Rules Team Rulings 08-AUG-08

108 views
Skip to first unread message

LSJ

unread,
Aug 8, 2008, 6:51:30 PM8/8/08
to
As always, changes contained herein do not go into effect for santioned
tournaments for 30 days. (So these become active on September 07, 2008.)

Errata:
-------

Lesser Boon is played when the block would succeed, and instead makes the action
resolve as if unblocked. (And so effects that depend on the successful block
don't see the block as successful -- Forced Awakening, Change of Target,
Venenation, &c.)

Errata:
-------

If a unique weapon is retrieved by Horrid Reality, it won't contest any other
copies of that equipment in play.

Reversal:
---------

Bauble cannot be burned if the target equipment isn't in play, by the general
targeting rule [1.6.1.4].

Reversal:
---------

An action that requires a Discipline (or clan or sect or capacity) will fizzle
if the acting vampire no longer meets the requirements (just as it would fizzle
if the acting minion ceased being ready, or if a required equipment was lost,
like a Bomb).

Ruling:
-------

Influence phase has two parts: the main part and the end part.

The main part is the "general" influence part, in which a Methuselah spends her
influence and plays most other influence-phase effects (effects that don't
specify the "end of the influence phase").

The end part is the "gain control" part, in which a Methuselah gains control of
the sufficiently-influenced minions in the uncontrolled region. Effects that are
applied "at the end of the influence phase" are played in this second part.

Note that some effects can bring a vampire out at other times. The timing given
in card text, not "does this effect bring a vampire out?", determines the
timing. For example:
-- Gather can bring out a vampire in the first part (the general part).
-- Tomb of Rameses III can bring the vampire out in the second part (end part).
-- Undue Influence can bring the vampire out in the minion phase.

Some effects check to see if a minion entered play "during" an influence phase.
These effects will notice a vampire coming into play in either part (so they'll
notice a vampire coming out via the normal means, Tomb, or Gather, but not Undue
Influence). For example:
-- Hermana Hambrienta Mayor/Menor.
-- Legendary Vampire
-- Paulo de Castille
-- Proxy Kissed
-- Sonja Blue
-- Static Virtue

Ruling:
-------

Some actions target more than one thing, some without the ability to
individually control the selection, like Edged Illusion or Jaroslav Pascek's
special ability. If one or more of the targets cannot be targeted (because of
Trophy: Safe Passage, Sleep Unseen, or Reality, for example), the action can
still be taken, and it will simply have no effect on the things it cannot target
(and have the normal effect on the allowable targets).

Each of the actual targets is considered a target, which means that effects like
Hide's "the action fails" or Talley's "+1 intercept" can be used if any one (or
more) of the targets would be enough to enable the effect.

If one of the multiple targets becomes ineligible during the course of the
action, then it's handled just as if it had always been ineligible. The action
resolves on the remaining targets as above.

Salem

unread,
Aug 8, 2008, 10:03:09 PM8/8/08
to
LSJ wrote:

> Some actions target more than one thing, some without the ability to
> individually control the selection, like Edged Illusion or Jaroslav
> Pascek's special ability. If one or more of the targets cannot be
> targeted (because of Trophy: Safe Passage, Sleep Unseen, or Reality, for
> example), the action can still be taken, and it will simply have no
> effect on the things it cannot target (and have the normal effect on the
> allowable targets).

Does this extend to things where one of the targets doesn't exist?

I'm specifically thinking of Mehemet. Can he burn a blood off a vampire
that doesn't have a discipline card?

--
salem
(replace 'hotmail' with 'gmail' to email)

LSJ

unread,
Aug 8, 2008, 11:09:41 PM8/8/08
to

No. Mehemet's targets are chosen, in contrast to the stated subject of the
ruling above.

Salem

unread,
Aug 8, 2008, 11:55:00 PM8/8/08
to

Fair enough. In that case, consider this a request for an updated
reprint to Mehemet to make him good. :)

echia...@yahoo.com

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 12:20:56 AM8/9/08
to
On Aug 8, 5:51 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> Ruling:
> -------
>
> Some actions target more than one thing, some without the ability to
> individually control the selection, like Edged Illusion or Jaroslav Pascek's
> special ability. If one or more of the targets cannot be targeted (because of
> Trophy: Safe Passage, Sleep Unseen, or Reality, for example), the action can
> still be taken, and it will simply have no effect on the things it cannot target
> (and have the normal effect on the allowable targets).
>
> Each of the actual targets is considered a target, which means that effects like
> Hide's "the action fails" or Talley's "+1 intercept" can be used if any one (or
> more) of the targets would be enough to enable the effect.
>
> If one of the multiple targets becomes ineligible during the course of the
> action, then it's handled just as if it had always been ineligible. The action
> resolves on the remaining targets as above.

So for cards like Condemn the Sins of the Father, Poison the Well of
Life, Wave of Insanity, Celestial Harmony, and Shepherd's Innocence:


Example Setup: A --> B --> C --> D --> E --> A
Player A plays Wave of Insanity (or similar card). Players B, C, and D
control allies. Player E does not.


#1. From Player A's perspective, this is considered to be an
undirected action (since it targets B, C, and D) for the purposes of
Creepshow Casino, Mirror's Visage, and Soar. This also means that
Tupdog (with no master !Tremere) and Rabbat can take the action but
Pariah cannot. Right?


#2. This is also an undirected action for determining blockers (only
prey B and predator E have the opportunity). Sound good?


#3. For Players B, C, and D, this is treated as a directed (D) action
(based on the examples provided of Hide and Talley the Hound).
Correct?


#4. But Player E sees this as an undirected action since he controls
no allies, right?


#5. So during the Wave of Insanity action, Player B cannot use a Wall
Street Night Newspaper to provide intercept (but if Player E controls
Wall Street Night he can use it). And if Player E controls Allonzo/
Benedict/Phillipe that minion cannot block (since it is undirected)
but if Player B controls that minion instead, the minion can block
(since it is directed). Is that the correct interpretation? So some
players see this as a (D) action and others see it as an undirected
action?


#6. Also, if multiple targets each have a Lock or Chanjelin Ward, then
the cost of the action is increased by each of these effects?


Thanks!

librarian

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 12:35:52 AM8/9/08
to
LSJ wrote:
>
> Note that some effects can bring a vampire out at other times. The
> timing given in card text, not "does this effect bring a vampire out?",
> determines the timing. For example:
> -- Gather can bring out a vampire in the first part (the general part).
> -- Tomb of Rameses III can bring the vampire out in the second part (end
> part).
> -- Undue Influence can bring the vampire out in the minion phase.
>
> Some effects check to see if a minion entered play "during" an influence
> phase. These effects will notice a vampire coming into play in either
> part (so they'll notice a vampire coming out via the normal means, Tomb,
> or Gather, but not Undue Influence). For example:
> -- Hermana Hambrienta Mayor/Menor.


Hooray! Time to make my Hermana Qui Anarch deck!

best -

chris

--
Super Fun Cards
www.superfuncards.com *NEW Website!*
auct...@superfuncards.com

LSJ

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 6:29:04 AM8/9/08
to

Correct.

> #2. This is also an undirected action for determining blockers (only
> prey B and predator E have the opportunity). Sound good?

Correct.

> #3. For Players B, C, and D, this is treated as a directed (D) action
> (based on the examples provided of Hide and Talley the Hound).
> Correct?

No. It isn't (D). The bit about Talley explains his "one".

> #4. But Player E sees this as an undirected action since he controls
> no allies, right?

Every played sees it as undirected. It is undirected.

> #5. So during the Wave of Insanity action, Player B cannot use a Wall
> Street Night Newspaper to provide intercept (but if Player E controls
> Wall Street Night he can use it). And if Player E controls Allonzo/
> Benedict/Phillipe that minion cannot block (since it is undirected)
> but if Player B controls that minion instead, the minion can block
> (since it is directed). Is that the correct interpretation? So some
> players see this as a (D) action and others see it as an undirected
> action?

Any played can use a Wall Street Night she controls, since the action is undirected.

> #6. Also, if multiple targets each have a Lock or Chanjelin Ward, then
> the cost of the action is increased by each of these effects?

No. The action is not directed.

LSJ

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 7:49:49 AM8/9/08
to

Well, actually, it explains his use of "directed at".

>> #4. But Player E sees this as an undirected action since he controls
>> no allies, right?
>
> Every played sees it as undirected. It is undirected.
>
>> #5. So during the Wave of Insanity action, Player B cannot use a Wall
>> Street Night Newspaper to provide intercept (but if Player E controls
>> Wall Street Night he can use it). And if Player E controls Allonzo/
>> Benedict/Phillipe that minion cannot block (since it is undirected)
>> but if Player B controls that minion instead, the minion can block
>> (since it is directed). Is that the correct interpretation? So some
>> players see this as a (D) action and others see it as an undirected
>> action?
>
> Any played can use a Wall Street Night she controls, since the action is
> undirected.
>
>> #6. Also, if multiple targets each have a Lock or Chanjelin Ward, then
>> the cost of the action is increased by each of these effects?
>
> No. The action is not directed.

Sorry -- still waking up I guess. Yes, Changelin Ward and Lock operate like
Talley -- looking to see who is targeted. So they'd work on the Wave action,
just like Talley's intercept would.

sg3kmb6...@gmail.com

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 8:29:57 AM8/9/08
to
On Aug 9, 1:49 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote:

> >> #6. Also, if multiple targets each have a Lock or Chanjelin Ward, then
> >> the cost of the action is increased by each of these effects?
>
> > No. The action is not directed.
>
> Sorry -- still waking up I guess. Yes, Changelin Ward and Lock operate like
> Talley -- looking to see who is targeted. So they'd work on the Wave action,
> just like Talley's intercept would.

I'm all in when it comes to Chanjelin Ward, but Talley and Lock
specifically uses the term "(d) action".
Does this mean that Wave of Insanity (and similar action) are
considered to be (d) actions for certain effects/cards but not for
others?
Or is the text on Talley/Lock/Chanjelin Ward just some sort of mishap
and they should all be treated the same way?


Talley, the Hound
Clan: Lasombra (group 2)
Capacity: 6
Disciplines: OBT POT aus dom
Sabbat: Talley gets +1 intercept when attempting to block any (D)
action directed at one of your other minions.

Lock
Type: Action
Requires: Defense
This action is at +1 stealth if it is undirected.
Put this card on any minion. (D) actions directed at this minion cost
monsters an additional blood or life. If this minion is a monster, he
or she burns a blood or life when he or she attempts an action or a
block. This minion may burn this card as an action. A minion can have
only one Lock.

Chanjelin Ward
Type: Master
Requires: Kiasyd
Master.
Put this card on a vampire you control. Actions directed at this
vampire cost an additional blood. This vampire can burn this card to
cause an action directed at him or her to fail. A vampire may have
only one Chanjelin Ward. Burn option.

LSJ

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 9:36:39 AM8/9/08
to
sg3kmb6...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 9, 1:49 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
>
>>>> #6. Also, if multiple targets each have a Lock or Chanjelin Ward, then
>>>> the cost of the action is increased by each of these effects?
>>> No. The action is not directed.
>> Sorry -- still waking up I guess. Yes, Changelin Ward and Lock operate like
>> Talley -- looking to see who is targeted. So they'd work on the Wave action,
>> just like Talley's intercept would.
>
> I'm all in when it comes to Chanjelin Ward, but Talley and Lock
> specifically uses the term "(d) action".
> Does this mean that Wave of Insanity (and similar action) are
> considered to be (d) actions for certain effects/cards but not for
> others?
> Or is the text on Talley/Lock/Chanjelin Ward just some sort of mishap
> and they should all be treated the same way?

The latter.

XZealot

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 9:40:38 AM8/9/08
to

> Hooray!  Time to make my Hermana Qui Anarch deck!

Too Late! :P

Comments Welcome,
Norman S. Brown, Jr
XZealot
Archon of the Swamp

floppyzedolfin

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 10:58:43 AM8/9/08
to

LSJ a écrit :


> As always, changes contained herein do not go into effect for santioned
> tournaments for 30 days. (So these become active on September 07, 2008.)
>

> Ruling:
> -------
>
> Some actions target more than one thing, some without the ability to
> individually control the selection, like Edged Illusion or Jaroslav Pascek's
> special ability. If one or more of the targets cannot be targeted (because of
> Trophy: Safe Passage, Sleep Unseen, or Reality, for example), the action can
> still be taken, and it will simply have no effect on the things it cannot target
> (and have the normal effect on the allowable targets).
>
> Each of the actual targets is considered a target, which means that effects like
> Hide's "the action fails" or Talley's "+1 intercept" can be used if any one (or
> more) of the targets would be enough to enable the effect.
>
> If one of the multiple targets becomes ineligible during the course of the
> action, then it's handled just as if it had always been ineligible. The action
> resolves on the remaining targets as above.

Some questions regarding this ruling arose :

1 - As of 07/09/08, will it still be possible to play Taunt the Caged
Beast sup' on a vampire with a Secure Haven / Safe Passage ?

2 - If my Jaroslav attempts his special action when my prey controls
Ambrosio Luis Moncada with a Safe Passage, will the action cost 1
additional pool ?

Thanks !


(next time, I'll post the questions directly over here)

LSJ

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 11:08:35 AM8/9/08
to
floppyzedolfin wrote:
>
> LSJ a écrit :
>> As always, changes contained herein do not go into effect for santioned
>> tournaments for 30 days. (So these become active on September 07, 2008.)
>>
>> Ruling:
>> -------
>>
>> Some actions target more than one thing, some without the ability to
>> individually control the selection, like Edged Illusion or Jaroslav Pascek's
>> special ability. If one or more of the targets cannot be targeted (because of
>> Trophy: Safe Passage, Sleep Unseen, or Reality, for example), the action can
>> still be taken, and it will simply have no effect on the things it cannot target
>> (and have the normal effect on the allowable targets).
>>
>> Each of the actual targets is considered a target, which means that effects like
>> Hide's "the action fails" or Talley's "+1 intercept" can be used if any one (or
>> more) of the targets would be enough to enable the effect.
>>
>> If one of the multiple targets becomes ineligible during the course of the
>> action, then it's handled just as if it had always been ineligible. The action
>> resolves on the remaining targets as above.
>
> Some questions regarding this ruling arose :
>
> 1 - As of 07/09/08, will it still be possible to play Taunt the Caged
> Beast sup' on a vampire with a Secure Haven / Safe Passage ?

No. The vampire is protected against being chosen as the target of the action.

> 2 - If my Jaroslav attempts his special action when my prey controls
> Ambrosio Luis Moncada with a Safe Passage, will the action cost 1
> additional pool ?

No. Monçada won't be targeted, thanks to the Secure Haven, so his special won't
increase the cost.

mat...@gmail.com

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 11:26:07 AM8/9/08
to
An action that requires a Discipline (or clan or sect or capacity)
will fizzle
if the acting vampire no longer meets the requirements (just as it
would fizzle
if the acting minion ceased being ready, or if a required equipment
was lost,
like a Bomb).


The acting vampire must still meet the requirements to play the card.
Correct?

LSJ

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 11:42:49 AM8/9/08
to

Yes.

XZealot

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 2:05:59 PM8/9/08
to

What happes if I attempt to play an Edged Illusion at superior and my
prey controls all the following minions (after using Talley and
Moncada to Graverob/Far Mastery all the other ones)?

Etienne Fauberge
Ambrosio Luis Moncada, Plenipotentiary
Francois "Warden" Loehr
Edward Vignes
Hazimel
Talley, the Hound

Do each of their specials activate?

LSJ

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 2:40:04 PM8/9/08
to
XZealot wrote:
> What happes if I attempt to play an Edged Illusion at superior and my
> prey controls all the following minions (after using Talley and
> Moncada to Graverob/Far Mastery all the other ones)?
>
> Etienne Fauberge
> Ambrosio Luis Moncada, Plenipotentiary
> Francois "Warden" Loehr
> Edward Vignes
> Hazimel
> Talley, the Hound
>
> Do each of their specials activate?

Edward's is usable, but isn't automatically "activated" by the attempt.

I doubt Hazimel's ability would be activated, given the requirements of Edged
Illusion, but it's possible.

And Talley, as has stated in the RTR itself, can use his special (although it,
like Edward's, is not automatically activated, but will activate when and if
Talley attempts to block).

James Coupe

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 4:48:59 PM8/9/08
to
In message <_pink.32940$co7....@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com>, LSJ
<vte...@white-wolf.com> writes:

>floppyzedolfin wrote:
>> Some questions regarding this ruling arose :
>> 1 - As of 07/09/08, will it still be possible to play Taunt the
>>Caged
>> Beast sup' on a vampire with a Secure Haven / Safe Passage ?
>
>No. The vampire is protected against being chosen as the target of the action.

