Strike Resolution and a Nifty combo that probably doesn't work - LSJ?
legbiter
Suppose they Fast React or Hidden Lurker themselves onto somebody.
First round; strike hands. Blur at superior. Second round, first
strike is Garotte, second strike is Coma. May i now burn the garotte
to burn the vampire?
Name: Garrote
[FN]
Cardtype: Equipment
Cost: 1 pool
Melee weapon.
Strike: strength damage, only usable at close range. If the opposing
vampire goes into torpor during *the strike resolution step* of *this
strike* and the bearer remains ready, the bearer may burn this card to
burn the opposing vampire. This is not considered diablerie.
Name: Coma
[Sabbat, SW]
Cardtype: Combat
Cost: 3 blood
Discipline: Dementation
[dem] Strike: opposing vampire goes into torpor.
[DEM] As above, and that vampire does not untap during his or her
controller's next untap phase.
It's really a question about whether there is one resolution step for
each strike, and secondarily a queston about what *this strike* means
[i suspect that there is one resolution step for each strike [rather
than, for example, one per round]; and that *this strike* means *the
strike which is being talked about on this card, ie a melee weapon
strike for strength damage with the garotte*].
Thanks in advance for any help!
LSJ
>
> Suppose i have a vampire with superior celerity and dementation.
> Suppose they Fast React or Hidden Lurker themselves onto somebody.
> First round; strike hands. Blur at superior. Second round, first
> strike is Garotte, second strike is Coma. May i now burn the garotte
> to burn the vampire?
No.
> It's really a question about whether there is one resolution step for
> each strike, and secondarily a queston about what *this strike* means
> [i suspect that there is one resolution step for each strike [rather
> than, for example, one per round]; and that *this strike* means *the
> strike which is being talked about on this card, ie a melee weapon
> strike for strength damage with the garotte*].
Correct:
There is one resolution step for each pair of strikes (yours and your
opponent's).
"This strike" means the Garrote strike.
--
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/
Daz
> Suppose i have a vampire with superior celerity and dementation.
> Suppose they Fast React or Hidden Lurker themselves onto somebody.
> First round; strike hands. Blur at superior. Second round, first
> strike is Garotte, second strike is Coma. May i now burn the garotte
> to burn the vampire?
What I don´t understand is why would you wan´t to strike three time
with hands during the first round (while the hidden lurker/fast
reaction) was in effect, and then use the garrote during the second
round.
The obviouse thing to do would be to have a ghoul retainer use the
garrote while the vampire strikes with come.
Would that work?
Henrik Isaksson
Daz <wb...@hotmail.com> skrev i
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:b57b2dc9.02041...@posting.google.com
...
I'd also like to know if it works the other way around, for instance if the
vampire strikes with garrote and ghoul retainer with Ivory Bow? (assuming no
prevent) also, would this combo work (i.e. burning the garrote and the
opposing vampire) even if the garrotte strike is dodged or prevented in any
way?
--
Henrik Isaksson
LSJ
> Daz <wb...@hotmail.com> skrev i
> > The obviouse thing to do would be to have a ghoul retainer use the
> > garrote while the vampire strikes with come.
> > Would that work?
Yes.
> I'd also like to know if it works the other way around, for instance if the
> vampire strikes with garrote and ghoul retainer with Ivory Bow? (assuming no
Yes.
> prevent) also, would this combo work (i.e. burning the garrote and the
> opposing vampire) even if the garrotte strike is dodged or prevented in any
> way?
Even if dodged? good question.
Since the strike is still resolved, though, the Garrote can still be
used to burn the torpor-bound opponent.
Even if the damage is prevented? Yes.
Joshua Duffin
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3CBC648D...@white-wolf.com...
> Henrik Isaksson wrote:
> > would this combo work (i.e. burning the garrote and the
> > opposing vampire) even if the garrotte strike is dodged or prevented in
any
> > way?
>
> Even if dodged? good question.
> Since the strike is still resolved, though, the Garrote can still be
> used to burn the torpor-bound opponent.
So the burn-effect is not an effect of the strike, but only
a sort of "other effect" of the weapon?
"Dodge: A dodge strike deals no damage, but it protects the
dodging minion and his possessions from the effects of the
opposing strike." [6.4.5]
Josh
LSJ
> > > would this combo work (i.e. burning the garrote and the
> > > opposing vampire) even if the garrotte strike is dodged or prevented in
> any
> > > way?
> >
> > Even if dodged? good question.
> > Since the strike is still resolved, though, the Garrote can still be
> > used to burn the torpor-bound opponent.
>
> So the burn-effect is not an effect of the strike, but only
> a sort of "other effect" of the weapon?
Right. It's something that can be done if something else (opposing
vampire to torpor) happens during the resolution of the strike.