Caseless Rounds & Sawed-Off Shotgun

On a related note (I don't consider it worth starting a new topic), I thought about milking even more damage out of the Mass Reality thingy and wanted to check if it actually worked.

So you got Mass Reality or few in place and your vamp is equipped with two Foldable Machine Guns and a Ghoul Retainer.

Am I correct in assuming that if the Ghoul Retainer, even though not strictly the "bearer", uses a Foldable Machine Gun it also gets a additional strike with it?


Ghoul Retainer
Ghoul with 2 life. 1 strength.
During the initial strike resolution each round, the Ghoul Retainer inflicts 1 damage or may use a weapon not used by the employing minion (or another retainer) that round (either before or after). This is not a strike, although it does count as using the weapon.


Foldable Machine Gun
1R damage each strike, with an optional maneuver each combat. This maneuver cannot be used on the first round. When bearer strikes with this gun, he or she gets an optional additional strike this round, only usable to strike with this gun.

Lönkka wrote:

Am I correct in assuming that if the Ghoul Retainer, even though not strictly the "bearer", uses a Foldable Machine Gun it also gets a additional strike with it?

No.

Rulings wrote:

The Ghoul is never the "bearer" of the weapon that it uses. Any side-effect of using the weapon (e.g. Zip Gun, Grenade) is applied to the employing minion, as normal. [TOM 19951114]

Are the additional strikes granted to the employer? No, see the precedent on Meat Hook, and the card text on Ghoul Retainer.

[LSJ 20020711]

LSJ wrote:

> if so, can you burn a garotte your Ghoul retainer used to burn the
> opposing vampire if it went to torpor from the garotte?

No. It isn't a strike.


> do you get a press if your ghoul retainer whacks someone with a meat
> hook?

No. It isn't a strike.

The reasoning for this was expanded in [LSJ 20080211] . (LSJ is mostly agreeing with someone else's analysis.)

LSJ wrote:

> Then it occurred to me that the answer might lie in the text of GR
> requiring that the weapon in question "is not being used by the
> employing minion ... during that round." Taking damage does not count
> as "use" of the weapon, but I suppose the other effects do. This
> could be construed as preventing both minion and GR from using the
> same weapon in the same round, even if the minion's use is subsequent
> to that of the GR. (It is crystal clear from text that GR cannot use
> a weapon currently or previously used that round by the minion, but
> less clear that the minion is restricted from using a weapon that was
> used EARLIER that round by GR).

Very nice analysis. Better than the excuses I was about to cobble together, I'm
sure.

> Then it occurred to me that I did not know whether a minion could
> additional-strike with a weapon used by GR earlier that round. I did
> a brief search on this, but could find no rulings. This used to be
> possible, when GR's text forbad use of a weapon being used by the
> minion "presently" rather than "during that round". I think most
> players assume it is still possible. Has this changed with the new
> card text?

I've probably been assuming it, too.

But the "not being used this round" has been there since the 1995 printing. (The
1994 printing used "presently" instead, as you note).

I hadn't noticed the change, but it seems to offer the path to the current rulings.

> If such (subsequent) additional strikes by the minion are no longer
> possible, then the rulings on Meat Hook and Garrote make perfect sense
> on the same logic. Otherwise ....

Well, then. Let's go with that.

That is, benefiting from the press, additional strike or whatever would mean the minion used it, and the Ghoul Retainer card text is being read as saying you can't - prohibiting both past AND future use in the round.


LSJ also notes in the same post:

LSJ wrote:

> I had thought that the prior rulings on Meat Hook and Garrote were in
> fact based on the strike-specific wording. But your most recent
> answers relating to POKER and others seem to call this into doubt.
> Like with "Poker" et al, it is possible to mentally edit Garrote and
> Meat Hook so that all references to the instant "strike" are replaced
> with the instant "GR-use or strike":

Thanks for the thoughts. I think this is shaky enough to warrant some extra
review by the rules team to see if it can be firmed up.

As far as I know, no change was ever issued.

So in this case, you get moreout of having the gr use a deagle, and the vamp using the foldable machine gun. Not horrible, but less optimal than just running foldables and things that dont cost pool retainer wise.

Ah yeah, the Rulings page...
Never thought to check THAT first, silly me! :/

Thanks for help James.

ReverendRevolver wrote:

6 damage each round with 2 cards = foldable machine gun + mass reality.

Other than the fact that combat is seriously hampered by S:CE, this is a wonderfully-efficient use of cards. I like it.


Alexis Sorokin and Lizette seem awesome for this, since they can both:
1)play the Ravnos Cache/Carnival
2)play the Mass Reality
3)play the Disguised Weapon
4)play the Psyche, to stop S:CE
5)protect themselves from any hit back with their Fortitude.

Alexis Sorokin
Ravnos
Group: 4
Capacity: 8
for CEL CHI OBF PRO
Independent. Red List: Once each combat, Alexis may dodge as a strike. She may steal an equipment card as a action. She gets +1 bleed when bleeding a Methuselah who controls a ready Toreador.

Lizette
Clan: Ravnos
Group: 4
Capacity: 10
pot ANI CEL CHI FOR PRO
Independent: Lizette may prevent 1 damage each combat. Once each action, she can burn 1 blood to get +1 bleed.

To be honest I think Fauberge is waaaay better than Lisette in this deck.

But you can useboth and have a trio of ravnos pistoleros '