Couple of Questions, One Master and One Combat

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Greetings All,

I can't seem to work out the correct search for the following
situations, so I'd appreciate either an answer or the search strings.


Q1. Toreador Grand Ball
If the TGB is in play and the "tapped" vampire is removed from the game
somehow, is TGB still in play?

The same goes for the "unblockable" vampire. Is it required to have
both vampires in play or just when the card is first played?

Q2. Rotschreck + Psyche! + Cardinal Sin - Is this sequence correct?
Jacko performs action, Lambach Blocks. During combat Lambach players
Breath of the Dragon + Rotschreck.

Rotschreck is put onto Jacko. Combat Ends. Jacko plays Psyche so new
combat is about to begin, Lambach plays Cardinal Sin: Insubordination.

Or should Lambach have played Cardinal Sin before the Psyche, right
after the Rotschreck? And if so, is there a window for him to do so?
Since Jacko restarted?

At the end of all of that, if Jacko does or does not go to torpor, he
keeps the Rotschreck on him correct?

Thanks in Advance,
David
16 answers Last reply
More about couple questions master combat
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    LSJ wrote:
    > quetzalcoatl wrote:
    > > I can't seem to work out the correct search for the following
    > > situations, so I'd appreciate either an answer or the search
    strings.
    > >
    > > Q1. Toreador Grand Ball
    > > If the TGB is in play and the "tapped" vampire is removed from the
    game
    > > somehow, is TGB still in play?
    >
    > Yes. Google: "grand ball host leaves play author:LSJ" (and "show
    quoted
    > text" for the applicable context).
    >
    > > The same goes for the "unblockable" vampire. Is it required to have
    > > both vampires in play or just when the card is first played?
    >
    > The latter. (same hit).

    Tangentially related: Mata Hari is chosen as the second Toreador from
    the ball. She untaps normally, right, since the ongoing "does not
    untap" affect refers to "the second Toreador" and not "the second
    vampire"? Likewise if she were chosen as the first, her actions would
    not be unblockable.

    Could make for an interesting deck.

    John
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    The confusion occurred because Psyche starts a new combat, while the
    CS:I is played after combat ends.

    The CS:I would not have been played if Jacko hadn't Psyche-d
    (obviously).

    So what you (LSJ) are saying is that no matter the Psyche being played,
    there is a window to play cards useable "after combat ends" before the
    Psyche activates the new combat? Clarification here would be most
    appreciated.

    David
  3. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    quetzalcoatl wrote:
    > Greetings All,
    >
    > I can't seem to work out the correct search for the following
    > situations, so I'd appreciate either an answer or the search strings.
    >
    > Q1. Toreador Grand Ball
    > If the TGB is in play and the "tapped" vampire is removed from the game
    > somehow, is TGB still in play?
    >
    > The same goes for the "unblockable" vampire. Is it required to have
    > both vampires in play or just when the card is first played?

    Yes. No.

    Decent strategy for a rush deck vs a TGB deck is to remove the
    unblockable vampire, and then not bother to remove the TGB.

    > Q2. Rotschreck + Psyche! + Cardinal Sin - Is this sequence correct?
    > Jacko performs action, Lambach Blocks. During combat Lambach players
    > Breath of the Dragon + Rotschreck.
    >
    > Rotschreck is put onto Jacko. Combat Ends. Jacko plays Psyche so new
    > combat is about to begin, Lambach plays Cardinal Sin: Insubordination.
    >
    > Or should Lambach have played Cardinal Sin before the Psyche, right
    > after the Rotschreck? And if so, is there a window for him to do so?
    > Since Jacko restarted?
    >
    > At the end of all of that, if Jacko does or does not go to torpor, he
    > keeps the Rotschreck on him correct?

    CS:I's window to be played is after Psyche!, since it is a reaction card
    and Psyche! is a combat card. However, you can play CS:I even after
    Psyche! has been played; note that it in this case, no new combat is
    ever entered, so Jacko can't play another Psyche! to stay out of torpor.

    http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/54ea5aa69c7e8a3f?hl=en

    And yes, Jacko keeps the Rotschrek on him.

