Save face Q [LSJ
Henrik Isaksson
pander-protean fighting deck a lot. :)
Save Face [FN]
Cardtype: Combat
Usable only by an untapped vampire not involved in the current combat. Only
usable during the press step if both combatants are still ready.
Choose a younger vampire of the same clan who is involved in the combat. The
chosen vampire gets a mandatory press, only usable to continue combat. If
the chosen combatant is still ready after the combat ends, he or she gains 1
blood from the blood bank. Only one Save Face may be played each combat.
--
Henrik Isaksson
Reyda
"Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> wrote in message
news:a9g61s$2rqbr$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de...
reaction cards cannot be played by vampires in torpor, barring special card
text. If i recall it's still possible to play martyr's resilience while
being in torpor, so we may need more clarifications here than inside this
diableri stuff... ahem...
reyda
LSJ
>
> Can Save face be played by a vampire in torpor? It would help my
> pander-protean fighting deck a lot. :)
Yes.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Reyda
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3CBBFA15...@white-wolf.com...
> Henrik Isaksson wrote:
> >
> > Can Save face be played by a vampire in torpor? It would help my
> > pander-protean fighting deck a lot. :)
>
> Yes.
can telepathic counter be played by a vampire in torpor ?
i guess no.
So vampires in torpor can play combat cards but can't play reaction cards.
what a consistency in the rules... =°
LSJ
> > >
> > > Can Save face be played by a vampire in torpor? It would help my
> > > pander-protean fighting deck a lot. :)
> >
> > Yes.
>
> can telepathic counter be played by a vampire in torpor ?
> i guess no.
Good guess, although there's no reason to guess. [1.6.3.5]
> So vampires in torpor can play combat cards but can't play reaction cards.
>
> what a consistency in the rules... =°
See also:
* tapped vampires can play action modifiers and not reaction cards.
* A vampire can play two of the same combat card but not the same
action modifier or reaction card
Etc.
If you're going to try to subvert other threads into your own little
misguided agenda under the banner of "big picture consistency" try to
look at the actual big picture. It will help you save face. :-)
--
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/
Reyda
> > > > Can Save face be played by a vampire in torpor? It would help my
> > > > pander-protean fighting deck a lot. :)
> > >
> > > Yes.
> >
> > can telepathic counter be played by a vampire in torpor ?
> > i guess no.
>
> Good guess, although there's no reason to guess. [1.6.3.5]
i read the rulebook thank you. The "i guess" in the sentence is here for a
purpose you surely understand ...
> > So vampires in torpor can play combat cards but can't play reaction
cards.
> >
> > what a consistency in the rules... =°
(snip)
> If you're going to try to subvert other threads into your own little
> misguided agenda under the banner of "big picture consistency" try to
> look at the actual big picture. It will help you save face. :-)
I'm not subverting anything here. i am just wondering how a vampire who is
not in combat, neither ready can intervene during a fight. And i'm thinking
the same thing for the "Mariel taps to end combat while in torpor" thing. We
need consistency in this kind of problem which affects the games everyday,
and not necessarily some changes in the way we handle diablerie just for the
purpose of playing Reform body.
just do your job =p
reyda =)
LSJ
> I'm not subverting anything here. i am just wondering how a vampire who is
> not in combat, neither ready can intervene during a fight. And i'm thinking
> the same thing for the "Mariel taps to end combat while in torpor" thing. We
> need consistency in this kind of problem which affects the games everyday,
It looks like you're using "consistency" to mean "real-world consistency",
a trait that carries little weight in arguments to add errata to the
card game.
> and not necessarily some changes in the way we handle diablerie just for the
> purpose of playing Reform body.
>
You must've missed the messages that explained that diablerie wasn't
changed just for the purpose of playing Reform Body (if you consider
it changed at all).
Reyda
> Reyda wrote:
> > I'm not subverting anything here. i am just wondering how a vampire who
is
> > not in combat, neither ready can intervene during a fight. And i'm
thinking
> > the same thing for the "Mariel taps to end combat while in torpor"
thing. We
> > need consistency in this kind of problem which affects the games
everyday,
> > just do your job =p
>
> It looks like you're using "consistency" to mean "real-world consistency",
granted =)
would'nt it be better ? torporized means you don't have to include the
beaten up vampire in you scheme. the game is already complicated as it is,
to take care of what torporized vampire can play.
> a trait that carries little weight in arguments to add errata to the
> card game.
not necessarily.
> > and not necessarily some changes in the way we handle diablerie just for
the
> > purpose of playing Reform body.
> >
>
> You must've missed the messages that explained that diablerie wasn't
> changed just for the purpose of playing Reform Body (if you consider
> it changed at all).
"the diablerie is *now* atomic". Is'nt this a change ? =)
reyda
LSJ
> would'nt it be better ? torporized means you don't have to include the
> beaten up vampire in you scheme. the game is already complicated as it is,
> to take care of what torporized vampire can play.
So the things that require ready vampires require ready vampires.
The things that don't don't.
The combination of rules and card text tells you which is which.
> > a trait that carries little weight in arguments to add errata to the
> > card game.
>
> not necessarily.
It does to the current errata writers.
> > > and not necessarily some changes in the way we handle diablerie just for
> the
> > > purpose of playing Reform body.
> > >
> >
> > You must've missed the messages that explained that diablerie wasn't
> > changed just for the purpose of playing Reform Body (if you consider
> > it changed at all).
>
> "the diablerie is *now* atomic". Is'nt this a change ? =)
Only if it was divisible before. The original Jyhad rules indicate
that it was all one simultaneous unit. [Jyhad 16.3]. The 1995 VTES
rules preserved that [VTES 19] and [VTES 20.2]. The Revised Rules
reworded the section to show the effective order of the events
(to stave off the question of whether the new Discipline capacity
can be filled with the diablerized blood, for example) and also
listed the "immediate" [Jyhad 16.3], [VTES 20.2] blood hunt in
that ordering.
Reyda
> Reyda wrote:
> > would'nt it be better ? torporized means you don't have to include the
> > beaten up vampire in you scheme. the game is already complicated as it
is,
> > to take care of what torporized vampire can play.
>
> So the things that require ready vampires require ready vampires.
> The things that don't don't.
>
> The combination of rules and card text tells you which is which.
this is something i can understand without much problem. I just wanted to
know if someday we can remove torporized vampires from the equation when we
try to attemps something.
Torporized vampires cannot enter combat, cannot play action cards, cannot
play reaction cards (barring special card text / rapid healing, crimson
fury) so why for god's sake should they be able to play combat cards ? just
give me a reason other than "it's a card game and we already preinted the
card that way".
> > > a trait that carries little weight in arguments to add errata to the
> > > card game.
> >
> > not necessarily.
>
> It does to the current errata writers.
I a perfect world, errata is needed only when a card is misprinted. We all
know that we already need a file full of the most recent card text and
clarifications to play this game by the rule. It won't make any difference
if the rulemonger decides that Alvaro in torpor cannot vote therefore cannot
gain blood during a referendum. And i think most players will applause.
(im sure that a lot of players were surprised when they learn two years ago
that alexandra can untap other toreadors from torpor !)
In my humble opinion, providing you were part of the design team on FN and
BL, i want to hilight the fact that the new wording you chose for the cards
is quite good and most of times excludes ambiguity. But for the older cards
it's another matter. Decisions have to be made, but i tend to prefer "real
world logic" rather than "strictly sticking to card text logic". Everyone ha
s his biases.
(snip)
> > "the diablerie is *now* atomic". Is'nt this a change ? =)
>
> Only if it was divisible before. The original Jyhad rules indicate
> that it was all one simultaneous unit. [Jyhad 16.3]. The 1995 VTES
> rules preserved that [VTES 19] and [VTES 20.2]. The Revised Rules
> reworded the section to show the effective order of the events
> (to stave off the question of whether the new Discipline capacity
> can be filled with the diablerized blood, for example) and also
> listed the "immediate" [Jyhad 16.3], [VTES 20.2] blood hunt in
> that ordering.
Of course, but at this time, diablerie was an easy thign to do =)
without reform body, crimson fury, dust to dust, draught of the soul, and
direct intervention around, it was as simple as playing amaranth, then
ritual of the bitter rose, then gain blood (and eventually a master card),
then wait for the blood hunt referendum. No sweat, no need for
clarification.
I think most players can cope with that, even with all those new cards by
using logic and acting/reacting order, and by not cheating or trying to
misguide other players. I genuinely think that fair play and sportsmanship
can replace this kind of neoclarifications about a mecanism of the game we
are using for more 7 years without much trouble.
reyda