Chain of command and contesting
Nikolaj Wendt
>well, you could include 2 of each vampire that you find desirable,
>bring out both copies so one burns, and then possess those that burn
now here i was trying to get the suckers to burn with daring the dawn
and spending their blood, when all i needed to do was self contest!
w00t!
I couldnt find this specified anywhere.
When i bring in two (or more copies) of the same vamp is it considered
to be simultaneous (so they both/all contest and then burn) or is one
supposed to enter first, THEN the other contests and burns.
Effectively leaving me with one chained vamp that now has to bleed?
John P.
"Nikolaj Wendt" <niko...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:22f564b8.04072...@posting.google.com...
It is illegal to self contest.
From the rulebook: Section 4.1.
"All vampires cards represent unique vampires"
"You cannot contest cards with yourself (if some effect would
force you to contest a card with yourself, then you simply burn
the incoming copy of the unique card)."
So if you have Lupo in torpor and you influence out another copy
of Lupo, the copy of Lupo with all the blood counters that you just
influenced burns automatically when you bring it into play. (Leaving you
the one in torpor).
Only Jimmy Dunn (card text) allows you to bring another copy
of itself into play, and that is because Jimmy Dunn never contests,
but burns the first copy instead.
Now Chain of Command has specific instructions on it
that also say you cannot contest unique vampires already controlled.
So you are forbidden to use chain of command to bring out a vampire
that would contest.
-JTP
LSJ
>
> When i bring in two (or more copies) of the same vamp is it considered
> to be simultaneous (so they both/all contest and then burn) or is one
> supposed to enter first, THEN the other contests and burns.
> Effectively leaving me with one chained vamp that now has to bleed?
The latter.
Google: "chain contest author:LSJ"
--
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/
John P.
"John P." <jtpa...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:YCsLc.71612$Mr4.69725@pd7tw1no...
>
> "Nikolaj Wendt" <niko...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:22f564b8.04072...@posting.google.com...
Snipage
....
Apologies, did not realize or consider that you were bringing both copies
out
through chain of command.
One burns, one ready to bleed. (See LSJ's ever timely reply for how
to find exact ruling).
-JTP
salem
scrawled:
>"Nikolaj Wendt" <niko...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:22f564b8.04072...@posting.google.com...
>> I couldnt find this specified anywhere.
>>
>> When i bring in two (or more copies) of the same vamp is it considered
>> to be simultaneous (so they both/all contest and then burn) or is one
>> supposed to enter first, THEN the other contests and burns.
>> Effectively leaving me with one chained vamp that now has to bleed?
>
>The latter.
>Google: "chain contest author:LSJ"
but the rulebook says you may not try and contest with yourself.
wouldn't choosing two uncontrolled vampires that were the same be
pretty much against the no self contest rule?
it's not like transferring where you do your transfers, and then at
the end of the influence phase the 'come into play' triggers and
'accidentally' you contest with yourself.
salem
domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm
(replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)
LSJ
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:52:21 -0400, "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com>
> scrawled:
>
>
>>"Nikolaj Wendt" <niko...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:22f564b8.04072...@posting.google.com...
>>
>>>I couldnt find this specified anywhere.
>>>
>>>When i bring in two (or more copies) of the same vamp is it considered
>>>to be simultaneous (so they both/all contest and then burn) or is one
>>>supposed to enter first, THEN the other contests and burns.
>>>Effectively leaving me with one chained vamp that now has to bleed?
>>
>>The latter.
>>Google: "chain contest author:LSJ"
>
>
> but the rulebook says you may not try and contest with yourself.
> wouldn't choosing two uncontrolled vampires that were the same be
> pretty much against the no self contest rule?
>
> it's not like transferring where you do your transfers, and then at
> the end of the influence phase the 'come into play' triggers and
> 'accidentally' you contest with yourself.
Sure.
Timlagor
> salem wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:52:21 -0400, "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com>
> > scrawled:
> >
> >
> >>"Nikolaj Wendt" <niko...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:22f564b8.04072...@posting.google.com...
> >>
> >>>I couldnt find this specified anywhere.
> >>>
> >>>When i bring in two (or more copies) of the same vamp is it considered
> >>>to be simultaneous (so they both/all contest and then burn) or is one
> >>>supposed to enter first, THEN the other contests and burns.
> >>>Effectively leaving me with one chained vamp that now has to bleed?
> >>
> >>The latter.
> >>Google: "chain contest author:LSJ"
> >
> >
> > but the rulebook says you may not try and contest with yourself.
> > wouldn't choosing two uncontrolled vampires that were the same be
> > pretty much against the no self contest rule?
> >
> > it's not like transferring where you do your transfers, and then at
> > the end of the influence phase the 'come into play' triggers and
> > 'accidentally' you contest with yourself.
>
> Sure.
You are overturning "the latter"?