    --Colin McGuigan
  4. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    quetzalcoatl wrote:
    > I can't seem to work out the correct search for the following
    > situations, so I'd appreciate either an answer or the search strings.
    >
    > Q1. Toreador Grand Ball
    > If the TGB is in play and the "tapped" vampire is removed from the game
    > somehow, is TGB still in play?

    Yes. Google: "grand ball host leaves play author:LSJ" (and "show quoted
    text" for the applicable context).

    > The same goes for the "unblockable" vampire. Is it required to have
    > both vampires in play or just when the card is first played?

    The latter. (same hit).

    > Q2. Rotschreck + Psyche! + Cardinal Sin - Is this sequence correct?
    > Jacko performs action, Lambach Blocks. During combat Lambach players
    > Breath of the Dragon + Rotschreck.
    >
    > Rotschreck is put onto Jacko. Combat Ends. Jacko plays Psyche so new
    > combat is about to begin, Lambach plays Cardinal Sin: Insubordination.

    Yes. The same sort of window in which Obedience could be played.
    AFAIK, this is a new question -- no googling would help.

    > Or should Lambach have played Cardinal Sin before the Psyche, right
    > after the Rotschreck? And if so, is there a window for him to do so?
    > Since Jacko restarted?

    Psyche! goes first, since it is a combat card.

    > At the end of all of that, if Jacko does or does not go to torpor, he
    > keeps the Rotschreck on him correct?

    Yes.

    --
    LSJ (vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply)
    Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
    http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
  5. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    quetzalcoatl wrote:

    > The confusion occurred because Psyche starts a new combat, while the
    > CS:I is played after combat ends.
    >
    > The CS:I would not have been played if Jacko hadn't Psyche-d
    > (obviously).
    >
    > So what you (LSJ) are saying is that no matter the Psyche being played,
    > there is a window to play cards useable "after combat ends" before the
    > Psyche activates the new combat? Clarification here would be most
    > appreciated.

    Psyche! is played after combat ends and before the Psyche!-combat
    begins. You can play effects there just like you can play Obedience
    between the time a block is successful and combat begins.

    (But you can't queue up any more combats, since there's already
    a combat pending.)

    --
    LSJ (vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply)
    Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
    http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
  6. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    In message <1115682733.283017.264570@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
    quetzalcoatl <david@vega.id.au> writes:
    >Q1. Toreador Grand Ball
    >If the TGB is in play and the "tapped" vampire is removed from the game
    >somehow, is TGB still in play?

    Yes. It doesn't go "on" either vampire. It just goes into play, and
    does things to either vampire - tapping them, or granting them
    unblockability, as appropriate.

    >The same goes for the "unblockable" vampire. Is it required to have
    >both vampires in play or just when the card is first played?

    Just when the card is played.

    http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/8c
    1e10e041e2ee02?hl=en

    ***
    > Hmm, what if the second vamp is removed from the game?

    Same thing.
    You can even have the second Toreador stolen.

    It doesn't matter, since card text doesn't put any conditions on the
    handling, status, or presence of the second vamp. He doesn't untap
    as normal, that is all.
    ***


    >Q2. Rotschreck + Psyche! + Cardinal Sin - Is this sequence correct?
    >Jacko performs action, Lambach Blocks. During combat Lambach players
    >Breath of the Dragon + Rotschreck.

    Minor point: Lambach doesn't play Rotschreck, his controller does.


    >Rotschreck is put onto Jacko. Combat Ends. Jacko plays Psyche so new
    >combat is about to begin, Lambach plays Cardinal Sin: Insubordination.

    That's fine:

    http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/54ea5
    aa69c7e8a3f?hl=en

    ***
    The Psyche! is played first.
    Then, after the base combat but before the Psyche! combat starts, CS:I
    can be played (since it isn't trying to start a new combat, just like
    Obedience could be played). Same thing if you swap HL or FR for Psyche!
    in the example, although then you go to 1.6.1.6 to see which can be
    played first.
    ***

    That the Psyche! was preceded by a Rotschreck isn't relevant.

    >Or should Lambach have played Cardinal Sin before the Psyche,

    Psyche!'s timing window is before that of CS:I. That is, if you played
    CS:I first, you would give up the opportunity to play Psyche!

    > right
    >after the Rotschreck? And if so, is there a window for him to do so?
    >Since Jacko restarted?
    >
    >At the end of all of that, if Jacko does or does not go to torpor, he
    >keeps the Rotschreck on him correct?

    Rotschreck is always put on the relevant vampire, regardless of Psyche!
    etc.

    --
    James Coupe "Why do so many talented people turn out to be sexual
    PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D deviants? Why can't they just be normal like me and
    EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 look at internet pictures of men's cocks all day?"
    13D7E668C3695D623D5D -- www.livejournal.com/users/scarletdemon/
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Daneel wrote:
    > On Tue, 10 May 2005 10:22:45 GMT, LSJ
    <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com>
    > > Johannes Walch wrote:
    > >> Daneel wrote:
    > >>>>> Tangentially related: Mata Hari is chosen as the second
    Toreador from
    > >>>>> the ball. She untaps normally, right, since the ongoing "does
    not
    > >>>>> untap" affect refers to "the second Toreador" and not "the
    second
    > >>>>> vampire"? Likewise if she were chosen as the first, her actions
    would
    > >>>>> not be unblockable.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> You cannot choose Mata Hari as second Toreador because she is
    Ravnos.
    > >>>> See the extensive discussions on her in previous threads (e.g
    cannot
    > >>>> gain blood via Tabriz Assembly). She fullfills the Toreador
    > >>>> requirement of the Grand Ball card to be played but then you
    have to
    > >>>> choose two other Toreador ;-)
    > >>>
    > >>> If you play the TGB using her special, it treats her like a
    Toreador.
    > >>> The line is AFAIK drawn between any immediate and lingering
    effects;
    > >>> so she is a Toreador when you put the card in play and apply any
    > >>> immediate effects (like choosing two Toreador), but she reverts
    to
    > >>> being a Ravnos for any continuous effects (either of the
    subsequent
    > >>> TGB effects are like that).
    > >>
    > >> Sounds reasonable. But anyway it would be good to have it
    confirmed by
    > >> LSJ.
    > >
    > > Johannes is correct.
    >
    > Is there a reason (aside of game balance issues)? Just curious what I
    got
    > wrong.

    Johannes's explanation is correct.

    Cards a minion plays as something treat him as that something (for
    purposes of playing the card). But once in play, the minion is no
    longer playing the card, so is no longer playing the card as something
    else, so is no longer treated as anything other than what the minion
    actually is.
  8. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    jnewquist@difsol.com wrote:
    > Tangentially related: Mata Hari is chosen as the second Toreador from
    > the ball. She untaps normally, right, since the ongoing "does not
    > untap" affect refers to "the second Toreador" and not "the second
    > vampire"? Likewise if she were chosen as the first, her actions would
    > not be unblockable.

    You cannot choose Mata Hari as second Toreador because she is Ravnos.
    See the extensive discussions on her in previous threads (e.g cannot
    gain blood via Tabriz Assembly). She fullfills the Toreador requirement
    of the Grand Ball card to be played but then you have to choose two
    other Toreador ;-)

    > Could make for an interesting deck.

    Of course.
  9. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    On Tue, 10 May 2005 08:00:32 +0200, Johannes Walch
    <johannes.walch@vekn.de> wrote:

    > jnewquist@difsol.com wrote:
    >> Tangentially related: Mata Hari is chosen as the second Toreador from
    >> the ball. She untaps normally, right, since the ongoing "does not
    >> untap" affect refers to "the second Toreador" and not "the second
    >> vampire"? Likewise if she were chosen as the first, her actions would
    >> not be unblockable.
    >
    > You cannot choose Mata Hari as second Toreador because she is Ravnos.
    > See the extensive discussions on her in previous threads (e.g cannot
    > gain blood via Tabriz Assembly). She fullfills the Toreador requirement
    > of the Grand Ball card to be played but then you have to choose two
    > other Toreador ;-)

    If you play the TGB using her special, it treats her like a Toreador.
    The line is AFAIK drawn between any immediate and lingering effects;
    so she is a Toreador when you put the card in play and apply any
    immediate effects (like choosing two Toreador), but she reverts to
    being a Ravnos for any continuous effects (either of the subsequent
    TGB effects are like that).

    --
    Bye,

    Daneel
  10. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Daneel wrote:

    >>> Tangentially related: Mata Hari is chosen as the second Toreador from
    >>> the ball. She untaps normally, right, since the ongoing "does not
    >>> untap" affect refers to "the second Toreador" and not "the second
    >>> vampire"? Likewise if she were chosen as the first, her actions would
    >>> not be unblockable.
    >>
    >>
    >> You cannot choose Mata Hari as second Toreador because she is Ravnos.
    >> See the extensive discussions on her in previous threads (e.g cannot
    >> gain blood via Tabriz Assembly). She fullfills the Toreador
    >> requirement of the Grand Ball card to be played but then you have to
    >> choose two other Toreador ;-)
    >
    >
    > If you play the TGB using her special, it treats her like a Toreador.
    > The line is AFAIK drawn between any immediate and lingering effects;
    > so she is a Toreador when you put the card in play and apply any
    > immediate effects (like choosing two Toreador), but she reverts to
    > being a Ravnos for any continuous effects (either of the subsequent
    > TGB effects are like that).

    Sounds reasonable. But anyway it would be good to have it confirmed by LSJ.

    --
    johannes walch
  11. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Johannes Walch wrote:
    > Daneel wrote:
    >>>> Tangentially related: Mata Hari is chosen as the second Toreador from
    >>>> the ball. She untaps normally, right, since the ongoing "does not
    >>>> untap" affect refers to "the second Toreador" and not "the second
    >>>> vampire"? Likewise if she were chosen as the first, her actions would
    >>>> not be unblockable.
    >>>
    >>> You cannot choose Mata Hari as second Toreador because she is Ravnos.
    >>> See the extensive discussions on her in previous threads (e.g cannot
    >>> gain blood via Tabriz Assembly). She fullfills the Toreador
    >>> requirement of the Grand Ball card to be played but then you have to
    >>> choose two other Toreador ;-)
    >>
    >> If you play the TGB using her special, it treats her like a Toreador.
    >> The line is AFAIK drawn between any immediate and lingering effects;
    >> so she is a Toreador when you put the card in play and apply any
    >> immediate effects (like choosing two Toreador), but she reverts to
    >> being a Ravnos for any continuous effects (either of the subsequent
    >> TGB effects are like that).
    >
    > Sounds reasonable. But anyway it would be good to have it confirmed by LSJ.

    Johannes is correct.

    --
    LSJ (vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply)
    Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
    http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
  12. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    On Tue, 10 May 2005 10:22:45 GMT, LSJ <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com>
    wrote:

    > Johannes Walch wrote:
    >> Daneel wrote:
    >>>>> Tangentially related: Mata Hari is chosen as the second Toreador from
    >>>>> the ball. She untaps normally, right, since the ongoing "does not
    >>>>> untap" affect refers to "the second Toreador" and not "the second
    >>>>> vampire"? Likewise if she were chosen as the first, her actions would
    >>>>> not be unblockable.
    >>>>
    >>>> You cannot choose Mata Hari as second Toreador because she is Ravnos.
    >>>> See the extensive discussions on her in previous threads (e.g cannot
    >>>> gain blood via Tabriz Assembly). She fullfills the Toreador
    >>>> requirement of the Grand Ball card to be played but then you have to
    >>>> choose two other Toreador ;-)
    >>>
    >>> If you play the TGB using her special, it treats her like a Toreador.
    >>> The line is AFAIK drawn between any immediate and lingering effects;
    >>> so she is a Toreador when you put the card in play and apply any
    >>> immediate effects (like choosing two Toreador), but she reverts to
    >>> being a Ravnos for any continuous effects (either of the subsequent
    >>> TGB effects are like that).
    >>
    >> Sounds reasonable. But anyway it would be good to have it confirmed by
    >> LSJ.
    >
    > Johannes is correct.

    Is there a reason (aside of game balance issues)? Just curious what I got
    wrong.

    --
    Bye,

    Daneel
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Colin McGuigan wrote:
    > Daneel wrote:
    > > I assumed that when you play a card you must specify all of its
    > > parameters; like in the case of Minion Tap announcing the vampire
    > > and the amount of blood is part of playing the card (other
    > > Methuselahs may decide whether to Sudden Reversal, for example,
    > > based on that piece of information).
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > It's my reading that you are correct, and LSJ said Johannes was
    correct
    > when he agreed with you.

    Hmmm. Yes. Thanks. I seemed to have tripped over the attribution lines.
    Daneel is correct (and with the correct explanation).
  14. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    On 10 May 2005 06:15:24 -0700, LSJ <vtesrep@white-wolf.com> wrote:

    >> Is there a reason (aside of game balance issues)? Just curious what I
    > got
    >> wrong.
    >
    > Johannes's explanation is correct.
    >
    > Cards a minion plays as something treat him as that something (for
    > purposes of playing the card). But once in play, the minion is no
    > longer playing the card, so is no longer playing the card as something
    > else, so is no longer treated as anything other than what the minion
    > actually is.

    I assumed that when you play a card you must specify all of its
    parameters; like in the case of Minion Tap announcing the vampire
    and the amount of blood is part of playing the card (other
    Methuselahs may decide whether to Sudden Reversal, for example,
    based on that piece of information).

    This assumption made me further assume that if any choices, targets
    and options must be declared when the card is played, declaring
    those choices, targets and options happen during the playing of
    the card.

    Meaning, that for example in the case of Toreador Grand Ball* the
    effects would be separated into immediate and continuous effects:
    (choose two ready Toreador - happens right when you play the card)
    would consider her to be a Toreador, but any continuous effects
    (that are a result of this card *being in play* as opposed to this
    card being *played*) would not.

    *Toreador Grand Ball: "Put this card in play. Choose 2 ready Toreador
    you control. The first Toreador's non-bleed actions cannot be blocked.
    The second Toreador does not untap as normal during the untap phase;
    tap the second Toreador. Any minion may burn this card as a (D) action;
    Nosferatu get -1 stealth when attempting that action."

    --
    Bye,

    Daneel
  15. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Daneel wrote:
    > I assumed that when you play a card you must specify all of its
    > parameters; like in the case of Minion Tap announcing the vampire
    > and the amount of blood is part of playing the card (other
    > Methuselahs may decide whether to Sudden Reversal, for example,
    > based on that piece of information).

    <snip>

    It's my reading that you are correct, and LSJ said Johannes was correct
    when he agreed with you.

    --Colin McGuigan
  16. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    On 10 May 2005 12:45:29 -0700, LSJ <vtesrep@white-wolf.com> wrote:

    >
    > Colin McGuigan wrote:
    >> Daneel wrote:
    >> > I assumed that when you play a card you must specify all of its
    >> > parameters; like in the case of Minion Tap announcing the vampire
    >> > and the amount of blood is part of playing the card (other
    >> > Methuselahs may decide whether to Sudden Reversal, for example,
    >> > based on that piece of information).
    >>
    >> <snip>
    >>
    >> It's my reading that you are correct, and LSJ said Johannes was
    > correct
    >> when he agreed with you.
    >
    > Hmmm. Yes. Thanks. I seemed to have tripped over the attribution lines.
    > Daneel is correct (and with the correct explanation).

    Thanks! I was beginning to doubt myself... ;)

    --
    Bye,

    Daneel
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Video Games