Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

[LSJ] Cold Aura question

36 views
Skip to first unread message

Jon D

unread,
Dec 27, 2008, 9:58:13 PM12/27/08
to
This came up over Brisbane's Holiday VtES session, concerning Cold
Aura. Fortunately, it did not diminish our holiday cheer.

Cold Aura Card Text:

[nec] Only usable before range is determined. Set the range for this
round to long.

[NEC] As above, with an optional press, only usable to end combat.


Every other card I could find that sets range (e.g. Cailean, Immortal
Grapple, Grasp the Python (heh, heh, heh), Sniper Rifle, Selective
Silence, Storm Sewers) explicitly says "skip the determine range
step". Cold Aura does NOT say "skip the determine range step".

I posit that that means that you can maneuver to close (at the
appropriate phase) after your opponent plays Cold Aura to set range to
long. Am I correct?

LSJ

unread,
Dec 27, 2008, 10:16:39 PM12/27/08
to

No. That would be called a maneuver, not setting range.

Once set, the range cannot be changed.

Jon D

unread,
Dec 27, 2008, 10:57:27 PM12/27/08
to
> Once set, the range cannot be changed.-

Fair enough. Out of curiosity, then, why bother including in the
first place the explicit "skip the determine range step" in other
cards with similar effects, including Sniper Rifles reprinted in the
KoT Toreador precon?

Chris Berger

unread,
Dec 28, 2008, 11:54:46 AM12/28/08
to

Reminder text. As a rule, reminder text does not invalidate a ruling
in the case of cards printed without that reminder text.

Kushiel

unread,
Dec 28, 2008, 1:36:20 PM12/28/08
to
On Dec 27, 9:58 pm, Jon D <jon.dar...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I posit that that means that you can maneuver to close (at the
> appropriate phase) after your opponent plays Cold Aura to set range to
> long.  Am I correct?

This has already been answered, but just as a point of clarification,
check out Fear of the Void Below for a counterexample of card text
that works as you thought Cold Aura does.

John Eno

brandons...@yahoo.com

unread,
Dec 28, 2008, 2:08:09 PM12/28/08
to

Would the addition of "(or something you control)." to the basic
"targeting you" be considered reminder text?
Examples:
Shemti
Black Sunrise
Forced Vigilance

LSJ

unread,
Dec 28, 2008, 5:17:35 PM12/28/08
to
brandons...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Would the addition of "(or something you control)." to the basic
> "targeting you" be considered reminder text?

Yes.

brandons...@yahoo.com

unread,
Dec 28, 2008, 5:47:34 PM12/28/08
to
On Dec 28, 2:17 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote:

Ok, thanks!

Brandon

Jon D

unread,
Dec 28, 2008, 10:48:23 PM12/28/08
to
A couple of other questions/comments came to mind.

> > Cold Aura Card Text:
>
> > [nec] Only usable before range is determined. Set the range for this
> > round to long.
>
> > [NEC] As above, with an optional press, only usable to end combat.
>
> > Every other card I could find that sets range (e.g. Cailean, Immortal
> > Grapple, Grasp the Python (heh, heh, heh), Sniper Rifle, Selective
> > Silence, Storm Sewers) explicitly says "skip the determine range
> > step".  Cold Aura does NOT say "skip the determine range step".
>
> > I posit that that means that you can maneuver to close (at the
> > appropriate phase) after your opponent plays Cold Aura to set range to
> > long.  Am I correct?
>
> No. That would be called a maneuver, not setting range.

Not precisely true. "That" could be played under the effects of
Drawing Out the Beast or Lapse (basic temporis level), whereas a
maneuver cannot.

>
> Once set, the range cannot be changed.- Hide quoted text -

This is the important bit. I have no problem with this ruling, except
I couldn't find it in the rulebook or the list of rulings before I
made my original post. Could it be added in a future version of the
rulebook?

cheers,
Jon

Jon D

unread,
Dec 28, 2008, 10:49:37 PM12/28/08
to

Sure, but when a ruling isn't explicit, it is difficult to distinguish
reminder text from functional text.

Salem

unread,
Dec 28, 2008, 11:17:56 PM12/28/08
to

http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=rulings

# If an effect "sets" the range of a round (and therefore skips the
maneuver phase), no other effect can be used to reset the range. [RTR
19970630]


although again, the parentheses in the ruling itself may serve to muddy
the issue, since the Cold Aura neglects to mention the bit inside the
ruling's parentheses.

Although it could be read that this ruling means all effects that set
range will then skip the maneuver phase.

--
salem
(replace 'hotmail' with 'gmail' to email)
"In *my* Assamite deck, this would pwn you in teh FAEC, so shut up."
"Thats only cos u've never sene mi Gionavvi PUNCHnMUCNH u asshat."
- James Coupe

John Flournoy

unread,
Dec 29, 2008, 12:52:31 AM12/29/08
to

The ruling is explicit. Official Rulings, ruling made per rules team
review in 1997: "If an effect "sets" the range of a round (and


therefore skips the maneuver phase), no other effect can be used to
reset the range."

Thus effects that set the range also inherently skip the maneuver
phase (and it cannot be reset, per 11-year old official ruling.

-John Flournoy

Jon D

unread,
Dec 29, 2008, 12:54:26 AM12/29/08
to

> http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=rulings
>
> # If an effect "sets" the range of a round (and therefore skips the
> maneuver phase), no other effect can be used to reset the range. [RTR
> 19970630]

Oops :) Thanks for bringing that to my attention!

>
> although again, the parentheses in the ruling itself may serve to muddy
> the issue, since the Cold Aura neglects to mention the bit inside the
> ruling's parentheses.

The parenthetical "and therefore" bit suggests that it's already a
given that "set range" effects skip the maneuvering phase. It's a bit
circular, since the only official ruling I could find that supports
that assumption is...the statement itself.

>
> Although it could be read that this ruling means all effects that set
> range will then skip the maneuver phase.

That was my original problem. There were at least two contradictory
"it could be read that..." sort of arguments, but nothing official.
Now I know the official ruling, but it'd be nice if it were displayed
a little more prominently w/o having to scour the internet.

0 new messages