Why?

Superior Taunt the Caged Beast isn't a directed action - it affects two
different Methuselahs. Both Secure Haven and Trophy: Safe Passage
prevent the vampire being the target of (D) actions.

Secure Haven
This minion cannot be affected by (D) actions.

Trophy: Safe Passage
While the vampire with this card is ready, he or she cannot be the
target of (D) actions.

Taunt the Caged Beast
[ANI] Choose a {ready} vampire controlled by your predator and
another controlled by your prey (not usable when only one other
Methuselah is in the game).

What's granting protection?

Similarly, I would not expect Talley to get +1 intercept against a Taunt
the Caged Beast (superior) that selected one of his controller's other
minions, and some other minion on the table. He may be able to see the
target, but his ability only looks at (D) actions.

--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

sg3kmb6...@gmail.com

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 5:25:30 PM8/9/08
to
On Aug 9, 10:48 pm, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote:
> In message <_pink.32940$co7.30...@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com>, LSJ


If I understood the answer to my question correctly the wording on
Talley is just a bit flawed and should be read as "any action" rather
than "any (d) action".
I'd also suppose that this would go for all cards with that particular
wording.

LSJ

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 7:22:39 PM8/9/08
to
sg3kmb6...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 9, 10:48 pm, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote:
>> In message <_pink.32940$co7.30...@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com>, LSJ
>> What's granting protection?
>>
>> Similarly, I would not expect Talley to get +1 intercept against a Taunt
>> the Caged Beast (superior) that selected one of his controller's other
>> minions, and some other minion on the table. He may be able to see the
>> target, but his ability only looks at (D) actions.
>
>
> If I understood the answer to my question correctly the wording on
> Talley is just a bit flawed and should be read as "any action" rather
> than "any (d) action".
> I'd also suppose that this would go for all cards with that particular
> wording.

Yes. The ruling is that things which assume that an action targeting a minion is
(D) are making that assumption unnecessarily, and work (or "are usable") for
both directed and undirected actions targeting the minion.

Jozxyqk

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 7:44:18 PM8/9/08
to

Inferior Sonar, for example, is still not usable against undirected
actions that target your minions, correct?

Is Crocodile Temple usable after an action that "targets" your minions but is
not a Directed Action?

LSJ

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 8:19:09 PM8/9/08
to
Jozxyqk wrote:
> Inferior Sonar, for example, is still not usable against undirected
> actions that target your minions, correct?

Sure. It says nothing about targeting a minion.

> Is Crocodile Temple usable after an action that "targets" your minions but is
> not a Directed Action?

It says nothing about targeting a minion.

Jozxyqk

unread,
Aug 9, 2008, 10:48:01 PM8/9/08
to
LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> > Is Crocodile Temple usable after an action that "targets" your minions but is
> > not a Directed Action?

> It says nothing about targeting a minion.

You once stated that "directed at you or something you control" was identical to
just "directed at you":

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/10a4ebe3206839f3

Under the 8/8/08 ruling, does this mean that Black Sunrise's (and similar) text
is now *different* from Crocodile Temple's?

Can I use Black Sunrise against one of those undirected actions that targets
one of my minions, just because it says "or something you control"?


LSJ

unread,
Aug 10, 2008, 8:00:44 AM8/10/08
to

OK. Good point. You can use Crocodile Temple at the end of a another
Methuselah's successful action targeting you (or something you control).

Likewise Black Sunrise.

Jozxyqk

unread,
Aug 10, 2008, 10:28:18 AM8/10/08
to

> Likewise Black Sunrise.

And after this answer, what about basic Sonar, and other effects "only usable
during a D action"?

The only difference between basic Sonar's text and the others is the phrase
"against you [(or something you control)]".

And, by extension, if Sonar is usable in this case, what about the general
case of blocking?

For example, Command the Legion.
Currently, this is an undirected action. If I pay 3 blood for the action,
and choose one minion controlled by my prey and one minion controlled by
my grandprey, my grandprey can not block the action.
Does this ruling allow him to block it?

Thanks!


Jozxyqk

unread,
Aug 10, 2008, 12:50:02 PM8/10/08
to

Separately posting from my other branch of questioning, because I realize that
the eventuality of my questions end up redefining what a Directed Action is, and
leading to some very very messy scenarios (and don't worry, between me and
floppyzedolfin, we could come up with some pretty crazy ones).

