Question on Bleeding (LSJ)
John Whelan
Greetings LSJ
Our playgroup recently had a disagreement which we need resolved by
Authority.
Player A bleeds for one.
Player B declares that he is taking the bleed and removes pool
Player A plays conditioning
Player B plays deflection
At this point two conflicting points of view are presented:
1) Player B already declared that he was taking the bleed, and should be
held to that. He may not play deflection.
2) Player B's failure to block is the only part of his decision that is
final. Otherwise he has the right to respond to any new effects
presented. He may deflect the bleed.
Thank you in advance.
-- John Whelan
LSJ
> Player A bleeds for one.
> Player B declares that he is taking the bleed and removes pool
> Player A plays conditioning
> Player B plays deflection
>
> At this point two conflicting points of view are presented:
>
> 1) Player B already declared that he was taking the bleed, and should be
> held to that. He may not play deflection.
>
> 2) Player B's failure to block is the only part of his decision that is
> final. Otherwise he has the right to respond to any new effects
> presented. He may deflect the bleed.
2) is correct.
After declaring "no block" (which is all that "I'll take it" can mean at this
point), the acting Methuselah gets first opportunity to play an effect - she
chooses to play Conditioning. The she gets the opportunity to play the next
effect. Sh chooses to play no further effects, so the target Methuselah gets
the opportunity to play an effect - she chooses to play Deflection. After
this event, the acting Methuselah again gets the opportunity to play the
next effect, and so on.
See "Sequencing" in the rulebook. [1.6.1.5]
--
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/
ELDB Dave
Is it important to point out that Player B does not actually lose pool
until after all modifiers have been played?
I only mention this because in the original poster's example, it seemed
as though Player B lost pool for the base bleed and then played a
deflection to pass on the remaining bleed after Player A played a
Conditioning - which is obviously incorrect.
Comments are, as Norm would say, welcome.
David
--
David Anderson-Dávila
Creator of the Elder Library Deck Builder©
http://people.atl.mediaone.net/intj/eldb/
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
cantila
John Whelan
No. The "removes pool" detail was merely a fact presented (in position
1) to argue the finality of player A's decision. Player A, naturally,
wished to bounce the entire bleed.
-- John Whelan