA in isolation, but
> doesn't fit with the wording of the slave rule.
>
> I'll put it on the RT list for review.
While we're clarifying, remember that the wording of Conscripted
Statue is almost identical to Blood Brother Ambush, so it needs to be
part of this as well. Also, I guess I'm not clear why Josh's
intuition doesn't fit with the current wording of the slave rule.
Looking at it:
[From 6.2.4] Also, if a member of the specified clan controlled by the
same Methuselah is blocked, the controller can tap the slave to cancel
the combat and to untap the acting vampire and have the slave enter
combat with the blocking minion instead.
This seems to indicate that a) combat is cancelled right now,
preventing the playing of any other combat-cancelling reaction cards
and b) the slave "enters combat", which is exactly the same wording as
BBA and CS. The only phrase missing from the slave rule that is on
the cards is - "Combat does not occur." My question is whether this
is a significantly different effect from "cancel combat", and I'm
inclined to think it isn't.
Anyway, review on. I just think it's clear enough as is.
Eric Simon
Prince of Chicago
LSJ
> While we're clarifying, remember that the wording of Conscripted
> Statue is almost identical to Blood Brother Ambush, so it needs to be
> part of this as well. Also, I guess I'm not clear why Josh's
Thanks.
> intuition doesn't fit with the current wording of the slave rule.
> Looking at it:
>
> [From 6.2.4] Also, if a member of the specified clan controlled by the
> same Methuselah is blocked, the controller can tap the slave to cancel
> the combat and to untap the acting vampire and have the slave enter
> combat with the blocking minion instead.
>
> This seems to indicate that a) combat is cancelled right now,
> preventing the playing of any other combat-cancelling reaction cards
> and b) the slave "enters combat", which is exactly the same wording as
The slave enters combat "instead", indicating that the combat replaces
the normal block combat. So things playable post-block, pre-block-combat
would be playable pre-slave-combat, since the one is merely substituted
for the other.
> BBA and CS. The only phrase missing from the slave rule that is on
> the cards is - "Combat does not occur." My question is whether this
> is a significantly different effect from "cancel combat", and I'm
> inclined to think it isn't.
Right.
Joshua Duffin
> Eric Simon wrote:
> > While we're clarifying, remember that the wording of Conscripted
> > Statue is almost identical to Blood Brother Ambush, so it needs to be
> > part of this as well. Also, I guess I'm not clear why Josh's
>
> Thanks.
Malleable Visage also has a very similar effect, in case you
hadn't already considered it. It doesn't shed much light on
the question, though, since its ruling vs Obedience doesn't
answer the Voice of Madness issue.
Josh
no future
Joshua Duffin
> Joshua Duffin wrote:
> > I would also expect that in the case where Jing Wei attempts
> > a bleed, a tapped Bear Paw plays Forced Awakening and blocks,
> > and Saxum steps in to fight via the slave rule, Bear Paw would
> > not then be able to play Rat's Warning to untap. Could he in
> > fact do that?
>
> Rat's Warning cannot be played after the action is blocked.
> This is true whether the slave rule is invoked (which can only
> be done when a block is successful) or not.
Is this because in the "when the action is blocked" time
frame, only reactions that specify to play them when a
block succeeds are legal? Parallel to the "when an action
is announced" action modifiers, which are the only ones
legal during the "announce-the-action" period?
Or if not, is there another reason for it? Card text
doesn't seem to provide any obvious guidance here.
Josh
would kind of like having a comprehensive set of rules
with more precision than the printed rulebook
;-)
LSJ
> Or if not, is there another reason for it? Card text
> doesn't seem to provide any obvious guidance here.
Most action modifiers are for modifying the action before
it resolves. Likewise reaction cards.
> would kind of like having a comprehensive set of rules
> with more precision than the printed rulebook
Anyone who has compiled such a thing is welcome to let me
know so that it can be archived/compiled on the web site.
The last time someone attempted such a thing, the reception
to the effort was not great.