LSJ: Clearer definition of "Determine Range"
Eric Simon
The terms "Determine Range" and "Maneuver" have different connotations
about what actually happens during the Determine Range step.
Specifically, does the combat actually "start" at close, with the
vampires physically maneuvering back and forth? Or is the Determine
Range step rather used to determine the one and only range for that
round? (This would suggest that "maneuver" is somewhat misleading,
and represents more of a "jockeying for position" prior to strikes.)
I ask this because of the interaction with effects such as Vampiric
Disease. If there is no pre-range "setting" of range, then it seems
(based partially on the phrasing in the rulebook's example) that ALL
combats start at close, and therefore all opponents should get a
disease counter, even if they then maneuver to long, because the
criteria have been met.
Text of Vampiric Disease:
Master
Choose a controlled vampire; put a disease counter on him or her if he
or she does not have one. Each time a vampire with a disease counter
is in combat at close range with another vampire, the second vampire
gets a counter as well. An afflicted vampire cannot gain blood by
hunting. When an afflicted vampire untaps, he or she burns a blood,
or, if unable, loses all disease counters.
Eric Simon
Prince of Chicago
Anarch Newsletter Writer
David Zopf
"Eric Simon" <vol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6f81fa2c.04082...@posting.google.com...
> Here's a question that doesn't seem to have come up:
>
> The terms "Determine Range" and "Maneuver" have different connotations
> about what actually happens during the Determine Range step.
> Specifically, does the combat actually "start" at close, with the
> vampires physically maneuvering back and forth? Or is the Determine
> Range step rather used to determine the one and only range for that
> round? (This would suggest that "maneuver" is somewhat misleading,
> and represents more of a "jockeying for position" prior to strikes.)
>
Night". I don't think theabove is relevant to your real question (when does
an opponent get a counter from my Diseased vampire).
> I ask this because of the interaction with effects such as Vampiric
> Disease. If there is no pre-range "setting" of range, then it seems
> (based partially on the phrasing in the rulebook's example) that ALL
> combats start at close, and therefore all opponents should get a
> disease counter, even if they then maneuver to long, because the
> criteria have been met.
>
> Text of Vampiric Disease:
>
> Master
> Choose a controlled vampire; put a disease counter on him or her if he
> or she does not have one. Each time a vampire with a disease counter
> is in combat at close range with another vampire, the second vampire
> gets a counter as well. An afflicted vampire cannot gain blood by
> hunting. When an afflicted vampire untaps, he or she burns a blood,
> or, if unable, loses all disease counters.
>
The fact that range is mentioned at all is sufficient to imply that the
disease counter is checked for applicability after range is determined, but
a clarification in the ERC list might be nice to make this explicit.
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
LSJ
It was an issue in mid 1996 re: the change to Blood to Water.
> The terms "Determine Range" and "Maneuver" have different connotations
> about what actually happens during the Determine Range step.
> Specifically, does the combat actually "start" at close, with the
> vampires physically maneuvering back and forth? Or is the Determine
> Range step rather used to determine the one and only range for that
> round? (This would suggest that "maneuver" is somewhat misleading,
> and represents more of a "jockeying for position" prior to strikes.)
>
> I ask this because of the interaction with effects such as Vampiric
> Disease.
If something depends on range being either close or long, then it
must wait until range is determined.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu
Eric Simon
> "Eric Simon" <vol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:6f81fa2c.04082...@posting.google.com...
> > Here's a question that doesn't seem to have come up:
> >
> > The terms "Determine Range" and "Maneuver" have different connotations
> > about what actually happens during the Determine Range step.
> > Specifically, does the combat actually "start" at close, with the
> > vampires physically maneuvering back and forth? Or is the Determine
> > Range step rather used to determine the one and only range for that
> > round? (This would suggest that "maneuver" is somewhat misleading,
> > and represents more of a "jockeying for position" prior to strikes.)
> >
> Maneuver is a game term, as in "I maneuver to long with Swallowed by the
> Night". I don't think theabove is relevant to your real question (when does
> an opponent get a counter from my Diseased vampire).