LSJ
Sure. It doesn't matter - either way means that no one will bother doing it.
Francois Gombault
> It doesn't matter - either way means that no one will bother doing it.
Except that in one case you get a burned vamp you can use with Posession
or Shambling Hordes, for example.
--
Francois Gombault
GPG key: http://hopeless.homelinux.org:2080/~francois/gpg/08A1B422.asc
I WILL NOT SHOW OFF -- Bart Simpson on chalkboard
Colin McGuigan
> Sure. It doesn't matter - either way means that no one will bother doing it.
I can think of some Giovanni decks that would bother doing it if they
could get some big cap vampires into their ash heap to be brought back.
--Colin McGuigan
Darby Keeney
> I can think of some Giovanni decks that would bother doing it if they
> could get some big cap vampires into their ash heap to be brought back.
I already have a deck partially assembled for just this purpose, using
NEC dom/DOM with Chains, Possession, Golconda and Redeem the Lost
Soul. Knowing if Chain will burn the second copy (or even if it
allowable to Chain-contest) is pretty important if I'm going to spend
any extra time building this beast.
So, I would appreciate a hint if the previous ruling has just been
overturned.
Crypt: 4 of each fattie, 3 of the smaller ones.
Silvia Giovanni 10 ANI DOM NEC POT for vic Giovanni:2
Ambrogino Giovanni 9 DOM NEC POT THA aus 1 vote Giovanni:2
Baron, The 9 FOR NEC OBF THN dom 2 votes Samedi:2
Ignazio Giovanni 9 DOM FOR NEC POT obf Giovanni:3
Unre, Keeper of Go 9 AUS FOR NEC dom ser thn bishop Harbinger:2
Bartholomew 8 AUS MYT NEC dom obt Kiasyd:2
Pochtli 8 NEC OBF POT cel dom Giovanni:2
Andrea Giovanni 7 DOM NEC pot vic Giovanni:2
Carlotta Giovanni 7 NEC POT dom obf Giovanni:2
Gillespi Giovanni 7 DOM NEC POT aus Giovanni:2
Kanimana Belghazi 7 AUS DOM NEC pro Nagaraja:2
Isabel Giovanni 5 DOM NEC pot Giovanni:2
Le Dinh Tho 5 NEC aus dom Nagaraja:2
Note that Chains/Possession also would get around the 3 pool penalty
for bringing a 2nd Naga into play - that is only triggered when a
scarce vampire moves from the uncontrolled to controlled region, not
from the ashheap to controlled.
LSJ
> Colin McGuigan <magu...@BGONEspeakeasy.net> wrote in message news:<08OdnW4ys4Y...@speakeasy.net>...
> overturned.
Hint?
Again, I say: it has been overturned.
Reyda
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:uGYLc.305862$Gx4....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Darby Keeney wrote:
> > Colin McGuigan <magu...@BGONEspeakeasy.net> wrote in message
news:<08OdnW4ys4Y...@speakeasy.net>...
> > So, I would appreciate a hint if the previous ruling has just been
> > overturned.
>
> Hint?
> Again, I say: it has been overturned.
it's becoming cryptic...
can you please describe us in a single sentence, in plain english, what
happens when one plays chain of command and brings out two copies of the
same vampire ?
The Lasombra
wrote:
>it's becoming cryptic...
>can you please describe us in a single sentence, in plain english, what
>happens when one plays chain of command and brings out two copies of the
>same vampire ?
You cannot choose two of the same vampire to bring into play with
Chain of Command. You cannot choose to contest with yourself.
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/rulebook/
4.1. Contested Cards
You can't control more than one of the same unique card at a time, and
you cannot contest cards with yourself.
LSJ Thu, 22 Jul 2004 10:52:18 GMT
----------------------
> but the rulebook says you may not try and contest with yourself.
> wouldn't choosing two uncontrolled vampires that were the same be
> pretty much against the no self contest rule?
>
> it's not like transferring where you do your transfers, and then at
> the end of the influence phase the 'come into play' triggers and
> 'accidentally' you contest with yourself.
Sure.
----------------------
Carpe noctem.
Lasombra
Reyda
"The Lasombra" <TheLa...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:i4v0g0dn4lk41kmsj...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 04:50:58 +0200, "Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >it's becoming cryptic...
>
> >can you please describe us in a single sentence, in plain english, what
> >happens when one plays chain of command and brings out two copies of the
> >same vampire ?
>
> You cannot choose two of the same vampire to bring into play with
> Chain of Command. You cannot choose to contest with yourself.
well,thank you !! =)
Nikolaj Wendt
> Chain of Command. You cannot choose to contest with yourself.
>
> http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/rulebook/
>
> 4.1. Contested Cards
>
> You can't control more than one of the same unique card at a time, and
> you cannot contest cards with yourself.
>
> LSJ Thu, 22 Jul 2004 10:52:18 GMT
>
> ----------------------