Ultimately, my suggestion is to leave Talley out of the equation.
It would be "smoother" if only the targeted minions' particular quirks kicked in
(and even allowing the Secure Haven-like effects to protect them), but not to
extend this ruling to apply to a whole other class of cards (Talley, Black Sunrise,
Crocodile Temple, Underbridge Stray, Sonar, Abbot, Ryder, etc, etc, etc).


Jozxyqk

unread,
Aug 10, 2008, 12:56:08 PM8/10/08
to

Addendum: Talley's ability, etc, should, of course still be usable if it is
still inherently a (D) action, even with multiple targets. That is: Talley's intercept
should be usable after Jaroslav's (D) action, because it is still directed at one
Methuselah. But Talley's intercept should *not* be usable against a superior
Wave of Insanity, because it is still an Undirected action.
(But Secure Haven _should_ still follow the ruling and protect against Wave of Insanity).

Just my suggestions.

James Coupe

unread,
Aug 10, 2008, 3:51:21 PM8/10/08
to
In message <NOydnd3Qk9s1gALV...@comcast.com>, Jozxyqk
<jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> writes:

>Jozxyqk <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote:
>> Ultimately, my suggestion is to leave Talley out of the equation.
>> It would be "smoother" if only the targeted minions' particular
>>quirks kicked in
>> (and even allowing the Secure Haven-like effects to protect them),
>>but not to
>> extend this ruling to apply to a whole other class of cards (Talley,
>>Black Sunrise,
>> Crocodile Temple, Underbridge Stray, Sonar, Abbot, Ryder, etc, etc, etc).
>
>Addendum: Talley's ability, etc, should, of course still be usable if it is
>still inherently a (D) action, even with multiple targets. That is:
>Talley's intercept
>should be usable after Jaroslav's (D) action, because it is still
>directed at one
>Methuselah. But Talley's intercept should *not* be usable against a superior
>Wave of Insanity, because it is still an Undirected action.
>(But Secure Haven _should_ still follow the ruling and protect against
>Wave of Insanity).

I concur.

Disclaimer: I haven't checked the specifics of every card Josh has just
mentioned, but I agree with the general principle. If a card targets
about being the target of a (D) action, it should apply when that card
is a target during a (D) action, but not when it's a 'target' during a
non-(D) action, because that's the simplest application of card text.

Several reasons:

- A seeming lack of necessity. The ruling appears to be about targets
being immune not causing an 'indiscriminate' action to fail. That
doesn't seem to require upgrading a bunch of a cards so that they make
extra targets immune.
- Card text / reprints. There seem to be quite a few cards that might
need an updated MRP, which sucks.
- Extensibility. What if you want to create an ability that only
applies in against (D) actions, but *not* against any action that
happens to select a target?


Also, there seems to be a potential grey area with political actions.

e.g. Secure Haven. "This minion cannot be affected by (D) actions."
Okay, so we're now saying that this affects Taunt the Caged Beast, which
is just an action (undirected).

- Can a Secure Haven minion be "affected by" Auto-da-Fe?
- Can it be affected by Consanguineous Condemnation?
- Can it be affected by positive effects, such as being selected for
Brujah Justicar (or any other title-granter)?


Note that Secure Haven doesn't say "targeted by", if we're going to say
that Taunt the Caged Beast targets a vampire and Auto-da-Fe doesn't have
a target (just a vampire selected in the referendum - see Yoruba Shrine
for that sort of wording because political actions didn't have targets).

(Note also that Trophy: Safe Passage does use "target", but to draw a
distinction between the two cards on that would seem slightly obscure.)

If we follow this line of ruling:

- Secure Haven preventing the vampire being a selected minion for
hostile votes seems a massive and unwarranted upgrade for it (and
similar cards).
- Secure Haven *not* preventing the vampire being a selected vampire for
hostile votes seems to go against the seeming new card text that means
that the (D) restriction on Secure Haven has gone away.

I'm only here talking about the hostile vote prevention, and not the
beneficial vote restriction, since you would simply work around the
beneficial vote issue (e.g. not include them in that deck, select other
vampires intentionally and plan for that, and so on).

