[LSJ] Seeds of Corruption Revisited

13 views
Skip to first unread message

echia...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jul 9, 2005, 2:31:49 PM7/9/05
to
A couple of questions concerning interaction with Seeds of Corruption:

"Put this card on one of your prey's vampires. If the vampire is a
Follower of Set, he or she burns 2 additional blood for each action he
or she attempts; otherwise, he or she burns 1 additional blood for each
action he or she attempts. The vampire with this card cannot use his or
her special abilities. Any vampire(s) may burn this card with two +1
stealth actions."


"Special ability" includes all text except terms (i.e., it doesn't
include Clan, Sect, Title, Unique (or not), Blood Cursed, Circle,
Flight, Infernal, Scarce, Slave, Sterile, Vulnerability, Anarch, Black
Hand, Seraph, Red List). (note that this only restricts things that are
possible only by special ability - things that a special ability makes
impossible are still impossible.) [LSJ 19970801] [LSJ 20011211] [LSJ
20040120] [RTR 20040501]

#1. Previously the Blood Curse was tied to a specific clan. Kindred
Most Wanted came with a revision such that the Blood Curse is tied to
specific card text (and is no longer the default). So how does Blood
Curse continue to interact with Seeds of Corruption?

"Before KMW, the Blood Curse was tied to what clan a vampire was. Every
Assamite had the Blood Curse even if card text didn't say so (unless
card text explicitly overrode that, of course). Now, as of KMW, the
Blood Curse only affects the vampires whose card text say so (just like
all of the other attributes: Scarce, Cold Iron Vulnerability, Sterile,
etc.)."

A. Fatima (who is Blood Cursed) has Seeds placed on her. She
continues to be Blood Cursed. Correct?

B. Michael diCarlo has card text that states "The Blood Curse does
not affect Michael." If Seeds is placed on Michael what happens? One
could argue that has text no longer is effective (and thus he is
affected by the Blood Curse). Alternatively, one could argue that even
with Seeds on him, his card text does not specifically say "Blood
Cursed" thus Seeds would not affect his ability to commit diablerie.

C. As a correlate to B, it was previously ruled that if Tariq had
Seeds placed on him, he would revert to the default Blood Curse state:

From: vtes...@white-wolf.com (LSJ)
Date: 7 Jun 2004 11:20:42 -0700
Subject: Re: [LSJ]Jacob the Glitch

"XZealot" <nbr...@rapidretailsolutions.com> wrote:
> How does Seeds of Corruption interact with all of Jacob's text.

It leaves him with just "Sabbat" as active text.

(A Seeds on Tariq would have a similar effect, leaving him simply
"Idependent" and Blood Cursed as per the default state of his clan).


--
LSJ (vtes...@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/

So does Kindred Most Wanted continue to support this ruling or should
it be reversed?


#2. Valerius Maior seems to be unique in that his Merge special
(non-infernal and non-Red List) appears to be a one-time occurrance
(whereas other Merge specials are in constant effect).

[MERGED] Independent: Valerius becomes non-infernal and non-Red List as
he merges. While merged, his capacity is reduced by 2.

How does this interact with Seeds of Corruption?


A. Advanced Valerius is in play with a Seeds of Corruption. This
would logically nullify his Merged text. Thus if he merges while Seeds
is in play, he remains Infernal and Red List even after Seeds is
removed. Correct?

B. But what happens if Basic Valerius is in play with a Seeds of
Corruption and then you merge him? Will the Seeds instantly nullify the
Advanced's text or is there a window of opportunity for the Advanced's
Merge text to trigger?

#3. There's an old Jimmy Dunn ruling whereby you stated that:

From: LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 08:02:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Final Nights welcome

> #3. (Not related to Political Seizure). What happens if you have Jimmy Dunn
> with a Seeds of Corruption (so this Jimmy *can* be contested). And then you
> bring out another one (this second one *can't* be contested). Now what happens?


The Second Jimmy's card text (not being seeded) applies - burn the
first.

(Some of it is rather old, especially regarding the contesting).

Nonetheless what happens if multiple Jimmy Dunns are brought into play
and all of them have Seeds of Corruption on them. (i.e. Jimmys with
Seeds are Banished and then all brought back into play). With the
latest rulings, the Seeds would not seem to affect his "cannot be
contested" restriction. But it would seemingly nullify his "If a second
Jimmy comes into play, burn the first Jimmy in play instead of
contesting him" card text, right?

With regards,
Eric Chiang

LSJ

unread,
Jul 9, 2005, 7:14:37 PM7/9/05
to
echia...@yahoo.com wrote:
> A couple of questions concerning interaction with Seeds of Corruption:
>
> "Put this card on one of your prey's vampires. If the vampire is a
> Follower of Set, he or she burns 2 additional blood for each action he
> or she attempts; otherwise, he or she burns 1 additional blood for each
> action he or she attempts. The vampire with this card cannot use his or
> her special abilities. Any vampire(s) may burn this card with two +1
> stealth actions."
>
> "Special ability" includes all text except terms (i.e., it doesn't
> include Clan, Sect, Title, Unique (or not), Blood Cursed, Circle,
> Flight, Infernal, Scarce, Slave, Sterile, Vulnerability, Anarch, Black
> Hand, Seraph, Red List). (note that this only restricts things that are
> possible only by special ability - things that a special ability makes
> impossible are still impossible.) [LSJ 19970801] [LSJ 20011211] [LSJ
> 20040120] [RTR 20040501]
>
>
> #1. Previously the Blood Curse was tied to a specific clan. Kindred
> Most Wanted came with a revision such that the Blood Curse is tied to
> specific card text (and is no longer the default). So how does Blood
> Curse continue to interact with Seeds of Corruption?

The same. Before it was clan and a restriction, and so doubly unaffected
by Seeds. Now it is just a card-text restriction, so is still
unaffected by Seeds.

> "Before KMW, the Blood Curse was tied to what clan a vampire was. Every
> Assamite had the Blood Curse even if card text didn't say so (unless
> card text explicitly overrode that, of course). Now, as of KMW, the
> Blood Curse only affects the vampires whose card text say so (just like
> all of the other attributes: Scarce, Cold Iron Vulnerability, Sterile,
> etc.)."

I don't know whence that quote, but it's true.
But, as the curse is a restriction, it is simply unaffected by Seeds.

> A. Fatima (who is Blood Cursed) has Seeds placed on her. She
> continues to be Blood Cursed. Correct?

Yes.

> B. Michael diCarlo has card text that states "The Blood Curse does
> not affect Michael." If Seeds is placed on Michael what happens? One
> could argue that has text no longer is effective (and thus he is
> affected by the Blood Curse). Alternatively, one could argue that even
> with Seeds on him, his card text does not specifically say "Blood
> Cursed" thus Seeds would not affect his ability to commit diablerie.

Rake is also unaffected by the Blood Curse. The reminder text on
Michael doesn't mean that Seeds will somehow add a Curse.

> C. As a correlate to B, it was previously ruled that if Tariq had
> Seeds placed on him, he would revert to the default Blood Curse state:

> (A Seeds on Tariq would have a similar effect, leaving him simply


> "Idependent" and Blood Cursed as per the default state of his clan).

> So does Kindred Most Wanted continue to support this ruling or should
> it be reversed?

It no longer applies, since the Curse is no longer a function of
Clan (a similar fate has met every ruling based on the Curse
being a function of clan (Embrace, etc.)).

> #2. Valerius Maior seems to be unique in that his Merge special
> (non-infernal and non-Red List) appears to be a one-time occurrance
> (whereas other Merge specials are in constant effect).
>
> [MERGED] Independent: Valerius becomes non-infernal and non-Red List as
> he merges. While merged, his capacity is reduced by 2.
>
> How does this interact with Seeds of Corruption?

It doesn't. That's essentially "term text" (equivalent to "non-infernal,
non-Red List", but in a head-off-the-obvious-questions kind of way,
at the expense of this corner case question.)

> A. Advanced Valerius is in play with a Seeds of Corruption. This
> would logically nullify his Merged text. Thus if he merges while Seeds
> is in play, he remains Infernal and Red List even after Seeds is
> removed. Correct?

The non-infernal and non-Red List terms are applied without regard
to the Seeds.

> B. But what happens if Basic Valerius is in play with a Seeds of
> Corruption and then you merge him? Will the Seeds instantly nullify the
> Advanced's text or is there a window of opportunity for the Advanced's
> Merge text to trigger?

They apply (this would be true even in the absence of the term-based
ruling above, as per the window you note).

> #3. There's an old Jimmy Dunn ruling whereby you stated that:

> The Second Jimmy's card text (not being seeded) applies - burn the
> first.

> Nonetheless what happens if multiple Jimmy Dunns are brought into play


> and all of them have Seeds of Corruption on them. (i.e. Jimmys with
> Seeds are Banished and then all brought back into play). With the
> latest rulings, the Seeds would not seem to affect his "cannot be
> contested" restriction. But it would seemingly nullify his "If a second
> Jimmy comes into play, burn the first Jimmy in play instead of
> contesting him" card text, right?

Meh. Treat the burn part as a reminder of what happens whenever
a non-contestable unique vampire meets himself "in play".

That is, it is independent of Seeds.

--
LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply)

Screaming Vermillian

unread,
Jul 9, 2005, 7:19:54 PM7/9/05
to
I love you for this.

echia...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jul 9, 2005, 7:30:14 PM7/9/05
to

Screaming Vermillian wrote:
> I love you for this.

Um...thanks?

- Eric Chiang

echia...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jul 9, 2005, 7:41:33 PM7/9/05
to
Thanks for the response.


LSJ wrote:
> echia...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > A couple of questions concerning interaction with Seeds of Corruption:
> >
> > "Put this card on one of your prey's vampires. If the vampire is a
> > Follower of Set, he or she burns 2 additional blood for each action he
> > or she attempts; otherwise, he or she burns 1 additional blood for each
> > action he or she attempts. The vampire with this card cannot use his or
> > her special abilities. Any vampire(s) may burn this card with two +1
> > stealth actions."

(Card text of Seeds of Corruption)


> > "Special ability" includes all text except terms (i.e., it doesn't
> > include Clan, Sect, Title, Unique (or not), Blood Cursed, Circle,
> > Flight, Infernal, Scarce, Slave, Sterile, Vulnerability, Anarch, Black
> > Hand, Seraph, Red List). (note that this only restricts things that are
> > possible only by special ability - things that a special ability makes
> > impossible are still impossible.) [LSJ 19970801] [LSJ 20011211] [LSJ
> > 20040120] [RTR 20040501]

(Rulings/Errata for Seeds of Corruption)


> > "Before KMW, the Blood Curse was tied to what clan a vampire was. Every
> > Assamite had the Blood Curse even if card text didn't say so (unless
> > card text explicitly overrode that, of course). Now, as of KMW, the
> > Blood Curse only affects the vampires whose card text say so (just like
> > all of the other attributes: Scarce, Cold Iron Vulnerability, Sterile,
> > etc.)."
>
> I don't know whence that quote, but it's true.
> But, as the curse is a restriction, it is simply unaffected by Seeds.


I was just quoting it because I was referencing the "Blood Curse
Update" from the Kindred Most Wanted preview page.

> > C. As a correlate to B, it was previously ruled that if Tariq had
> > Seeds placed on him, he would revert to the default Blood Curse state:
>
> > (A Seeds on Tariq would have a similar effect, leaving him simply
> > "Idependent" and Blood Cursed as per the default state of his clan).
>
> > So does Kindred Most Wanted continue to support this ruling or should
> > it be reversed?
>
> It no longer applies, since the Curse is no longer a function of
> Clan (a similar fate has met every ruling based on the Curse
> being a function of clan (Embrace, etc.)).


Okay, just clarifying.


> > #2. Valerius Maior seems to be unique in that his Merge special
> > (non-infernal and non-Red List) appears to be a one-time occurrance
> > (whereas other Merge specials are in constant effect).
> >
> > [MERGED] Independent: Valerius becomes non-infernal and non-Red List as
> > he merges. While merged, his capacity is reduced by 2.
> >
> > How does this interact with Seeds of Corruption?
>
> It doesn't. That's essentially "term text" (equivalent to "non-infernal,
> non-Red List", but in a head-off-the-obvious-questions kind of way,
> at the expense of this corner case question.)


Okay, that makes sense.


> > B. But what happens if Basic Valerius is in play with a Seeds of
> > Corruption and then you merge him? Will the Seeds instantly nullify the
> > Advanced's text or is there a window of opportunity for the Advanced's
> > Merge text to trigger?
>
> They apply (this would be true even in the absence of the term-based
> ruling above, as per the window you note).


So if there *is* such a window of opportunity, then how would that
interact with Sonja Blue + Seeds of Corruption? If I manage to get
Sonja Blue with a Seeds of Corruption and then Banish her, when I bring
her out again, is there a window of opportunity for me to gain 4 pool
before the Seeds of Corruption kicks in?

By contrast, previous rulings on Clan Impersonation + Scarce and also
with Discipline cards on a vampire returning to play seem to preclude
any such window.


> > #3. There's an old Jimmy Dunn ruling whereby you stated that:
>
> > The Second Jimmy's card text (not being seeded) applies - burn the
> > first.
>
> > Nonetheless what happens if multiple Jimmy Dunns are brought into play
> > and all of them have Seeds of Corruption on them. (i.e. Jimmys with
> > Seeds are Banished and then all brought back into play). With the
> > latest rulings, the Seeds would not seem to affect his "cannot be
> > contested" restriction. But it would seemingly nullify his "If a second
> > Jimmy comes into play, burn the first Jimmy in play instead of
> > contesting him" card text, right?
>
> Meh. Treat the burn part as a reminder of what happens whenever
> a non-contestable unique vampire meets himself "in play".
>
> That is, it is independent of Seeds.


Okay. Works for me. =D

- Eric Chiang

LSJ

unread,
Jul 9, 2005, 8:41:04 PM7/9/05
to
echia...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> B. But what happens if Basic Valerius is in play with a Seeds of
>>>Corruption and then you merge him? Will the Seeds instantly nullify the
>>>Advanced's text or is there a window of opportunity for the Advanced's
>>>Merge text to trigger?
>>
>>They apply (this would be true even in the absence of the term-based
>>ruling above, as per the window you note).
>
> So if there *is* such a window of opportunity, then how would that
> interact with Sonja Blue + Seeds of Corruption? If I manage to get
> Sonja Blue with a Seeds of Corruption and then Banish her, when I bring
> her out again, is there a window of opportunity for me to gain 4 pool
> before the Seeds of Corruption kicks in?
>
> By contrast, previous rulings on Clan Impersonation + Scarce and also
> with Discipline cards on a vampire returning to play seem to preclude
> any such window.

Quite right.

So the window story is false, and the term-based ruling is indeed
to be fallen back upon.

Peter D Bakija

unread,
Jul 9, 2005, 10:15:49 PM7/9/05
to
echia...@yahoo.com wrote:

> Um...thanks?

We all love you Eric.

:-)


Peter D Bakija
pd...@lightlink.com
http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6

"So in conclusion, our business plan is to sell hot,
easily spilled liquids to naked people."
-Brittni Meil

BearofMilwaukee

unread,
Jul 11, 2005, 1:06:57 AM7/11/05
to
Ditto.

Peter D Bakija

unread,
Jul 11, 2005, 9:21:22 AM7/11/05
to
BearofMilwaukee wrote:

> Ditto.

Just as a point of handy advice, it is always a good idea to quote relevant
text that you are responding to--on google groups, the conteext of other
messages are retained, but on the newsreaders that, like, 90% of the people
using usenet use, it is very common to only keep unread messages around, so
messages like this without relevant text quoted seem incredibly random.

Just being helpful.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages