Re: Strix superior and the edge

Ohlmann wrote:

Making the bleed successful anyway have the badded advantage to make the card less confusing. You can't easily guess that Strix make the bleed fail but not the action, and I can see a lot of people having it wrong.

You can already Freak Drive at after successfully resolving a bleed for 0 damage, so changing it so Strix would have a successful action but unsuccessful bleed is not a new feature of the game.

Successful actions only require that the action is not blocked or failed by some other means.

Successful bleeds (and therefore gaining the Edge) require the bleed action to resolve for 1+.

The easiest example would be to have a vampire with bleed for 1. The defending Methuselah chooses not to block and then plays Telepathic Counter at , reducing the bleed to -1. When the action is not blocked, it is a successful action, but the bleed amount is -1 and will resolve for 0 pool damage. This makes it a successful action and unsuccessful bleed. So the acting vampire can now play Freak Drive at and untap.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

It is a successful action but it is NOT a successful bleed since there is no pool damage. Successful bleed actions need there to be an actual pool loss from the action resolution. The edge should not be gained from a bleed action which did not result in pool loss.

Not per the current rules (already quoted earlier in this discussion).
Rulebook 6.1.1 wrote:

Additionally, if the action succeeds and the bleed amount is one or more, then the bleed is successful and the controller of the acting minion gets the Edge, taking it from the Methuselah who has it, if any.

But Pascal, to be Devil's Advocate, how can there be a bleed amount of one or more if these is no Pool lost at resolution? It is easily argued that there a bleed amount is zero if the resulting pool loss is zero. I don't see why this card should be treated, regarding the edge, in any way differently to Spying Mission.

Yes, the acting minion should be able to play Freak Drive at . But no, I cannot see any good reason (thematically and in-game) for an action which causes no pool damage to result in movement of the edge.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

But Pascal, to be Devil's Advocate, how can there be a bleed amount of one or more if these is no Pool lost at resolution?

The bleed amount and the amount burned by a Methuselah aren't the same thing. (Though, clearly, in 95% of situations they are.)

Several examples:

• Protected Resources - the bleed amount is unchanged, but you only burn 2 pool (maximum)
• Night Moves (and similar 'ignore the excess' actions) - if I bleed you for four with Night Moves, by adding modifiers etc., it's still targetable by Archon Investigation. The amount is never reduced by Night Moves, but the pool burned is capped at one. [LSJ 20010502]
• Alamut cares about the amount of pool burned, not the bleed amount. (Which could come up fairly easily - I bleed you for two, you're on 1 pool, I oust you, Alamut gets one counter.)

So we already disconnect "bleed amount" and "pool burned". The rules on a successful bleed currently say they care about the former.



It also wouldn't be beyond the realms of imagination to imagine a card like:
Intuitively, that would probably be regarded by most people as a successful bleed.

Actually that's entirely the opposite of what I would call a successful bleed, using your Hypothetical MOoT.

1) You took an action that wasn't blocked.
2) The action WOULD have dealt pool damage.
3) The MOoT was played and no pool damage was done as part of resolving the action. The Edge will not move.

So I would say that it was a successful action (was not blocked) that was an unsuccessful bleed (<1 pool was burned at resolution). Therefore the Edge should not move.

Strix functions differently to both Protected Resources and Night Moves (see below). Neither of them stops there being any pool damage, they limit the actual pool loss to 1 or 2. Strix explicity says that the bleed action burns no pool; a reduction of the bleed to 0 (if you want to play semantics the other way) or a limit of the pool loss to 0. Either way, there was not 1+ pool damage done as resolution of the action so the Edge shouldn't move.

The Edge has always been a 'reward' for taking successful bleed actions that damage your prey. Why should we now suddenly reward people for failing to deal pool damage to their prey?



Protected Resources and Night Moves don't stop pool being burned, they just alter the amount of pool burned.

Night Moves example
If you take the action Night Moves and it is not blocked, prey plays a Telepathic Counter at and you then follow it with say Conditioning @ ... it works out to be a bleed a +3/+6 stealth for a bleed amount of 2 which then burns only 1 pool but it still burns pool. Successful action (not blocked) and bleed (1+ pool was lost at resolution of the action)

Protected Resources example
If you bleed someone for 4 with Protected Resources and you are not blocked. The bleed would be successful and Protected Resources changes the pool that is burned to 2 or less but they still burn at least 1 pool. Successful action (not blocked) and bleed (1+ pool was lost at resolution of the action)

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

The Edge has always been a 'reward' for taking successful bleed actions that damage your prey. Why should we now suddenly reward people for failing to deal pool damage to their prey?

Wrong.
When it comes to bleed actions, gaining the Edge is only triggered on successful bleed actions (see quotes above).
Pool damage is most of the time related, but not always. There is no generic rule on pool damage vs the Edge (except, maybe, that if the target of the bleed does burn pool to the bleed, then you do get the Edge - but this isn't an equivalence).