A few questions
LSJ
> Lets say Quentin who has +1 hand damage as a natual ability equips himself
Quentin (and all vampires with innate "+N hand damage") treats the bonus as
a bonus to his innate strength. ("Strength" is the term used to denote a
minion's base amount of damage.)
> with B.N Tigers claws which give him +2 hand damage. If he stikes with the
B.N. Tiger Claws can be used to strike for strength+2 damage. (A similar
interpretation applies to all other melee weapons that deal damage based
on the minion's "hand damage".)
> claws is his damage three (just the +2 for the claws) or does it include his
He deals 4 damage: 2 (his base hand damage, his strength) +2 = 4
> natural +1 as well? Also if he struck with B.N. can he play Wolf's Claws or
> Claws of the Dead to make his damage aggravated (ie is attacking with B.N. a
> hand strike since it says +2 hand damage or is it a regular weapon strike?)
No strikes with weapons are hand strikes, so the damage they inflict is
not hand damage. That weapon damage is not made aggravated by Claws (or
Basilia's ability, etc.).
> Question Two: Are multiple Mass Realities cumulative?
Yes.
> Question Three: If a vampire is attempting to rescue himself from Torpor and
> is blocked does he still spend two blood and does combat occur or does he
> just go back to Torpor?
From the revised rulebook (see link in .sig):
6.5.2. Leave Torpor action (+1 stealth)
If this action is blocked, there is no combat (vampires in torpor
cannot enter combat). Instead, if the blocker is a vampire, he gets the
opportunity to diablerize the acting vampire (see Diablerie, sec. 6.5.5).
If he chooses not to, or if he is an ally, then the action simply fails
(the acting vampire remains in torpor and no cost is paid).
> Lastly: If I have no vampires in my uncontrolled region yet I have the
> Arcane Library. I spend all four of my transfers and a pool to bring out a
> new vamp (who happens to be a Tremere, can I tap the Arcane Library to
> immediatly put a blood on him...or is my influece phase over the minute I
> pull him out from my crypt?
Your influence phase is not over until you are finished with it.
You can tap the Arcane Library to put a counter on the new vampire.
--
LSJ (vte...@wizards.com) V:TES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.wizards.com/VTES/rules.asp
Kristyl Meth
<37B2B584...@wizards.com>...
[snip beginning of question]
> > natural +1 as well? Also if he struck with B.N. can he play Wolf's
Claws or
> > Claws of the Dead to make his damage aggravated (ie is attacking with
B.N. a
> > hand strike since it says +2 hand damage or is it a regular weapon
strike?)
>
> No strikes with weapons are hand strikes, so the damage they inflict is
> not hand damage. That weapon damage is not made aggravated by Claws (or
> Basilia's ability, etc.).
OK, so let me get this straight in my thick skull. B.N. Tiger Claws is a
weapon that gives a minion "+2 _hand damage_", but weapon strikes cannot be
"hand" strikes. OK. So, if weapon strikes are not "hand" strikes, why
does Quintin still get his innate bonus "hand damage"? And since he _does_
get that bonus, can't Wolf Claws be used to make at least that portion (the
innate portion) of the damage aggravated? Allowing Quintin to tack on his
innate "hand damage" bonus but not allowing him to use modifiers applicable
to "hand damage" seems completely contradictory to me.
The rule should be either: (1) B.N. strikes are weapon strikes, so
Quintin's bonus "hand damage" does not apply and "hand damage" modifiers
cannot be played, or (2) the _entire_ B.N. Tiger Claws strike is hand
damage (because of B.N. Tiger Claws card text) which is added to Quintin's
inherent +1 hand damage and which can entirely be modified by hand damage
modifiers like Wolf Claws (giving him 4 aggro "hand damage"). The current
rule seems unecessarily confusing and doesn't make much sense to me
anyways. Why can't weapons like B.N. Tiger Claws (that increase "hand
damage") be treated as additions to a minion's innate strength (like
Depravity)? Under the current rule (using a minion's innate strength with
weapon strikes but not calling it hand damage), Quintin may as well be
allowed to tack on his base damage when striking with _any_ weapon at close
range (.44, chainsaw, etc.).
Just my thoughts (and I'm sure this point has been discussed before),
KM
LSJ
>
> LSJ <vte...@wizards.com> wrote in article
> <37B2B584...@wizards.com>...
>
> [snip beginning of question]
>
> > > natural +1 as well? Also if he struck with B.N. can he play Wolf's
> Claws or
> > > Claws of the Dead to make his damage aggravated (ie is attacking with
> B.N. a
> > > hand strike since it says +2 hand damage or is it a regular weapon
> strike?)
> >
> > No strikes with weapons are hand strikes, so the damage they inflict is
> > not hand damage. That weapon damage is not made aggravated by Claws (or
> > Basilia's ability, etc.).
>
> OK, so let me get this straight in my thick skull. B.N. Tiger Claws is a
> weapon that gives a minion "+2 _hand damage_", but weapon strikes cannot be
It is a weapon that can be used to strike. A strike with that weapon
inflicts an amount of damage equal to two plus the bearer's (innate) hand
damage. The template is not as good at getting this notion across as it
could be. Treat it as "Strike: Strength+2 damage" (meaning that it gives
the bearer a new strike option). The ruling is that melee weapons strength
bonuses only apply when striking with the weapon.
> "hand" strikes. OK. So, if weapon strikes are not "hand" strikes, why
> does Quintin still get his innate bonus "hand damage"? And since he _does_
Because the melee weapon does an amount of damage based on the bearer's
innate hand damage (his "strength").
> get that bonus, can't Wolf Claws be used to make at least that portion (the
> innate portion) of the damage aggravated? Allowing Quintin to tack on his
> innate "hand damage" bonus but not allowing him to use modifiers applicable
> to "hand damage" seems completely contradictory to me.
That's because the rules and cards are using "hand damage" to mean two
different things: the amount of damage a minion would do with a hand
strike and the type of damage done by a hand strike.
Quinton's bonus applies to the former. Claws apply to the latter.
The revised rules use "strength" instead of "hand damage" for the former,
but of course the printed cards haven't been updated to reflect that.
> The rule should be either: (1) B.N. strikes are weapon strikes, so
> Quintin's bonus "hand damage" does not apply and "hand damage" modifiers
It is a weapon strike that inficts an amount of damage based on the
striking minion's strength.
> cannot be played, or (2) the _entire_ B.N. Tiger Claws strike is hand
> damage (because of B.N. Tiger Claws card text) which is added to Quintin's
> inherent +1 hand damage and which can entirely be modified by hand damage
> modifiers like Wolf Claws (giving him 4 aggro "hand damage"). The current
The damage done by a weapon strike is weapon damage. The damage done by a
hand strike is hand damage. Claws make the latter aggravated. They do not
affect the former.
> rule seems unecessarily confusing and doesn't make much sense to me
> anyways. Why can't weapons like B.N. Tiger Claws (that increase "hand
> damage") be treated as additions to a minion's innate strength (like
> Depravity)? Under the current rule (using a minion's innate strength with
Because your claws aren't connecting when you strike with a weapon - the
weapon is. When you connect with a weapon, no one cares if your fingernails
are properly trimmed or not.
> weapon strikes but not calling it hand damage), Quintin may as well be
> allowed to tack on his base damage when striking with _any_ weapon at close
> range (.44, chainsaw, etc.).
.44's and Chainsaws do not deal damage based on how hard you "hit" with
them, so are not written to be based on strength ("hand damage [1]").
Kristyl Meth
> .44's and Chainsaws do not deal damage based on how hard you "hit" with
> them, so are not written to be based on strength ("hand damage [1]").
This was the statement that finally clicked with me conceptually. Just
pretend as if the card text says "equal to hand damage + 2" instead of "+2
hand damage." Got it.
KM
Richard Zopf
The way the mechanic was intended to work, as I see it, was as follows;
1. Weapons that inflict greater damage when wielded by a stronger than
average opponent should reflect this in the way the game mechanic functions.
Thus, for many melee weapons, this is represented as Strike: +X hand damage.
2. Weapons that involve a mechanic other than the strength of the
wielder for inflicting damage, eg. Guns, should not gain the benefit of
additional strength of the wielder.
3. Special effects which revolve around the actual inflicting of damage
with the bare hands of the acting minion (Burning Wrath, Claws, etc.) should
_not_ be allowed to carry their benefit through if the strike is done with a
melee weapon. Said differently, you've got to get their flesh under your
Claws if you want the damage to be aggravated. Likewise, you shouldn't gain
the benefit of a Bastard Sword's additional damage if yo uaren't swinging it
at them. Just having it strapped to your back isn't enough.
These situations said, the rules are now structured to reflect all three
of these points. Confusing? Probably, only because of poor wording on the
part of original card text. But it does make sense, both from a game
mechanic point of view, and a logical one.
My $0.02
Regards,
R. David Zopf
Atom Weaver (& V:EKN Prince of Charlotte, NC)
Rob Grau
> > not hand damage. That weapon damage is not made aggravated by Claws (or
> > Basilia's ability, etc.).
>
> OK, so let me get this straight in my thick skull. B.N. Tiger Claws is a
> weapon that gives a minion "+2 _hand damage_", but weapon strikes cannot be
> does Quintin still get his innate bonus "hand damage"?
I don't believe Quentin has an innate hand damage modifier. Anyway, see
my example below.
> And since he _does_
> get that bonus, can't Wolf Claws be used to make at least that portion (the
> innate portion) of the damage aggravated?
He may use Wolf Claws if he choses (and has Protean). It will _not_ make
a weapon strike aggavated, however. (not even part of it)
> Allowing Quintin to tack on his
> innate "hand damage" bonus but not allowing him to use modifiers applicable
> to "hand damage" seems completely contradictory to me.
A hand strike involves a vampire that strikes with his hands.
A weapon strike involves a vampire that strikes with a weapon.
The "+X hand damage" text on weapons is only used for determining the
damage done by the weapon. If Lazvernius strikes with his fists, he
inflicts 3 damage (His Special: +2 hand damage). This is hand damage. It
would be modified by Wolf Claws. If Lazverinus strikes with BN Tiger
Claws, he inflicts 5 damage. This is weapon damage. Using Wolf Claws
would not make the damage aggravated because he is not striking with his
hands.
>
> The rule should be either: (1) B.N. strikes are weapon strikes, so
> Quintin's bonus "hand damage" does not apply and "hand damage" modifiers
> cannot be played,
BN is a weapon, so strikes using the weapon are weapon strikes.
> or (2) the _entire_ B.N. Tiger Claws strike is hand
> damage (because of B.N. Tiger Claws card text) which is added to Quintin's
> inherent +1 hand damage and which can entirely be modified by hand damage
> modifiers like Wolf Claws (giving him 4 aggro "hand damage"). The current
> rule seems unecessarily confusing and doesn't make much sense to me
> anyways. Why can't weapons like B.N. Tiger Claws (that increase "hand
> damage") be treated as additions to a minion's innate strength (like
> Depravity)?
Because a weapon isn't the same as a modification to base hand damage.
> Under the current rule (using a minion's innate strength with
> weapon strikes but not calling it hand damage), Quintin may as well be
> allowed to tack on his base damage when striking with _any_ weapon at close
> range (.44, chainsaw, etc.).
The weapons make no allowance for hand damage. There is no reason to
tack on additional damage.
Hope I've been clear,
Rob Grau
Andrew Loder
(A picture of Arika w/ Legendary Vampire & B.N. Tiger Claws
dealing 9 dam in one strike with hel from Isle of Yiaros :)
Now I need to get me one :)
Andrew
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
LSJ
> How does the damage from Island of Yiaros work then?
It increases the selected vampire's strength by X for one strike.
This will affect both hand strikes and strength-based weapon
strikes.
Rob Grau
>
> How does the damage from Island of Yiaros work then?
Card Text says "Tap this card to give a vampire you control +X hand
damage for one strike, where X is the number of votes the vampire has"
It does not specify the type of strike the vampire must make, so the
vampire may still choose any legal strike. This would _not_ be the time
for a zip gun, though.
> (A picture of Arika w/ Legendary Vampire & B.N. Tiger Claws
> dealing 9 dam in one strike with hel from Isle of Yiaros :)
Appears to be legal. (and ouch, no potence needed.)
> Now I need to get me one :)
Downside is that it costs two and is (D) action burnable.
Rob Grau
rfg...@eos.ncsu.edu
Nate Williams
>
> For example, see Talbot's Chainsaw:
>
> Unique weapon.
> 3 damage each strike. If bearer is ready during your
> untap phase, a ready minion you control takes 3 damage
> (damage not preventable). Bearer cannot hunt. If ready
> and untapped during your minion phase, bearer may
> attack any minion as a +1 stealth (D) action, preses at
> the end of the first round, and may prevent up to 1
> damage each combat.
>
Does the official version of this weapon say "may attack any minion?"
From the Jyhad version (and the story behind the card: This is the
chainsaw used by a crazy mass-murderer Gangrel named Talbot), I always
had the impression that there was no choice involved in whether to
attack someone or not (the Jyhad version says "bearer attacks" without
the 'may.'
Nate Williams
>
> "davey! sprocket" wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, LSJ wrote:
> >
> > > Gaining additional strikes (Sword of Judgement) or presses (Talbot's Chainsaw)
> > > has nothing to do with striking.
> >
> > why is it different for maneuvers from guns?
>
> Because the rules say so:
>
> 6.4.2. Determine Range
> [...] If a minion uses the maneuver from a strike card or a
> weapon, he is effectively choosing his strike as well.
>
> 6.4.3. Strike
> 1. Choose Strike. [...]If a minion has used a maneuver from a strike (either a
> strike card or a weapon) this round, then he cannot choose any other
> strike for his initial strike of the round.
>
> > Sword of Judgement:
> > The Brujah antitribu with this equipment gets +1 hand damage with each
> > strike; he or she gains an optional additional strike each round of
> > combat.
Does the Sword of Judgement do nothing if owned by a minion who is not
Brujah Antitribu? Other clan-requiring equipment (Mummy's Tongue, Femur
of Toomler, for example) can be used by anyone, right?
> >
> > .44 Magnum:
> > Weapon, Gun 2R each strike, with an optional maneuver each combat
> >
> > If instead it said "the minion with this eqipment gets an optional
> > maneuver each combat," would the maneuver still commit the minion to
> > striking with the weapon?
>
> Yes, because of the rule that says it would.
>
> You can visualize the maneuver from a gun as the minion with the gun
> laying down some "cover fire" to keep his opponent at range before
> firing the actual shot aimed at his opponent's head. (A different
> visualization is needed for 'sniper weapons' like the Deer Rifle.)
>
Hehe. I always wondered how a gun might give a maneuver. And how about
IR Goggles? Do V:TM vampires have body heat?
Halcyan 2
>the benefit of a Bastard Sword's additional damage if yo uaren't swinging it
>at them. Just having it strapped to your back isn't enough.
I understand this whole concept of strength vs. hand damage and all. And how a
weapon's damage bonus only applies when using it (just as a gun's manuever can
be used only when using it), but I'm still confused. Someone told me that the
Brujah anti-tribu Sword of Judgment, which grants an additional strike gives
the strike even if it isn't used as the weapon. What's the deal with that?
Halcyan 2
LSJ
It is true.
Gaining additional strikes (Sword of Judgement) or presses (Talbot's Chainsaw)
has nothing to do with striking.
Dealing damage with a weapon, on the other hand, has a lot to do with striking.
James Coupe
<halc...@aol.com> writes
>Someone told me that the
>Brujah anti-tribu Sword of Judgment, which grants an additional strike gives
>the strike even if it isn't used as the weapon. What's the deal with that?
Well, if you have an IR Goggles, they just give you a maneuver, right?
The Sword of Judgement gives you the ability to strike in a particular
way, just like most weapons. It also has, as other text, the fact that
you also get an Additional Strike. The striking bit needs the weapon to
be chosen to strike with, because of the rules. The other bits don't.
For example, see Talbot's Chainsaw:
Unique weapon.
3 damage each strike. If bearer is ready during your
untap phase, a ready minion you control takes 3 damage
(damage not preventable). Bearer cannot hunt. If ready
and untapped during your minion phase, bearer may
attack any minion as a +1 stealth (D) action, preses at
the end of the first round, and may prevent up to 1
damage each combat.
Now, if I get into combat with TC, and I am playing against PDB6 with
one of his weenie potence combat decks, and he throws down Immortal
Grapple, I can't use it to strike for 3 damage with. However, I could
prevent up to 1 damage and would press, because they come through
holding the weapon, not through striking with it.
Similarly, Sword of Judgement gives me an additional strike - not by
striking with it, just by holding it.
--
James Coupe (Prince of Mercia, England)
Vampire: Elder Kindred Network
http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net http://www.obeah.demon.co.uk
LSJ
>
> James Coupe wrote:
> >
> > For example, see Talbot's Chainsaw:
> >
> > Unique weapon.
> > 3 damage each strike. If bearer is ready during your
> > untap phase, a ready minion you control takes 3 damage
> > (damage not preventable). Bearer cannot hunt. If ready
> > and untapped during your minion phase, bearer may
> > attack any minion as a +1 stealth (D) action, preses at
> > the end of the first round, and may prevent up to 1
> > damage each combat.
> >
Yes.
> From the Jyhad version (and the story behind the card: This is the
> chainsaw used by a crazy mass-murderer Gangrel named Talbot), I always
> had the impression that there was no choice involved in whether to
> attack someone or not (the Jyhad version says "bearer attacks" without
> the 'may.'
The attack action is an option. Just as the strike for 3 is an option.
The press is mandatory, however, as is the damage during untap.
davey! sprocket
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, LSJ wrote:
> Gaining additional strikes (Sword of Judgement) or presses (Talbot's Chainsaw)
> has nothing to do with striking.
why is it different for maneuvers from guns?
Sword of Judgement:
The Brujah antitribu with this equipment gets +1 hand damage with each
strike; he or she gains an optional additional strike each round of
combat.
.44 Magnum:
Weapon, Gun 2R each strike, with an optional maneuver each combat
If instead it said "the minion with this eqipment gets an optional
maneuver each combat," would the maneuver still commit the minion to
striking with the weapon?
-davey!
LSJ
>
> On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, LSJ wrote:
>
> > Gaining additional strikes (Sword of Judgement) or presses (Talbot's Chainsaw)
> > has nothing to do with striking.
>
> why is it different for maneuvers from guns?
Because the rules say so:
6.4.2. Determine Range
[...] If a minion uses the maneuver from a strike card or a
weapon, he is effectively choosing his strike as well.
6.4.3. Strike
1. Choose Strike. [...]If a minion has used a maneuver from a strike (either a
strike card or a weapon) this round, then he cannot choose any other
strike for his initial strike of the round.
> Sword of Judgement:
> The Brujah antitribu with this equipment gets +1 hand damage with each
> strike; he or she gains an optional additional strike each round of
> combat.
>
> .44 Magnum:
> Weapon, Gun 2R each strike, with an optional maneuver each combat
>
> If instead it said "the minion with this eqipment gets an optional
> maneuver each combat," would the maneuver still commit the minion to
> striking with the weapon?
Yes, because of the rule that says it would.
You can visualize the maneuver from a gun as the minion with the gun
laying down some "cover fire" to keep his opponent at range before
firing the actual shot aimed at his opponent's head. (A different
visualization is needed for 'sniper weapons' like the Deer Rifle.)
--
James Coupe
>, davey! sprocket <dhat...@midway.uchicago.edu> writes
>.44 Magnum:
> Weapon, Gun 2R each strike, with an optional maneuver each combat
>
>If instead it said "the minion with this eqipment gets an optional
>maneuver each combat," would the maneuver still commit the minion to
>striking with the weapon?
Imagine the following guard:
.44 Magnum with Big Shield Attached:
Weapon Gun. 2R with each strike. The bearer may prevent up to 1 damage
each combat.
You wouldn't have to use the gun for a strike to prevent the 1 damage.
It just happens. How about "has an optional press". Same deal. Now,
change that to "additional strike" - same deal.
The only reason the maneuver thing is different is because the rules
specifically single out maneuvers.
LSJ
> LSJ wrote:
> > "davey! sprocket" wrote:
> > > The Brujah antitribu with this equipment gets +1 hand damage with each
> > > strike; he or she gains an optional additional strike each round of
> > > combat.
>
> Brujah Antitribu? Other clan-requiring equipment (Mummy's Tongue, Femur
> of Toomler, for example) can be used by anyone, right?
Sword of Judgement has no card text pertaining to any advantages, bonuses,
uses, restrictions, or disadvantages for a minion who is not Brujah
Antitribu, so no.
Mummy's Tongue can only be used by a "vampire" (not an ally), by card text.
The Femur's ability is usable by the "minion" with it, so can be used by
any minion (who gets his hands on it).
> > You can visualize the maneuver from a gun as the minion with the gun
> > laying down some "cover fire" to keep his opponent at range before
> > firing the actual shot aimed at his opponent's head. (A different
> > visualization is needed for 'sniper weapons' like the Deer Rifle.)
> >
> Hehe. I always wondered how a gun might give a maneuver. And how about
> IR Goggles? Do V:TM vampires have body heat?
Heh. Unknown, but unlikely (except immediately after they've fed, I suspect).
Halcyan 2
>Weapon Gun. 2R with each strike. The bearer may prevent up to 1 damage
>each combat.
>
>You wouldn't have to use the gun for a strike to prevent the 1 damage.
>It just happens.
So in this case, one prevents a damage from "holding" the weapon, as someone
previously said, right? But what if a vampire was equipped with 5 of those .44
Magnums w/ Shields. Would it make sense that he/she would be able to prevent 5
damage?
>The only reason the maneuver thing is different is because the rules
>specifically single out maneuvers.
But my question is whether the reason manuevers were specifically singled out
is because the rules team thought manuevers were special, or whether it was
simply a minor oversight. Maybe they hadn't considered other weapon effects
would be a problem.
Halcyan 2
LSJ
> >.44 Magnum with Big Shield Attached:
> >Weapon Gun. 2R with each strike. The bearer may prevent up to 1 damage
> >each combat.
> >
> >You wouldn't have to use the gun for a strike to prevent the 1 damage.
> >It just happens.
>
> So in this case, one prevents a damage from "holding" the weapon, as someone
> previously said, right? But what if a vampire was equipped with 5 of those .44
> Magnums w/ Shields. Would it make sense that he/she would be able to prevent 5
> damage?
As much sense as getting 5 maneuvers by wearing 5 pairs of IR Goggles, I
suppose. At some point, you have to let go of reality in favor of simplicity,
uniformity, and playability. It is a card game, after all.
> >The only reason the maneuver thing is different is because the rules
> >specifically single out maneuvers.
>
> But my question is whether the reason manuevers were specifically singled out
> is because the rules team thought manuevers were special, or whether it was
> simply a minor oversight. Maybe they hadn't considered other weapon effects
> would be a problem.
Other weapon effects *aren't* a problem.
Maneuvers were singled out because the mechanic of maneuvering with a strike
was a common one in the base set. The idea is that the nature of the strike
itself allows the minion to maneuver.
Other things, like preventing damage, are neither common for weapons, nor
conceptually linked to the strike.
At any rate, if some effect (like gaining addition strikes) were to be
linked to striking, it would have to say so on the card, since the rules
do not make that connection. Since the Sword of Judgment doesn't have
such text, the gaining of the additional strike is not linked to striking
with the weapon. And since the Sword is not overly powerful, no errata
has been issued.
Xian
LSJ wrote in message <37C2DCFB...@wizards.com>...
>Nate Williams wrote:
>> IR Goggles? Do V:TM vampires have body heat?
>
>Heh. Unknown, but unlikely (except immediately after they've fed, I suspect).
According to V:TM, they're about ambient temperature, but they can burn some
blood to simulate body heat.
I always suspected the IR goggles simply allowed those without Auspex or
Protean to see in the dark better. Though perhaps I was thinking more of
"low-light" goggles...
Richard Zopf
LSJ wrote in message <37C2F6FC...@wizards.com>...
>Halcyan 2 wrote:
>> So in this case, one prevents a damage from "holding" the weapon, as
someone
>> previously said, right? But what if a vampire was equipped with 5 of
those .44
>> Magnums w/ Shields. Would it make sense that he/she would be able to
prevent 5
>> damage?
>
>As much sense as getting 5 maneuvers by wearing 5 pairs of IR Goggles, I
>suppose. At some point, you have to let go of reality in favor of
simplicity,
>uniformity, and playability. It is a card game, after all.
>
("Shaddup. It's a fashion statement..." - Marco Balaguer). Imagine, if you
would, that your additional investment (pool or actions) nets you an
upgraded version of the original piece of equipment, instead of two of the
same item. Rather than a cheap WW II surplus item, you upgraded to the high
tech kevlar model. Same for IR Goggles. Although I agree with the above
wholeheartedly (It is just a card game) I also maintain that if you can't
come up with a reason for the CCG to fit reality, you're just not thinking
abstractly enough.
Hardy Range
[snip]
>> >
>> Hehe. I always wondered how a gun might give a maneuver. And how about
>> IR Goggles? Do V:TM vampires have body heat?
>
>Heh. Unknown, but unlikely (except immediately after they've fed, I
suspect).
>
>--
>LSJ (vte...@wizards.com) V:TES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
>Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
>http://www.wizards.com/VTES/rules.asp
Well, of course you get a maneuver from the Goggles exactly because vamps do
_not_ have body heat - and when you look at a crowd through them and do not
see a person you can perceive good and well with normal sight, you know that
the enemy is near... ;-)
--
Hardy Range
"We live on a placid island in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it
was not meant that we should journey far."
H.P.Lovecraft