Timing of "Kindred Spirits" under "The Rising"

Pascal wrote:

Yes. I'm considering changing the ruling on the unnamed to have both cards work the same way (and reduce confusion). But that will be more explicit in the incoming RTR.

The pool gain for Kindred Spirits is part of the action itself. The pool gain for The Unnamed is not. LSJ's ruling is perfectly logical.

Molloy wrote:

The pool gain for Kindred Spirits is part of the action itself. The pool gain for The Unnamed is not. LSJ's ruling is perfectly logical.

Being logical is not enough sometime, and it's pretty subjective. As of I, I don't really see how thoses two are differents, mainly because I don't see how to justify that the pool gain is part of the action in kindred and not with the unnamed other than "it's like that".

It's so perfectly logical, that at least 5 people are asking the question why two cards with identical wording function differently and contradictory to another ruling on a card that has similar timing on a different effect.

Ohlmann wrote:

Couldn't the difference between Kindred Spirit and the Unnamed be that Kindred Spirit is an action (that must be resolved completely before gaining the edge) while the Unnamed trigger on the action, like gaining the edge trigger on a successful bleed ?

This.

Molloy wrote:

The pool gain for Kindred Spirits is part of the action itself. The pool gain for The Unnamed is not. LSJ's ruling is perfectly logical.

This.

Ohlmann wrote:

Molloy wrote:

The pool gain for Kindred Spirits is part of the action itself. The pool gain for The Unnamed is not. LSJ's ruling is perfectly logical.

Being logical is not enough sometime, and it's pretty subjective. As of I, I don't really see how thoses two are differents, mainly because I don't see how to justify that the pool gain is part of the action in kindred and not with the unnamed other than "it's like that".

You resolve the whole action card before doing else. The gaining of pool is part of the card. Only after the card is resolved you will get the edge from the bleed (if successful). If you don't already have the edge, you won't get the pool from the card while The Rising is in play.

If Unnamed would have same effect as Kindred spirits, it would be worded as in card ability for Unnamed like so: Independent: The unnamed may strike: 2R aggravated damage as a strike that costs 1 blood. The Unnamed can bleed for 1 and his controller gains 2 pool from the bloodbank if this bleed is successful. Infernal.

But see, that would be completely different vampire, for he couldn't use say cameraphone bleed to get the 2 pool, or other bleed actions except his own. With his current ability, the unnamed doesn't have action that gives pool if you bleed successfully (like kindred spirits) but he has action modifier -like ability that kicks in after the action is resolved (like forced march).

I hope this helped anyone who wasn't sure about this by now. It is pretty clear. Resolve things card at a time.

Izaak wrote:

It's so perfectly logical, that at least 5 people are asking the question why two cards with identical wording function differently and contradictory to another ruling on a card that has similar timing on a different effect.

They use some of the same words. One is an action card and the other is a crypt card.

An action card that says "Bleed at +1 bleed" and an action modifier that says "+1 bleed" use "identical wording" but are nonetheless not identical in function. The issue at hand is a little subtler, but only a little. The pool gain on KS is part of resolving the action because it's part of the text on an action card. The Unnamed's pool gain is not part of the text on an action card, nor is it part of the text of an action allowed by a card in play, so it is not part of the resolving the action.

Kude wrote:

I hope this helped anyone who wasn't sure about this by now. It is pretty clear. Resolve things card at a time.

It's the current way it work. It's also a confusing mess, because things work differently with the same formulation, which is supposedly why Pascal work to see if a less confusing ruling is possible.

And unlike what you explain, not alway all of a action card is resolved before either effect happen : they can have delayed effect which happen well after the action resolution. And the current text use an ambiguous formulation.