Hidden Lurker question
Mikko Saari
never seen anyone to even try to block it?
--
for more info msaari
finger msa...@tukki.jyu.fi @jyu.fi
"if in doubt, stab Austria"
292
myrm...@my-deja.com
> Is Hidden Lurker a special action which cannot be blocked or why I
> have never seen anyone to even try to block it?
No, it is not a special action. There could be a few reasons why you
haven't seen anyone try to block it:
1) They may not know that they can block it. It seems as though the
Lurking vamp simply joins a combat already in progress, so there is no
chance to block him. Actually, he's taking an action to become involved
in that combat, and that action can be blocked.
2) Hidden Lurker requires Obfuscate, and most vamps with Obfuscate will
have no problem laying on stealth should you attempt to block the Hidden
Lurker. So maybe they just knew they'd get out-stealthed anyway.
3) If someone is playing a Hidden Lurker, it is to get into combat with
another minion on purpose. And if that's the case, they usually have
some decent combat ability and you wouldn't want to tangle with them
anyway.
Other than these, I can't really think of why you haven't seen anyone
block a Hidden Lurker... unless nobody you know has any. =)
p.
>
> --
> for more info msaari
> finger msa...@tukki.jyu.fi @jyu.fi
> "if in doubt, stab Austria"
> 292
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Richard Zopf
Mikko Saari wrote in message <7rso41$q...@tukki.cc.jyu.fi>...
>Is Hidden Lurker a special action which cannot be blocked or why I have
>never seen anyone to even try to block it?
>
Regards,
R. David Zopf
Atom Weaver (& V:EKN Prince of Charlotte, NC)
James Coupe
<msa...@tukki.cc.jyu.fi> writes
>Is Hidden Lurker a special action which cannot be blocked or why I have
>never seen anyone to even try to block it?
It was supposed to be a special action which cannot be blocked - most
people didn't even think of doing it.
However, it was changed to being an action modifier played by another
vampire - like Cloak the Gathering at superior. Hence, it now *cannot*
be blocked.
--
James Coupe (Prince of Mercia, England)
Vampire: Elder Kindred Network
http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net http://www.obeah.demon.co.uk
James Coupe
>Other than these, I can't really think of why you haven't seen anyone
>block a Hidden Lurker...
Because they know the errata on it.
Derek S. Ray
>
>> Is Hidden Lurker a special action which cannot be blocked or why I
>> have never seen anyone to even try to block it?
>
>No, it is not a special action. There could be a few reasons why you
>haven't seen anyone try to block it:
>
>1) They may not know that they can block it. It seems as though the
>Lurking vamp simply joins a combat already in progress, so there is no
>chance to block him. Actually, he's taking an action to become involved
>in that combat, and that action can be blocked.
Except that it is an action modifier, like Fast Reaction, and it
cannot be blocked, so that would be the first reason you haven't seen
anyone try to block it. =)
>2) Hidden Lurker requires Obfuscate, and most vamps with Obfuscate will
>have no problem laying on stealth should you attempt to block the Hidden
>Lurker. So maybe they just knew they'd get out-stealthed anyway.
This is a typical response to any vamp with Obfuscate, though, and
usually correct too. "You have superior what? mmm. I fail to
attempt to block, allowing you to cycle NO steatlh."
>3) If someone is playing a Hidden Lurker, it is to get into combat with
>another minion on purpose. And if that's the case, they usually have
>some decent combat ability and you wouldn't want to tangle with them
>anyway.
Well, that too. It's much like blocking a Bum's Rush, except you
wouldn't gain ANY remove-his-maneuver benefit and would just get a
-different- minion clocked instead.
>Other than these, I can't really think of why you haven't seen anyone
>block a Hidden Lurker... unless nobody you know has any. =)
The biggest reason is that nobody plays with it, because card text on
Hidden Lurker means it's only usable when the original action was
blocked. You can't Rush with one vamp, have the other vamp play S:CE,
and then Hidden Lurker to nail him if he didn't block. (This would
make the Assamites even more combat-viable, if a little unwieldy...)
-- Derek
(replying by email? remove the nospam from my domain :)
James Coupe
s.net>, Derek S. Ray <lor...@nospam.nineball.org> writes
>Except that it is an action modifier, like Fast Reaction
Fast Reaction is a reaction card, not an action modifier.
Madman2001
usually correct too. "You have superior what? mmm. I fail to
In other words, one cannot play stealth cards unless your vampire is
blocked??
Madman, the newbie
--
Posted via Talkway - http://www.talkway.com
Exchange ideas on practically anything (tm).
James Coupe
s.net>, Derek S. Ray <lor...@nospam.nineball.org> writes
>wouldn't gain ANY remove-his-maneuver benefit and would just get a
>-different- minion clocked instead.
Actually, were it still to be an action, you would go into combat from a
block, not from the card. Hence, the restriction on striking would not
be there - a fairly hefty bonus - in the same way that the maneuver is
not there in a blocked Bum's Rush.
James Coupe
Madman2001 <Mad...@madman.com> writes
>In other words, one cannot play stealth cards unless your vampire is
>blocked??
You cannot play stealth unless you need stealth. If your vampire is
unblocked, you do not need stealth to evade intercept.
Mikko Saari
> The biggest reason is that nobody plays with it, because card text on
> Hidden Lurker means it's only usable when the original action was
> blocked. You can't Rush with one vamp, have the other vamp play S:CE,
> and then Hidden Lurker to nail him if he didn't block. (This would
> make the Assamites even more combat-viable, if a little unwieldy...)
Well, I threw two or three in my pot/obf deck... Bum's Rushes and Ambushes
get blocked every once in a while... Though, it really is a card which you
can't base your deck on (I've tried :)
--
for more info msaari
finger msa...@tukki.jyu.fi @jyu.fi
"if in doubt, stab Austria"
291
Jasper Phillips
Madman2001 <Mad...@madman.com> wrote:
>>>This is a typical response to any vamp with Obfuscate, though, and
>usually correct too. "You have superior what? mmm. I fail to
>attempt to block, allowing you to cycle NO stealth."<<
>blocked??
Correct. Nor can one play intercept if his target is at zero stealth.
In general you can't play action modifiers or reactions unless you
actually need them. One of the biggest costs of a card in Jyhad,
and a strong balancing factor considering one immediately redraws.
--
/\ Jasper Phillips
/VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|~"~"~"~"~"~"----------........____ jaz
j^^^^^^^^^^^^^\/"~"~"~"~-----------........._____ ~"~--.
* http://www.engr.orst.edu/~philljas/ "~"~'--`
myrm...@my-deja.com
> > Other than these, I can't really think of why you haven't seen
> > anyone block a Hidden Lurker...
> Because they know the errata on it.
Aw geez. Thank you for correcting me there, James. I just cannot keep
track of all the errata, I guess. But then I shouldn't be posting
answers if I don't, eh? Heee. Well, I thought I did anyway.
Hmm... so what prompted the errata? Was it to make the card function as
was intended, or was it considered useless previously?
p.
LSJ
>
> In article <7rso41$q...@tukki.cc.jyu.fi>, Mikko Saari
> <msa...@tukki.cc.jyu.fi> writes
> >never seen anyone to even try to block it?
>
> people didn't even think of doing it.
It was supposed to be an action modifier - it was simply misprinted in
the Jyhad version. And the misprint made some of the text seem strange,
generating questions from this group. When the V:TES version was printed,
it "corrected" the text to match the 'action' status.
A reading of the Jyhad card text should illustrate the point:
Only usable after an acting minion that you control other than
this vampire has just completed combat. This vampire now enters
combat with the blocking minion. This vampire is tapped. The first
round of this combat, the blocking minion cannot use any strikes.
Why say "this vampire is tapped" is the card is an action card - minions
tap to take actions by default.
It can only be used by a vampire who is not the acting minion - which is
strange for an action card.
> However, it was changed to being an action modifier played by another
> vampire - like Cloak the Gathering at superior. Hence, it now *cannot*
> be blocked.
Correct.
--
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
LSJ
>
> In article <6i6F3.13199$LL2.1...@c01read02-admin.service.talkway.com>,
> Madman2001 <Mad...@madman.com> wrote:
> >>>This is a typical response to any vamp with Obfuscate, though, and
> >usually correct too. "You have superior what? mmm. I fail to
> >attempt to block, allowing you to cycle NO stealth."<<
> >In other words, one cannot play stealth cards unless your vampire is
> >blocked??
>
> Correct. Nor can one play intercept if his target is at zero stealth.
Unless one current has intercept of less than zero. :-)
Better wording is: one cannot play intercept unless one needs intercept
(and one doesn't need intercept unless one is attempting to block and
the acting minion's stealth exceeds one's intercept).
> In general you can't play action modifiers or reactions unless you
> actually need them.
This is only true of intercept-adding effects and stealth-adding effects.
You can play superior Eagle's Sight even if you are already capable of
blocking the action, for instance.
Richard Zopf
myrm...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7s5q8t$p8m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>
>Hmm... so what prompted the errata? Was it to make the card function as
>was intended, or was it considered useless previously?
>
with the phrases "tap this vampire" and "acting minion other than this one",
which are redundant when put on an action card.