file Submission: Calling Song

16 Jan 2019 23:03 #92953 by jamesatzephyr

jblacey wrote: I would think it be similar to this: (or at least that was the intention)

Eagle's Sight rulings: Can be used to overcome the restrictions on blocking (allowing a non-target Methuselah to block a directed action or a non-adjacent Methuselah to block an undirected action). It won't overcome any other restrictions on blocking (like stealth, Seduction, Day Operation, or a prior "I don't block" decision). [RTR 20020501]


Eagle Sight isn't a relevant comparison for the "card text restricting blocks" text, because that isn't text found on Eagle Sight - it's something different. Eagle Sight says: "ignoring the normal prey, predator, or target restrictions". In earlier texts, it didn't have that text, just that you could attempt a block - it didn't have any text that overrode (for example) Day Operation.

jblacey wrote: Tyler McGill
Camarilla: Tyler gets an additional vote when any Methuselah burns the Edge for a vote. He cannot block Nosferatu.

Yseult
Sabbat: When Yseult plays a card that requires Melpominee [mel] , you may draw an additional card. Discard afterward. Yseult cannot block vampires with capacity above 4.


So are you only talking about vampire card text that restricts that vampire from blocking? Eagle's Sight doesn't let Tyler or Yseult block Nofseratu or vampires with capacity above 4.

jblacey wrote: I am less concerned about the card text that says things like "has to burn a blood" or "-1 Intercept" though as I considered that a normal cost, not an exclusion.


None of the four cards I've asked about provide -1 intercept or "has to burn a blood".


Could you specifically answer:

a) Is it your intention that "card text restricting blocks" means that a vampire with Calling Song can or can't block an action that is not blockable by vampires, having been modified with Day Operation?

b) Is it your intention that "card text restricting blocks" means that a vampire with Calling Song can or can't block an action that is unblockable, having been modified with Horrific Countenance?

c) Is it your intention that "card text restricting blocks" means that a vampire with Calling Song whose block attempt has been failed and who is unable to block the action again, having been hit with superior Elder Impersonation, can simply announce another attempt to block because they are ignoring the card text from Elder Impersonation that is stopping them from blocking?

d) Is it your intention that "card text restricting blocks" means that a vampire with Calling Song who is hit with Crocodile's Tongue can allow Crocodile's Tongue to be played, not cancel it, and simply block again because it ignores the text restricting blocks on Crocodile's Tongue? (This could also be the case if another of the same Methuselah's minions (A) attempts to block, Crocodile's Tongue is played and not cancelled, and then vampire B with Calling Song attempts to block, ignoring the card text restricting blocks: "The blocking minion's controller cannot attempt to block this action again.")

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
16 Jan 2019 23:18 #92954 by Nac
Replied by Nac on topic Submission: Calling Song
i still believe giving them a blocking-able crypt is mechanicly easier than solving the points that James brings. You could even go with "Sons of Discord being hunted everywhere, so of course they can't be distracted"(well they did and they died :P) if you want thematic coherence. But we also don't know what will be of bloodlines in V5 so there could be space for a different clan flaw or other context for it

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Jan 2019 01:33 #92955 by jblacey
Replied by jblacey on topic Submission: Calling Song

jamesatzephyr wrote: So are you only talking about vampire card text that restricts that vampire from blocking? Eagle's Sight doesn't let Tyler or Yseult block Nofseratu or vampires with capacity above 4.


Yes, vampire card text was my initial concern. I probably should have been more explicit.

Thematically the way I justified the card is Daughter starts singing and instead of the Daughter chasing after the acting minion they find themselves turning the corner walking into the singing Daughter instead of their intended destination.

jblacey wrote: None of the four cards I've asked about provide -1 intercept or "has to burn a blood".


True, but there are other Daughters that have that card text which is what I was thinking about.

Could you specifically answer:

a) Is it your intention that "card text restricting blocks" means that a vampire with Calling Song can or can't block an action that is not blockable by vampires, having been modified with Day Operation?


Seems too strong if it could block unblockable actions and thematically if the action was taking place during the day it doesn't make sense that the Daughter could block. To my knowledge most unblockable actions are a result of it being physically impossible to block the acting minion.

b) Is it your intention that "card text restricting blocks" means that a vampire with Calling Song can or can't block an action that is unblockable, having been modified with Horrific Countenance?


Similar to above. Should not be able to block. Being able to block unblockable actions seems bad.

c) Is it your intention that "card text restricting blocks" means that a vampire with Calling Song whose block attempt has been failed and who is unable to block the action again, having been hit with superior Elder Impersonation, can simply announce another attempt to block because they are ignoring the card text from Elder Impersonation that is stopping them from blocking?


This is an intriguing question, because I can see justification for ignoring "block fails" and allowing this card to override effects like Elder Impersonation. This thought did not initially occur to me, but this would be a reasonable interpretation. The idea being this vampire should be able to block and not excluded if the action is blockable by a vampire.

d) Is it your intention that "card text restricting blocks" means that a vampire with Calling Song who is hit with Crocodile's Tongue can allow Crocodile's Tongue to be played, not cancel it, and simply block again because it ignores the text restricting blocks on Crocodile's Tongue? (This could also be the case if another of the same Methuselah's minions (A) attempts to block, Crocodile's Tongue is played and not cancelled, and then vampire B with Calling Song attempts to block, ignoring the card text restricting blocks: "The blocking minion's controller cannot attempt to block this action again.")


Yes, based on the same reason as above.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.110 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum