[LSJ] Rush action and Form of Mist
antero
then plays Form of Mist in order to slip past Kassiym in order to
pulverize Marconius. Looks a nice solution, but our Prince said that
if you declare a rush action and find yourself in combat with a chump
blocker, you cannot play FoM to reach the original target. If so, why?
-Antero
Janne Hägglund
Your prince finally found his crack pipe and smoked it...?
This is the most bizzare ruling I remember hearing about.
Isn't the whole *point* of superior Form of Mist to shaft blockers?
HG
--
hg@ "If you can't offend part of your audience,
iki.fi there is no point in being an artist at all." -Hakim Bey
LSJ
Not so.
Enkidu can play FoM at superior.
Enkidu is acting, so he can burn 1 blood (to FoM's effect) to continue as if
unblocked, with +1 stealth in addition.
Meaning that, if it remains unblocked, it will resolves as if it hadn't been
blocked (and Enkidu will enter combat with Marconius).
Card text.
antero
Thanks.
John Flournoy
Follow-ups:
Can Enkidu use Form of Mist if the blocker was Marconius (i.e., he has
already entered combat with the target of his action, albeit by being
blocked?)
If Enkidu completes combat with Kassiym, and then Marconius uses Fast
Reaction to start a combat with Enkidu, could Enkidu use Form of Mist
during that combat to continue his action to enter combat with
Marconius (again)?
Heck, can you ever use Form of Mist to continue your action after a
second vampire has used Fast Reaction (I assume generally so, since
you are still acting and the action isn't over until all the combats
resolve)?
What if his original target was Angelo, and a Hermana blocked and then
Angelo joined the combat via Free Fight? Could Enkidu use superior
Form of Mist to end the combat and continue to rush Angelo?
-John Flournoy
LSJ
> On Feb 19, 1:53 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
>> antero wrote:
>>> Scenario: Enkidu rushes Marconius and Kassiym Malikhair blocks. Enkidu
>>> then plays Form of Mist in order to slip past Kassiym in order to
>>> pulverize Marconius. Looks a nice solution, but our Prince said that
>>> if you declare a rush action and find yourself in combat with a chump
>>> blocker, you cannot play FoM to reach the original target. If so, why?
>> Not so.
>>
>> Enkidu can play FoM at superior.
>>
>> Enkidu is acting, so he can burn 1 blood (to FoM's effect) to continue as if
>> unblocked, with +1 stealth in addition.
>>
>> Meaning that, if it remains unblocked, it will resolves as if it hadn't been
>> blocked (and Enkidu will enter combat with Marconius).
>>
>> Card text.
>
> Follow-ups:
>
> Can Enkidu use Form of Mist if the blocker was Marconius (i.e., he has
> already entered combat with the target of his action, albeit by being
> blocked?)
Yes. Card text: "If this vampire is acting..."
Enkidu is acting.
The part that may cause confusion is attempting to continue an action that has
already resolved successfully (i.e., the Rush is not blocked, is successful, and
the acting vampire attempts to end combat and continue the action). While that
is not legal in the Form of Mist case (since FoM continuance adds stealth, and
adding stealth is only allowed when stealth is needed), other continuance could
be used, but would do nothing. Continuing an already resolved successful action
"as if unblocked" just means: do nothing (since the only thing to continue into
after successful resolution is "action ends").
> If Enkidu completes combat with Kassiym, and then Marconius uses Fast
> Reaction to start a combat with Enkidu, could Enkidu use Form of Mist
> during that combat to continue his action to enter combat with
> Marconius (again)?
Yes. Card text.
> Heck, can you ever use Form of Mist to continue your action after a
> second vampire has used Fast Reaction (I assume generally so, since
> you are still acting and the action isn't over until all the combats
> resolve)?
Exactly.
> What if his original target was Angelo, and a Hermana blocked and then
> Angelo joined the combat via Free Fight? Could Enkidu use superior
> Form of Mist to end the combat and continue to rush Angelo?
I'm no longer interested in dissecting the various permutations. So, without
looking closely at that set-up, the answer is:
Yes, if Enkidu is acting, in combat, and needs stealth.
J
sounds like a t-shirt slogan
--> J
grail_pbem "at" hotmail.com
Frederick Scott
news:x0Luj.1286$Mh2...@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>> Enkidu can play FoM at superior.
>>>
>>> Enkidu is acting, so he can burn 1 blood (to FoM's effect) to continue as if
>>> unblocked, with +1 stealth in addition.
>>>
>>> Meaning that, if it remains unblocked, it will resolves as if it hadn't been
>>> blocked (and Enkidu will enter combat with Marconius).
>>>
>>> Card text.
>>
>> Follow-ups:
>>
>> Can Enkidu use Form of Mist if the blocker was Marconius (i.e., he has
>> already entered combat with the target of his action, albeit by being
>> blocked?)
>
> Yes. Card text: "If this vampire is acting..."
> Enkidu is acting.
>
> The part that may cause confusion is attempting to continue an action that has already resolved successfully (i.e., the Rush is
> not blocked, is successful, and the acting vampire attempts to end combat and continue the action). While that is not legal in the
> Form of Mist case (since FoM continuance adds stealth, and adding stealth is only allowed when stealth is needed), other
> continuance could be used, but would do nothing. Continuing an already resolved successful action "as if unblocked" just means: do
> nothing (since the only thing to continue into after successful resolution is "action ends").
Nothing at all? If Enkidu or his opponent had a .44, could he use the maneuver
again? Would Traps and other multiround effects end? I would have thought yes,
a new combat would begin (assuming spending the blood to continue the action were
allowed at all); it sounds like you're saying no, combat just continues on as if
nothing happened. For that matter, would the same round of combat continue, e.g.
extra strikes, press resolution, and so forth for the round of combat in which
the FoM was played?
Fred
John Flournoy
> "LSJ" <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
You miss his point.
If you play Form of Mist at superior after entering combat with your
target (unblocked), combat does not continue, or restart - nothing
happens and the action ends, because 'continue the action' in this
case means 'well, the combat generated by action resolution is over,
so all that is left is the end-of-action.'
> Fred
-John Flournoy
LSJ
>> not blocked, is successful, and the acting vampire attempts to end combat and continue the action). While that is not legal in the
>> Form of Mist case (since FoM continuance adds stealth, and adding stealth is only allowed when stealth is needed), other
>> continuance could be used, but would do nothing. Continuing an already resolved successful action "as if unblocked" just means: do
>> nothing (since the only thing to continue into after successful resolution is "action ends").
>
> Nothing at all?
Yes. There is nothing after action resolution and before end of action.
That is, action resolution is the last thing that occurs during an action.
The continuance does nothing at all -- it continues straight into the "end of
action", which is where it (the action) would've gone anyhow.
If Enkidu or his opponent had a .44, could he use the maneuver
> again?
No. .44 only provides a maneuver in combat.
> Would Traps and other multiround effects end?
Trap only works in combat as well.
> I would have thought yes,
> a new combat would begin (assuming spending the blood to continue the action were
> allowed at all);
No. There's nothing around to start a new combat.
The action resolved. Combat started. Combat ended. The action continues "as if
unblocked", but it was already unblocked, so that just means "continue", and the
only thing left on the track is "end of line".
> it sounds like you're saying no, combat just continues on as if
> nothing happened.
The "end combat and continue the action" effect (e.g., Mirror Image)doesn't
continue combat, it continues the action. It ends combat. Card text.
> For that matter, would the same round of combat continue, e.g.
> extra strikes, press resolution, and so forth for the round of combat in which
> the FoM was played?
No.
Frederick Scott
news:f27b7d30-4d1f-4da4...@q33g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 20, 10:42 am, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>> "LSJ" <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
>> news:x0Luj.1286$Mh2...@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> >>> Enkidu can play FoM at superior.
>>
>> >>> Enkidu is acting, so he can burn 1 blood (to FoM's effect) to continue as if
>> >>> unblocked, with +1 stealth in addition.
>>
>> >>> Meaning that, if it remains unblocked, it will resolves as if it hadn't been
>> >>> blocked (and Enkidu will enter combat with Marconius).
>>
>> >>> Card text.
>>
>> >> Follow-ups:
>>
>> >> Can Enkidu use Form of Mist if the blocker was Marconius (i.e., he has
>> >> already entered combat with the target of his action, albeit by being
>> >> blocked?)
>>
>> > Yes. Card text: "If this vampire is acting..."
>> > Enkidu is acting.
>>
>> > The part that may cause confusion is attempting to continue an action
>> > that has already resolved successfully (i.e., the Rush is not blocked,
>> > is successful, and the acting vampire attempts to end combat and continue
>> > the action). While that is not legal in the Form of Mist case (since FoM
>> > continuance adds stealth, and adding stealth is only allowed when stealth
>> > is needed), other continuance could be used, but would do nothing
>> > means: do nothing (since the only thing to continue into after successful
>> > resolution is "action ends").
>>
>> Nothing at all? If Enkidu or his opponent had a .44, could he use the maneuver
>> again? Would Traps and other multiround effects end? I would have thought yes,
>> a new combat would begin (assuming spending the blood to continue the action were
>> allowed at all); it sounds like you're saying no, combat just continues on as if
>> nothing happened. For that matter, would the same round of combat continue, e.g.
>> extra strikes, press resolution, and so forth for the round of combat in which
>> the FoM was played?
>
> You miss his point.
Oh, yea, I did. I guess the parenthetical part was the part that contained the
actual _thing_ that happens at that point in the combat, after all that talk
about the action "continuing". Not disputing LSJ's authority or knowledge of the
rules but just as an amusing aside here, I've got to say that's one of the most
oxymoronic rulings on a situation I've ever heard:
1) Q: What happens when I 'continue' the action as per card text?
2) A: The action continues by immediately ending.
Doesn't sound right, somehow...
Fred
LSJ
> Oh, yea, I did. I guess the parenthetical part was the part that contained the
> actual _thing_ that happens at that point in the combat, after all that talk
> about the action "continuing". Not disputing LSJ's authority or knowledge of the
> rules but just as an amusing aside here, I've got to say that's one of the most
> oxymoronic rulings on a situation I've ever heard:
>
> 1) Q: What happens when I 'continue' the action as per card text?
>
> 2) A: The action continues by immediately ending.
>
> Doesn't sound right, somehow...
Here's your trip itinerary (ports of call):
2 days at pt A.
2 days at pt B.
2 days at pt C.
return Home.
During any of the trip stops, you can call the tour director and end your
current port call and continue your trip.
You decide to do so during the second day at pt C.
What happens (multiple choice):
1. You re-disembark on a new 2-day port call at pt C.
2. You return home.
?
LSJ
> The "end combat and continue the action" effect (e.g., Mirror
> Image)doesn't continue combat, it continues the action. It ends combat.
> Card text.
That should be "e.g., Toreador's Bane at MEL". Mirror Image cannot be used to
continue in non-block combat.
Frederick Scott
Sure, it makes sense when analyzed. I wasn't disputing that. I just thought
as a final result, "continuing-by-ending" superficially sounded oxymoronic.
As do a lot of other things, like civil war, head butt, and lucky stiff.
Fred