sniper rifle against terror frenzy

[adam....@ngc.com]

Is this an allowable sequence?

Vampire A (with ANI) attempts an action and get blocked by Vampire B
with a sniper rifle. Vampire A has Terror frenzy in his hand.

Vampire A, because he is acting, declares first. He declares "no
pre-range".

Vampire B responds with setting range to long with sniper rifle (this
is a pre-range declaration).

Now since Meth B declared something, Meth A can now respond with Terror
Frenzy?

If so, I assume the result is default long range but since Meth B
declared use of sniper rifle (which he cannot use now due to TF) he
gets no strike. (But could get additional strikes of course)

[LSJ]

<adam....@ngc.com> wrote in message news:1112123844.7...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

> Is this an allowable sequence?
>
> Vampire A (with ANI) attempts an action and get blocked by Vampire B
> with a sniper rifle. Vampire A has Terror frenzy in his hand.
>
> Vampire A, because he is acting, declares first. He declares "no
> pre-range".
>
> Vampire B responds with setting range to long with sniper rifle (this
> is a pre-range declaration).
>
> Now since Meth B declared something, Meth A can now respond with Terror
> Frenzy?

Yes.

> If so, I assume the result is default long range but since Meth B
> declared use of sniper rifle (which he cannot use now due to TF) he
> gets no strike. (But could get additional strikes of course)

Correct.

--
LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (Remove spam trap to reply).
V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu