Bima questions
jnew...@difsol.com
Bima
Ally
Follower of Set
Blood Cost: 1
Ghoul with 2 life. 2 strength, 1 bleed.
When this Bima enters play, move a master: Discipline card to it from
your hand or burn this Bima. The Bima may play cards that require the
basic level of that Discipline as a vampire.
1) Bima has presence. There is a lingering Charming Lobby effect from a
previous vote. Bima plays Charming Lobby to call a vote:
Charming Lobby
+1 stealth political action.
[pre]This vampire calls a referendum listed on a political action card
in your hand (play that card) or allowed by an effect in play. If the
referendum passes, then the next referendum called by any vampire
thereafter passes automatically.
[PRE]As above, and this vampire gains 2 votes for the first referendum.
Since Bima is not a vampire, his referendum does not automatically pass
from the previous charming lobby, correct?
If his referendum does pass (with enough votes), there are now two CL
effects lingering on the table. A single referendum called by any
vampire will trigger both of them, leaving no CL effects lingering,
correct?
2) Bima has Obetenebration. Bima plays Descent Into Darkness:
Desent Into Darkness
1 blood
+1 stealth action
[obt]Turn the acting vampire and any cards on him or her face down, out
of play (breaking any temporary control affects). Put this card on him
or her (in play). During your influence phase, move 2 blood to this
face-down vampire from the blood bank, and you can choose to burn this
card to return the vampire to play, tapped.
[OBT]As above, but the vampire is untapped when he or she returns to
play
Bima can never be returned to play, since Bima is no longer considered
to be a vampire by Descent Into Darkness. Bye-bye Bima, correct?
Thanks,
John
LSJ
> Several questions involving Bima:
>
> 1) Bima has presence. There is a lingering Charming Lobby effect from a
> previous vote. Bima plays Charming Lobby to call a vote:
>
> from the previous charming lobby, correct?
Correct.
> If his referendum does pass (with enough votes), there are now two CL
> effects lingering on the table. A single referendum called by any
> vampire will trigger both of them, leaving no CL effects lingering,
> correct?
Correct.
> 2) Bima has Obetenebration. Bima plays Descent Into Darkness:
>
> Bima can never be returned to play, since Bima is no longer considered
> to be a vampire by Descent Into Darkness. Bye-bye Bima, correct?
Correct.
niko...@hotmail.com
Another Bima question. The new follower of set Zhenga:
Laibon: When Zhenga announces a recruit action or employ action, she
may burn X blood. If the action succeeds, she may recruit and employ up
to X additional allies and retainers from your hand (pay cost as
normal).
If I want to play more than one Bima at a time, do I need:
1: All copies of the Bima in my hand when the action is announced? (I
assume so)
2: All copies of Bima AND the skillcards in my hand when the action is
announced (I assume not)
So, can I put all Bimas into play, replace, and then put Master
Skillcards?
LSJ
> Another Bima question. The new follower of set Zhenga:
> Laibon: When Zhenga announces a recruit action or employ action, she
> may burn X blood. If the action succeeds, she may recruit and employ up
> to X additional allies and retainers from your hand (pay cost as
> normal).
>
> If I want to play more than one Bima at a time, do I need:
>
> 1: All copies of the Bima in my hand when the action is announced? (I
> assume so)
No. You just have to set X when the action is announced.
You could draw into some of the X Bima when you replace the card
used for the action and/or when you play other cards during the
action prior to resolution (stealth, etc.)
> 2: All copies of Bima AND the skillcards in my hand when the action is
> announced (I assume not)
Correct.
> So, can I put all Bimas into play, replace, and then put Master
> Skillcards?
Correct.
--
That is my story, be it bitter or be it sweet.
Keep a little and let a little come back to me.
LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply)
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
R0b1et
" [pre]This *vampire* calls a referendum..."?
emphasis mine of course
Chris Berger
"The Bima may play cards that require the
basic level of that Discipline as a *vampire*."
Emphasis mine.
illarion
> basic level of that Discipline as a *vampire*."
> Emphasis mine.
I'm confused by this. If I understand previous rulings, when playing a
card "as a vampire", then the minion is only considered a vampire with
respect to the card being played.
How then is an ally (able to play cards requiring presence) able to
call a vote with Charming Lobby? (cf rulings on Herald + Charming
Lobby).
Obviously the ally's card text allows him to play CL (as a vampire),
but what allows him to get around the "called by any vampire" text on
the political action card itself? The "as a vampire" clause only
treats him as a vampire with respect to CL itself.
The only reason I can imagine is the text of CL itself ("This vampire
calls a referendum listed on a political action card in your hand..."),
but it seems to me that the political action card would "see" the ally
as an ally and not a vampire.
Clearly not, given the ruling on Herald, but can anyone explain why? I
was pretty sure I'd got the hang of the "as X" cards, but this one
still puzzles me.
Rehlow
I think its time I put together my rules nightmare deck.
Before it was just going to be Merged Kemintiri playing Protect Thine
Own after Fall of the Camarilla has been played, maybe with or maybe
without Closed Session, and probably after Wormwood is down to 6
counters so that everyone is a legal target of PTO. Now I can add
Bimas' with Presence skill cards calling Charming Lobby votes, playing
Bewitching Oration and Awe during the vote, and then gaining life well
beyond their starting amount with Voter Captivation after a successful
vote.
I hope that after the tenth time someone in my playgroup asks if such
and such is legal and I prove that it is, that they will just trust
everything I do is legal from now on and then I can proceed to just
take their pool and add it to mine and no one will question it. :)
Later,
~Rehlow
Fred Scott
news:1138218850.1...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I think its time I put together my rules nightmare deck.
>
> Before it was just going to be Merged Kemintiri playing Protect Thine
> Own after Fall of the Camarilla has been played, maybe with or maybe
> without Closed Session, and probably after Wormwood is down to 6
> counters so that everyone is a legal target of PTO. Now I can add
> Bimas' with Presence skill cards calling Charming Lobby votes, playing
> Bewitching Oration and Awe during the vote, and then gaining life well
> beyond their starting amount with Voter Captivation after a successful
> vote.
>
> I hope that after the tenth time someone in my playgroup asks if such
> and such is legal and I prove that it is, that they will just trust
> everything I do is legal from now on and then I can proceed to just
> take their pool and add it to mine and no one will question it. :)
Obvious, _someone_ has seen "How to Steal a Million" recently...
Fred
LSJ
>>"The Bima may play cards that require the
>>basic level of that Discipline as a *vampire*."
>>Emphasis mine.
>
>
> I'm confused by this. If I understand previous rulings, when playing a
> card "as a vampire", then the minion is only considered a vampire with
> respect to the card being played.
>
> How then is an ally (able to play cards requiring presence) able to
> call a vote with Charming Lobby? (cf rulings on Herald + Charming
> Lobby).
Because CL (the card he is playing as a vampire) has the effect of
doing that when it is played.
> Obviously the ally's card text allows him to play CL (as a vampire),
> but what allows him to get around the "called by any vampire" text on
> the political action card itself? The "as a vampire" clause only
> treats him as a vampire with respect to CL itself.
And playing CL as a vampire means that he resolves CL as a vampire,
and resolving CL involves calling the referendum.
> The only reason I can imagine is the text of CL itself ("This vampire
> calls a referendum listed on a political action card in your hand..."),
> but it seems to me that the political action card would "see" the ally
> as an ally and not a vampire.
CL sees the ally as a vampire. The resolution of that involves him (that
vampire, in this case) calling the referendum.
> Clearly not, given the ruling on Herald, but can anyone explain why? I
> was pretty sure I'd got the hang of the "as X" cards, but this one
> still puzzles me.
--
That is my story, be it bitter or be it sweet.
Keep a little and let a little come back to me.
LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply)
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
R0b1et
bima via Charming Lobby?
bima rave deck... hum... must be something there.
illarion
for the Herald+CL stuff.
illarion
and resolving CL involves calling the referendum.
Ok, this is the piece that makes it make sense :)
Thanks LSJ.
Can I infer that other cards would chain in this way?
For example, if there were an ally that required a vampire to recruit
(don't believe there is currently, mind), then the Herald should be
able to do so via superior The Summoning (if he could get superior
PRE)?
Card text: "This vampire recruits that ally (he or she must meet the
requirements, if any, of the ally)"
Presumably the recruit part would still be part of the resolution of
The Summoning, and so the Herald would still be considered a vampire
WRT that resolution - correct?
Sorry it's a convoluted scenario, I'm just trying to make sure I
understand the way the rule works, rather than just how it works in a
specific instance.
François
illarion wrote:
> 3 I believe - pretty sure I saw LSJ answer this while I was searching
> for the Herald+CL stuff.
Herald allocates 3 points because he plays CL as a vampire of capacity
5 (card text).
I guess Bima allocates 1 point beacuse he plays CL as avampire of
capacity 1 (which is the default)
- François
jnew...@difsol.com
I don't know that either of them can play FSR at all. It requires an
independent vampire. Do allies have a sect?
John
LSJ
> > And playing CL as a vampire means that he resolves CL as a vampire,
> and resolving CL involves calling the referendum.
>
> Ok, this is the piece that makes it make sense :)
>
> Thanks LSJ.
>
> Can I infer that other cards would chain in this way?
Sure. Consistency is a primary goal.
> For example, if there were an ally that required a vampire to recruit
> (don't believe there is currently, mind), then the Herald should be
> able to do so via superior The Summoning (if he could get superior
> PRE)?
Yes.
Neighborhood Watch Command costs blood, which effectively
requires a vampire.
Herald can't recruit it directly (can't pay the cost), but could get
it via The Summoning (if he could play it at superior), since he
could then pay blood costs with life.
LSJ
> François wrote:
> > illarion wrote:
> > > 3 I believe - pretty sure I saw LSJ answer this while I was searching
> > > for the Herald+CL stuff.
> >
> > Herald allocates 3 points because he plays CL as a vampire of capacity
> > 5 (card text).
> > I guess Bima allocates 1 point beacuse he plays CL as avampire of
> > capacity 1 (which is the default)
Correct.
> > - François
>
> I don't know that either of them can play FSR at all. It requires an
> independent vampire. Do allies have a sect?
No, but vampires do. Just like vampires have capacity (default of 1 for
allies posing as vampires), vampires without a sect designation (like
allies posing as vampires) are independent.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/6940ffec2064f7c2
jnew...@difsol.com
LSJ wrote:
> jnew...@difsol.com wrote:
> > I don't know that either of them can play FSR at all. It requires an
> > independent vampire. Do allies have a sect?
>
> No, but vampires do. Just like vampires have capacity (default of 1 for
> allies posing as vampires), vampires without a sect designation (like
> allies posing as vampires) are independent.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/6940ffec2064f7c2
Ah! Thanks. Makes sense then. Vampires can be clanless and have no
disciplines, but they must have a capacity and sect. Is there anything
else that has to be set by default? Probably not.
John
LSJ
Right.
Just the standard minion stuff: strength and bleed. Any minion without
a strength designation has a strength of 1. Any minion without a bleed
designation has a bleed of 1.
Ankur Gupta
> bima via Charming Lobby?
I don't think you can call Free States Rant. Because, even if Bima is
considered a vampire for the referendum, it is not an independent vampire,
as is required by Free States Rant.
Ankur Gupta
Prince of West Lafayette
Ankur Gupta
>> bima via Charming Lobby?
>
> I don't think you can call Free States Rant. Because, even if Bima is
> considered a vampire for the referendum, it is not an independent
> vampire, as is required by Free States Rant.
Ignore this message of mine. I'm clearly wrong according to LSJ's earlier
post on the subject. But, you can't call a Sabbat, Camarilla, or Laibon
vote card. :)
Incarnadyne
LSJ wrote:
> > 2) Bima has Obetenebration. Bima plays Descent Into Darkness:
> >
> > Bima can never be returned to play, since Bima is no longer considered
> > to be a vampire by Descent Into Darkness. Bye-bye Bima, correct?
>
> Correct.
Does this mean that Bima with Fortitude is no longer considered a
Vampire at the end of an action, having played Day Operation or Daring
the Dawn, and so does not burn or take damage respectively ?
Rehlow
The go to torpor or agg damage is part of the resolution of the card.
If an ally plays a card as a vampire, they treat the resolution of the
card as a vampire. In this case, they will go to torpor (and an ally
that goes to torpor is burned now IIRC) or will take agg damage (but
will only lose life, since they are once again an ally by the time they
handle damage IIRC).
Too bad, because Bimas' with Fortitude playing Force of Will and
ignoring the damage would be cool. :)
I think I got this one right, but we'll wait for LSJ.
Later,
~Rehlow
Incarnadyne
LSJ
Correct.
Fred Scott
news:1138387155....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Rehlow wrote:
>> Incarnadyne wrote:
>> > LSJ wrote:
>> > Does this mean that Bima with Fortitude is no longer considered a
>> > Vampire at the end of an action, having played Day Operation or Daring
>> > the Dawn, and so does not burn or take damage respectively ?
>>
>> The go to torpor or agg damage is part of the resolution of the card.
>> If an ally plays a card as a vampire, they treat the resolution of the
>> card as a vampire. In this case, they will go to torpor (and an ally
>> that goes to torpor is burned now IIRC) or will take agg damage (but
>> will only lose life, since they are once again an ally by the time they
>> handle damage IIRC).
> Correct.
So a Bima playing Daring the Dawn will die from loss of life, not from
going *poof* by being quote-torporized-unquote? If so, I assume this is
a distinction due to the damage occurring after resolution of the action.
Would a Bima with a Thaumaturgy discipline card survive playing a Rutor's
Hand, given that the damage is taken during resolution of the action?
(Yes, I realize that even if he did, he couldn't actually use the Rutor's
Hand. Maybe I'm just trying to get the RH out of my hand without
killing the Bima.)
Fred
jnew...@difsol.com
> > > Does this mean that Bima with Fortitude is no longer considered a
> > > Vampire at the end of an action, having played Day Operation or Daring
> > > the Dawn, and so does not burn or take damage respectively ?
> >
> > The go to torpor or agg damage is part of the resolution of the card.
> > If an ally plays a card as a vampire, they treat the resolution of the
> > card as a vampire. In this case, they will go to torpor (and an ally
> > that goes to torpor is burned now IIRC) or will take agg damage (but
> > will only lose life, since they are once again an ally by the time they
> > handle damage IIRC).
> >
> > Too bad, because Bimas' with Fortitude playing Force of Will and
> > ignoring the damage would be cool. :)
> >
> > I think I got this one right, but we'll wait for LSJ.
>
> Correct.
This would seem to contradict the Keminitiri/Closed Session ruling of
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/571e93365e932a10
in which it was ruled that since Closed Session does not see Kem as a
Camarilla vampire during the polling because it sets up an "extended
duration effect". Does the damage from DtD not count as such an effect?
John
LSJ
> "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
> news:1138387155....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Rehlow wrote:
>>
>>>Incarnadyne wrote:
>>>
>>>>LSJ wrote:
>>>>Does this mean that Bima with Fortitude is no longer considered a
>>>>Vampire at the end of an action, having played Day Operation or Daring
>>>>the Dawn, and so does not burn or take damage respectively ?
>>>
>>>The go to torpor or agg damage is part of the resolution of the card.
>>>If an ally plays a card as a vampire, they treat the resolution of the
>>>card as a vampire. In this case, they will go to torpor (and an ally
>>>that goes to torpor is burned now IIRC) or will take agg damage (but
>>>will only lose life, since they are once again an ally by the time they
>>>handle damage IIRC).
>
>
>>Correct.
>
>
> So a Bima playing Daring the Dawn will die from loss of life, not from
> going *poof* by being quote-torporized-unquote? If so, I assume this is
> a distinction due to the damage occurring after resolution of the action.
Mehbe. It's just what the rules say to do. [1.6.3]
Torpor = burn
Aggravated damage = burn life
> Would a Bima with a Thaumaturgy discipline card survive playing a Rutor's
> Hand, given that the damage is taken during resolution of the action?
> (Yes, I realize that even if he did, he couldn't actually use the Rutor's
> Hand. Maybe I'm just trying to get the RH out of my hand without
> killing the Bima.)
He'd burn life for each point of damage.
LSJ
> This would seem to contradict the Keminitiri/Closed Session ruling of
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/571e93365e932a10
>
> in which it was ruled that since Closed Session does not see Kem as a
> Camarilla vampire during the polling because it sets up an "extended
> duration effect". Does the damage from DtD not count as such an effect?
The rules cover this ally-as-a-vampire-taking-agg-damage thing. [1.6.3]
Fred Scott
news:puxCf.1167$Nv2...@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Fred Scott wrote:
>> "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
>> news:1138387155....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> going *poof* by being quote-torporized-unquote? If so, I assume this is
>> a distinction due to the damage occurring after resolution of the action.
>
> Mehbe. It's just what the rules say to do. [1.6.3]
> Torpor = burn
> Aggravated damage = burn life
>
>> Would a Bima with a Thaumaturgy discipline card survive playing a Rutor's
>> Hand, given that the damage is taken during resolution of the action?
>> (Yes, I realize that even if he did, he couldn't actually use the Rutor's
>> Hand. Maybe I'm just trying to get the RH out of my hand without
>> killing the Bima.)
>
> He'd burn life for each point of damage.
What I was getting at was whether aggravated damage = torpor = burned when
an ally is resolving an action from an action card he played "as a
vampire". (In this case, the damage is done when resolving the action,
not after the action has been resolved.) In short, since the Bima-with-
Thaumaturgy was playing a Rutor's Hand at inferior as a vampire, he would
therefore go to torpor when he got aggravated damage and therefore burn -
not just take one point of damage.
From your response, it sounds like I'm taking the reasoning about playing
a card as a vampire one turn past the destination. Bima with 2 life playing
a Rutor's Hand doesn't burn. He just takes one damage. Stop there.
Fred
jnew...@difsol.com
Fred Scott wrote:
> What I was getting at was whether aggravated damage = torpor = burned when
> an ally is resolving an action from an action card he played "as a
> vampire". (In this case, the damage is done when resolving the action,
> not after the action has been resolved.) In short, since the Bima-with-
> Thaumaturgy was playing a Rutor's Hand at inferior as a vampire, he would
> therefore go to torpor when he got aggravated damage and therefore burn -
> not just take one point of damage.
>
> From your response, it sounds like I'm taking the reasoning about playing
> a card as a vampire one turn past the destination. Bima with 2 life playing
> a Rutor's Hand doesn't burn. He just takes one damage. Stop there.
Allies no longer go to torpor from agg damage, even if that agg damage
was from a source that sees them as a vampire. The rulebook handles
this.
> Fred
jnew...@difsol.com
LSJ wrote:
> jnew...@difsol.com wrote:
> > This would seem to contradict the Keminitiri/Closed Session ruling of
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/571e93365e932a10
> >
> > in which it was ruled that since Closed Session does not see Kem as a
> > Camarilla vampire during the polling because it sets up an "extended
> > duration effect". Does the damage from DtD not count as such an effect?
>
> The rules cover this ally-as-a-vampire-taking-agg-damage thing. [1.6.3]
That's not my question, though. My question is whether the DtD damage
is an "extended duration effect", i.e. does not happen when the Daring
the Dawn is played and resolved but is set up to happen later, like the
Closed Session in the Kemenitri example, which was ruled to see her as
an Independent vampire after she played it and thus no longer eligible
to vote in the referendum.
This seems inconsistent, unless Daring the Dawn does not fully resolve
until the end of the action, which would be odd.
John
LSJ
It is part of the resolution of DtD.
It has no duration.
jnew...@difsol.com
LSJ wrote:
> jnew...@difsol.com wrote:
> > LSJ wrote:
> >
> >>jnew...@difsol.com wrote:
> >>
> >>>This would seem to contradict the Keminitiri/Closed Session ruling of
> >>>
> >>>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/571e93365e932a10
> >>>
> >>>in which it was ruled that since Closed Session does not see Kem as a
> >>>Camarilla vampire during the polling because it sets up an "extended
> >>>duration effect". Does the damage from DtD not count as such an effect?
> >>
> >>The rules cover this ally-as-a-vampire-taking-agg-damage thing. [1.6.3]
> >
> >
> > That's not my question, though. My question is whether the DtD damage
> > is an "extended duration effect", i.e. does not happen when the Daring
> > the Dawn is played and resolved but is set up to happen later, like the
> > Closed Session in the Kemenitri example, which was ruled to see her as
> > an Independent vampire after she played it and thus no longer eligible
> > to vote in the referendum.
> >
> > This seems inconsistent, unless Daring the Dawn does not fully resolve
> > until the end of the action, which would be odd.
>
> It is part of the resolution of DtD.
>
> It has no duration.
>
Fair enough.
John