If you take a look at the example of a Determine Range step (6.4.2) in
the rulebook, the term "Maneuver" seems to take on a very physical
meaning. Even the phrasing in the rules includes the line, "...use a
maneuver to GET TO long range, or he can maneuver to GET BACK to close
range." (my emphasis)
This is my fundamental problem - both "Maneuver" and "Determine Range"
are game terms. They have different, opposing connotations. Which
one is preferred?
> > Text of Vampiric Disease:
> >
> > Master
> > Choose a controlled vampire; put a disease counter on him or her if he
> > or she does not have one. Each time a vampire with a disease counter
> > is in combat at close range with another vampire, the second vampire
> > gets a counter as well. An afflicted vampire cannot gain blood by
> > hunting. When an afflicted vampire untaps, he or she burns a blood,
> > or, if unable, loses all disease counters.
> >
> The fact that range is mentioned at all is sufficient to imply that the
> disease counter is checked for applicability after range is determined, but
> a clarification in the ERC list might be nice to make this explicit.
>
> DaveZ
> Atom Weaver
That's a fine possibility, but I'm not currently convinced. (I
personally want it to be that way - otherwise VD is broken - but I'm
devil's advocating here.) The problem is that the wording is
different from all other cards that happen at close. All the others
say "Only usable at close range, before strikes are chosen." Because
the cards are only usable at close, we have to wait until after range
is determined to be sure the card is played legally. The one card
that is used "before strikes" without requiring a range is Death of My
Conscience, which I have seen people play even before range. (You can
- that's perfectly legal.) What I'm trying to say is that the only
reason other cards that happen at close wait until after range is
determined is to verify legality, not because there is no range. The
only thing VD requires is that you be in combat and be at close. This
happens, however instantaneously, in nearly all combats, unless there
is a way that combat ends or is set to long BEFORE the Determine Range
step (I do believe that there is no such thing as range before that
step).
Again, I don't want it to be this way, as I think it goes against
designer intent for Vampiric Disease, but this is how I read the rules
currently.
LSJ
> the rulebook, the term "Maneuver" seems to take on a very physical
> meaning. Even the phrasing in the rules includes the line, "...use a
> maneuver to GET TO long range, or he can maneuver to GET BACK to close
> range." (my emphasis)
>
> This is my fundamental problem - both "Maneuver" and "Determine Range"
> are game terms. They have different, opposing connotations. Which
> one is preferred?
Maneuvering is what you do to determine range.
Range is determined once all the maneuvers are done.
These are not opposing connotations.
Each manuever makes the range close if it was long or vice versa.
Once you're done with those, then range is determined (and other
effects that depend on one range or the other can then be
satisfied, or not, with that now-determined range).
David Zopf
> > > Text of Vampiric Disease:
> > >
> > > Master
> > > Choose a controlled vampire; put a disease counter on him or her if he
> > > or she does not have one. Each time a vampire with a disease counter
> > > is in combat at close range with another vampire, the second vampire
> > > gets a counter as well. An afflicted vampire cannot gain blood by
> > > hunting. When an afflicted vampire untaps, he or she burns a blood,
> > > or, if unable, loses all disease counters.
> > >
> > The fact that range is mentioned at all is sufficient to imply that the
> > disease counter is checked for applicability after range is determined,
but
> > a clarification in the ERC list might be nice to make this explicit.
> >
> > DaveZ
> > Atom Weaver
>
> That's a fine possibility, but I'm not currently convinced. (I
> personally want it to be that way - otherwise VD is broken - but I'm
> devil's advocating here.) The problem is that the wording is
> different from all other cards that happen at close.
>
Which, in itself, is not enough to be an issue, so long as Vamp Disease is
also adequately worded.
> All the others
> say "Only usable at close range, before strikes are chosen." Because
> the cards are only usable at close, we have to wait until after range
> is determined to be sure the card is played legally. The one card
> that is used "before strikes" without requiring a range is Death of My
> Conscience, which I have seen people play even before range. (You can
> - that's perfectly legal.) What I'm trying to say is that the only
> reason other cards that happen at close wait until after range is
> determined is to verify legality, not because there is no range. The
> only thing VD requires is that you be in combat and be at close. This
> happens, however instantaneously, in nearly all combats, unless there
> is a way that combat ends or is set to long BEFORE the Determine Range
> step (I do believe that there is no such thing as range before that
> step).
>
Combat is not determined to be at _any_ range until the conclusion of the
Determine Range step (be it arrived at by default close, through maneuvers,
or through Set Range effects). That is why its called the Determine Range
step; the range is Undetermined until you are done with the step... By your
logic, the timing provided by the phrase "only usable at close range, before
strikes are chosen" would give any card so worded the same opportunity of
play that you ascribe to VD (ie. applying the effect before the conclusion
of the Determine Range step), because being at close, but mid-step in
determining range, satisfies both the 'at close range' and 'before strikes'.
Fortunately, such is not the case. Anytime (including with VD) that an
effect is range-dependant, it is applied/checked _after_ the Determine Range
step.
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
Eric Simon
> "Eric Simon" <vol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:6f81fa2c.04082...@posting.google.com...
> > If you take a look at the example of a Determine Range step (6.4.2) in
> > the rulebook, the term "Maneuver" seems to take on a very physical
> > meaning. Even the phrasing in the rules includes the line, "...use a
> > maneuver to GET TO long range, or he can maneuver to GET BACK to close
> > range." (my emphasis)
> >
> > This is my fundamental problem - both "Maneuver" and "Determine Range"
> > are game terms. They have different, opposing connotations. Which
> > one is preferred?
>
>
> Maneuvering is what you do to determine range.
> Range is determined once all the maneuvers are done.
> These are not opposing connotations.
>
> Each manuever makes the range close if it was long or vice versa.
> Once you're done with those, then range is determined (and other
> effects that depend on one range or the other can then be
> satisfied, or not, with that now-determined range).
Okay then, this leads to some further complications. This means that
range is determined whenever we know what the range will be for the
round, not necessarily at the end of the Determine Range step. This
sounds straightforward and fine, but it causes some issues.
Example #1:
Beckett (acting) is blocked by Cailean who has a disease counter.
Because Cailean's power is "At the beginning of each round of combat,"
Cailean sets range to close. Beckett decides he doesn't want any of
that and plays Alpha Glint to get out of there "Before range is
determined." Does he now have a Vampiric Disease counter on him? The
current direction of the explanations says yes.
HOWEVER,
Example #2:
Now the player of Cailean calls a judge over and gets the judge to
point out that Beckett could not have played that Alpha Glint, because
it explicitly states "Before range is determined." Cailean sets range
as the very first thing that happens in combat (as he must), so range
is now determined and no further "before range" effects may be played.
He tries to offer some consolation to his opponent by pointing out
that because of this he can never play Torn Signpost, Increased
Strength or Carrion Crows when using Cailean's power, but this comes
as scant comfort when Beckett gets Immortal Grappled, punched for
four, and Disarmed.
So, the problem that I see with a literal understanding of the term
"Determine Range" is that it means that "set range" trumps ALL "before
range" cards. For it to not, we must decide that "set range" effects,
though played early in combat, do not actually cause the range to be
set until the normal Determine Range step. If this is the case, of
course, then we are taking a less literal definition of "determine
range," and that brings me around to my original question.
Eric Simon
Prince of Chicago
Anarch Newsletter Writer (and Troublemaker)
Colin Goodman
2 is correct.
> Example #2:
>
> Now the player of Cailean calls a judge over and gets the judge to
> point out that Beckett could not have played that Alpha Glint, because
> it explicitly states "Before range is determined." Cailean sets range
> as the very first thing that happens in combat (as he must), so range
> is now determined and no further "before range" effects may be played.
Although Beckett is the acting minion, the wording on Cailean says to me
that his ability comes before Beckett plays a card to move to long.
--
Colin "Eryx" Goodman
http://www.geocities.com/eryx_uk/Cambridge_by_night.html
Ira
While I commend your desire to understand the details of the rules, I
think you might find yourself better served simply accepting some
fuzziness on this issue and relying on what you believe to be the
intent of the designers and on your best guess.
Regardless, my understanding is:
There's a Determine Range step of the combat. Range is undefined
until that step. In the case of Cailean, he specifies what the range
will be at the beginning of combat, and then it actually gets set at
the beginning of the Determine Range step (which then is immediately
done.)
> He tries to offer some consolation to his opponent by pointing out
> that because of this he can never play Torn Signpost, Increased
> Strength or Carrion Crows when using Cailean's power, but this comes
> as scant comfort when Beckett gets Immortal Grappled, punched for
> four, and Disarmed.
Your eloquence is entertaining to me. :)
> For it to not, we must decide that "set range" effects,
> though played early in combat, do not actually cause the range to be
> set until the normal Determine Range step.
Of course this is correct (as far as I know.)
> If this is the case, of course, then we are taking
> a less literal definition of "determine range,"
> and that brings me around to my original question.
"Determine Range" is a keyword in this game for a step in the combat
process. Let's look at your original questions:
> Specifically, does the combat actually "start" at close, with the
> vampires physically maneuvering back and forth? Or is the Determine
> Range step rather used to determine the one and only range for that
> round?
At the beginning of a round, range is undefined. At the end of the
"Determine Range" step, range is defined to be either close or long.
I could be wrong, but any other interpretation breaks stuff as far as
I can tell.
I hope this helps you,
Ira, remembering the pain of the Aura of Invincibility discussion...
Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
> > as the very first thing that happens in combat (as he must), so range
> > is now determined and no further "before range" effects may be played.
>
Not true. Since Beckett is the acting minion, he gets the firt opportunity
to play effects in the "before Range is determined phase," which would
include setting the Range if he had the option, or to play Alpha Glint.
As has been stated elsewhere, his set Range effect has been used, but
Range has not strictly been determined, nor is it close range.
Ankur Gupta
Eric isn't stating the way things work. . . he's stating a series of
consequences from a particular interpretation of the phrase "determine
range". I think if you go back and take a look at Eric's original post
(and then his much more clearly stated description of thie issue), you'll
see what he means.
Eric would like to know how the two scenarios that have been brought up
are consistent with each other. It's a good point. I'd like to know too,
so hopefully this post will steer the discussion back to its original
intent.
Ankur
LSJ
> "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<2p92q8F...@uni-berlin.de>...
>>Range is determined once all the maneuvers are done.
>>These are not opposing connotations.
>>
>>Each manuever makes the range close if it was long or vice versa.
>>Once you're done with those, then range is determined (and other
>>effects that depend on one range or the other can then be
>>satisfied, or not, with that now-determined range).
>
> Okay then, this leads to some further complications. This means that
> range is determined whenever we know what the range will be for the
> round, not necessarily at the end of the Determine Range step. This
> sounds straightforward and fine, but it causes some issues.
It means only what it says: that range is determined when you have
concluded the maneuvers in the determine range step. If you'd like to
factor in additional set-range effects, then extend that with "or when
you reach the determine range step and have to skip it due to range
already having been set."
> Example #1:
>
> Beckett (acting) is blocked by Cailean who has a disease counter.
> Because Cailean's power is "At the beginning of each round of combat,"
> Cailean sets range to close. Beckett decides he doesn't want any of
> that and plays Alpha Glint to get out of there "Before range is
> determined." Does he now have a Vampiric Disease counter on him? The
> current direction of the explanations says yes.
No.
> HOWEVER,
>
> Example #2:
>
> Now the player of Cailean calls a judge over and gets the judge to
> point out that Beckett could not have played that Alpha Glint, because
> it explicitly states "Before range is determined." Cailean sets range
> as the very first thing that happens in combat (as he must), so range
> is now determined and no further "before range" effects may be played.
No. Skipping the "determine range" step doesn't mean that the
"before range is determined" step is skipped.
> He tries to offer some consolation to his opponent by pointing out
> that because of this he can never play Torn Signpost, Increased
> Strength or Carrion Crows when using Cailean's power, but this comes
> as scant comfort when Beckett gets Immortal Grappled, punched for
> four, and Disarmed.
Also no.
> So, the problem that I see with a literal understanding of the term
> "Determine Range" is that it means that "set range" trumps ALL "before
> range" cards. For it to not, we must decide that "set range" effects,
> though played early in combat, do not actually cause the range to be
> set until the normal Determine Range step. If this is the case, of
> course, then we are taking a less literal definition of "determine
> range," and that brings me around to my original question.
You are attempting to apply too much English to the text.
Use the terms as they are given. "Before range is determined" means
before the determine range step (or before the determine range step
would occur in the event that it is skipped), not "before some
effect sets the range or makes a particular range unavoidable".
--
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/
Eric Simon
> You are attempting to apply too much English to the text.
> Use the terms as they are given. "Before range is determined" means
> before the determine range step (or before the determine range step
> would occur in the event that it is skipped), not "before some
> effect sets the range or makes a particular range unavoidable".
Okay, sounds good. So here's what I read from these explanations:
1) "Determine Range" is a game term that refers to a step in combat.
2) This step always exists, though it may be sometimes be skipped by
card text. (This allows "before range" cards to always be played.)
Furthermore, range is never considered determined before the end of
the Determine Range step, or where that that step would occur if
skipped.
3) "Maneuver" is a game term that describes the process by which the
Determine Range interaction occurs. Range does not literally change
during the Determine Range step. Rather, the opposing minions play
effects in order to alter the final outcome of the Determine Range
step.
Now that we have clearly highlighted these three very important
conclusions, I would like to point out that none of them are directly
apparent from 6.4.2. In fact, the phrasing can be somewhat
misleading:
"A minion in combat can use a maneuver to get to long range, or he can
maneuver to get back to close range if his opponent maneuvers to
long."
The example in the grey box similarly confuses. Someone carefully
reading the last sentence (and the Combat Sequence in 6.4.1) may note
the word "set" in there, which does suggest that what we're really
doing is abstractly deciding what the final range will be rather than
literally moving back and forth. However, the phrases "move to,"
"move back," and "get back" stick out more, and may suggest the
opposite to many readers.
I know I'm being terribly anal about this, but I think it might be
nice if the rulebook made the above three points (mostly 2 and 3) a
little more explicit. Just something to consider whenever the next
rewrite happens.
Eric Simon
Prince of Chicago
Anarch Newsletter Writer (and noodge)
Daneel
> Okay, sounds good. So here's what I read from these explanations:
>
> 1) "Determine Range" is a game term that refers to a step in combat.
> 2) This step always exists, though it may be sometimes be skipped by
> card text. (This allows "before range" cards to always be played.)
> Furthermore, range is never considered determined before the end of
> the Determine Range step, or where that that step would occur if
> skipped.
Actually, I think it would be more accurate to phrase it like this:
The phases of combat are as follows:
Step One: "Before Range is Determined" phase. Refers to the timing window
in
which cards that are normally usable before range is determined can be
played.
The fact whether or not an effect skips the actual "Determine Range" step
has
no bearing on the existance of this phase.
Step Two: Determine Range phase. etc.
> 3) "Maneuver" is a game term that describes the process by which the
> Determine Range interaction occurs. Range does not literally change
> during the Determine Range step. Rather, the opposing minions play
> effects in order to alter the final outcome of the Determine Range
> step.
Snipped rest for brevity, but the contents are addressed. The rulebook
uses a
vivid phraseology that is easier to understand but may lead to false
conclusions
later on. I agree that it should be changed based on how the game
mechanics work,
but I'm not sure how. Newbies probably find the current wording to be
easier to
understand, as it is a quite practical example (unlike the way maneuvers
really
work, which is a theoretical contest for setting the range). Also, the
loopholes
of the current wording only come up in cornercase situations (which can be
handled
intuitively by most people; I mean, if all combat starts at short range,
even
before range is determined, then what is the purpose of the restriction on
Vampiric Disease? etc.)
Bye,
Daneel
LSJ
> LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<kcvYc.531540$Gx4.3...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
>
>>You are attempting to apply too much English to the text.
>>Use the terms as they are given. "Before range is determined" means
>>before the determine range step (or before the determine range step
>>would occur in the event that it is skipped), not "before some
>>effect sets the range or makes a particular range unavoidable".
>
>
> Okay, sounds good. So here's what I read from these explanations:
>
> 1) "Determine Range" is a game term that refers to a step in combat.
> 2) This step always exists, though it may be sometimes be skipped by
> card text. (This allows "before range" cards to always be played.)
Close enough.
The step may or may not exist if skipped, but the "before range" step
still exists in either event.
> Furthermore, range is never considered determined before the end of
> the Determine Range step, or where that that step would occur if
> skipped.
A fair restatement, yes.
> 3) "Maneuver" is a game term that describes the process by which the
> Determine Range interaction occurs. Range does not literally change
> during the Determine Range step. Rather, the opposing minions play
> effects in order to alter the final outcome of the Determine Range
> step.
If you like. Each maneuver does in fact change the range, but this
is splitting hairs -- the effect is the same as what you say.
> Now that we have clearly highlighted these three very important
> conclusions, I would like to point out that none of them are directly
> apparent from 6.4.2. In fact, the phrasing can be somewhat
> misleading:
>
> "A minion in combat can use a maneuver to get to long range, or he can
> maneuver to get back to close range if his opponent maneuvers to
> long."
This is true.
> The example in the grey box similarly confuses. Someone carefully
> reading the last sentence (and the Combat Sequence in 6.4.1) may note
> the word "set" in there, which does suggest that what we're really
> doing is abstractly deciding what the final range will be rather than
> literally moving back and forth. However, the phrases "move to,"
> "move back," and "get back" stick out more, and may suggest the
> opposite to many readers.
Each manuever sets the range to something else.
But, as already noted, things that depend on the round being at a
certain range must wait until the final range is determined for the
round.
> I know I'm being terribly anal about this, but I think it might be
> nice if the rulebook made the above three points (mostly 2 and 3) a
> little more explicit. Just something to consider whenever the next
> rewrite happens.
I think you're still trying too hard to make the rulebook not work.
Eric Simon
> Eric Simon wrote:
> > I know I'm being terribly anal about this, but I think it might be
> > nice if the rulebook made the above three points (mostly 2 and 3) a
> > little more explicit. Just something to consider whenever the next
> > rewrite happens.
>
> I think you're still trying too hard to make the rulebook not work.
I know, I know. I apologize for hassling you so much. It's mostly
because the Chicago players have a "bend it till it breaks" approach
to the game. Every time I turn around there's some bizarre loophole
somebody's trying to exploit, and I can't tell you how many times I've
tried to reason how a basic game mechanic does not allow their broken
combo and heard, "That's not what it SAYS."
So, I'm nitpicky about wording because my playgroup is. If we're just
weird, that's fine. I'm just trying to offer "clear and simple"
explanations for others who might be in the same boat.
Kevin M.
> I know, I know. I apologize for hassling you so much. It's mostly
> because the Chicago players have a "bend it till it breaks" approach
> to the game. Every time I turn around there's some bizarre loophole
> somebody's trying to exploit, and I can't tell you how many times I've
> tried to reason how a basic game mechanic does not allow their broken
> combo and heard, "That's not what it SAYS."
Could you give us some examples of loopholes that the crazy Chicago
playgroup tries to exploit? I'd *love* to hear them! Those crazy Chicago
players! hehee:)
> Eric Simon
> Prince of Chicago
Kevin M., Prince of Henderson, NV (USA)
"Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Emmit Svenson
> I apologize for hassling you so much. It's mostly
> because the Chicago players have a "bend it till it breaks" approach
> to the game.
Hey, when I get a rule wrong, do I blame the playgroup?
No, I do not.
I blame Boris for using an old printing of Leonardo.
carl
"Eric Simon"
>6.4.1) may note the word "set" in there, which does >suggest that what
we're really doing is abstractly >deciding what the final range will be
rather than literally >moving back and forth. However, the phrases "move
>to," "move back," and "get back" stick out more, and >may suggest the
opposite to many readers.
But the chase is half the fun :)
(especially if you've got a prince on the run and I've got concealed weapon,
a magnum, and some dragon breath rounds up my sleeve)
<toothy grin>