Similarly, if Secure Haven now effectively says "cannot be affected by
actions" (regardless of (D)-ness), can my Secure minion benefit from
superior Media Influence taken by another vampire?

Can my Secure minion be "affected by" a Rescue from Torpor action by one
of my own minions?

Can it be "affected by" actions it takes itself? Even hunting!

Jozxyqk

unread,
Aug 11, 2008, 11:58:30 AM8/11/08
to
LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> Ruling:
> -------

> Some actions target more than one thing, some without the ability to
> individually control the selection, like Edged Illusion or Jaroslav Pascek's
> special ability. If one or more of the targets cannot be targeted (because of
> Trophy: Safe Passage, Sleep Unseen, or Reality, for example), the action can
> still be taken, and it will simply have no effect on the things it cannot target
> (and have the normal effect on the allowable targets).

> Each of the actual targets is considered a target, which means that effects like
> Hide's "the action fails" or Talley's "+1 intercept" can be used if any one (or
> more) of the targets would be enough to enable the effect.

> If one of the multiple targets becomes ineligible during the course of the
> action, then it's handled just as if it had always been ineligible. The action
> resolves on the remaining targets as above.

Does this carry over to actions you perform yourself?
If Julia Prima has a Secure Haven, is she unaffected by my own Song of Pan?

LSJ

unread,
Aug 11, 2008, 1:00:28 PM8/11/08
to
Jozxyqk wrote:
> If Julia Prima has a Secure Haven, is she unaffected by my own Song of Pan?

Song of Pan, the action, has no targets, other than the acting Kiasyd, who is
untapped by the action.

Song of Pan, the card in play, affects Kiasyd. Even Kiasyd with Secured Havens.

librarian

unread,
Aug 11, 2008, 6:35:03 PM8/11/08
to
LSJ wrote:
> As always, changes contained herein do not go into effect for santioned
> tournaments for 30 days. (So these become active on September 07, 2008.)
>


I'm sort of disappointed Scott that you didn't post this at 8:08...

LSJ

unread,
Aug 11, 2008, 7:09:30 PM8/11/08
to
librarian wrote:
> LSJ wrote:
>> As always, changes contained herein do not go into effect for santioned
>> tournaments for 30 days. (So these become active on September 07, 2008.)
>>
>
>
> I'm sort of disappointed Scott that you didn't post this at 8:08...

Look on the bright side. At least I'm using the Gregorian calendar.

Which gives me an idea...

Blooded Sand

unread,
Aug 11, 2008, 7:45:47 PM8/11/08
to

DUN dun duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuun...
;)

Cantila

unread,
Sep 23, 2008, 6:08:03 PM9/23/08
to
> Note that some effects can bring a vampire out at other times. The timing given
> in card text, not "does this effect bring a vampire out?", determines the
> timing. For example:
> -- Gather can bring out a vampire in the first part (the general part).
> -- Tomb of Rameses III can bring the vampire out in the second part (end part).
> -- Undue Influence can bring the vampire out in the minion phase.

So does this mean that a Govern the Unaligned at superior can bring
out a 3 cap vampire (or a 6 cap if a dual GtU) in the minion phase
(who can then take an action)?

GtU really didn't need that :/

Blooded Sand

unread,
Sep 23, 2008, 6:37:40 PM9/23/08
to


Undue Influence
Type: Action
Requires: anarch Chimerstry/Presence/Quietus
+1 stealth action. Requires a ready anarch. Choose a vampire in your
uncontrolled region.
[chi] (D) Move 1 blood from an uncontrolled minion in any uncontrolled
region to the chosen vampire.
[pre] (D) Bleed. If the bleed is successful, put 1 blood counter on
the chosen vampire.
[qui] Put 1 blood counter on the chosen vampire.* If the number of
counters equals or exceeds his or her capacity, move that vampire to
your ready region*.

Govern the Unaligned
Type: Action
Requires: Dominate
Cost: 1 blood
[dom] (D) Bleed with +2 bleed.
[DOM] +1 stealth action. Move 3 blood from the blood bank to a younger
vampire in your uncontrolled region.

The bit in between asterisks for UI is the important bit you seem to
be missing. Undue specifically calls a check for amount of blood on
vampire vs capacity, unlink GtU, which leaves the check for the normal
time for it, ie influence phase end

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages