Bleeding to oust with Lorrie Dunsirn at 1 pool

AaronC wrote:

What about the following scenario?:

Lorrie's controller, player A, has 1 pool. Player A's prey, player B, has 3 pool and a Red List minion with Fame. In his master phase, Player A marks Player B's Red List minion. During Player A's minion phase, Lorrie successfully takes the Red List rush action. If combat were to occur, Lorrie would send the Famed Red List minion to torpor, thus dealing 3 pool damage to Player B and ousting him.

The Red List rush action costs 1 blood and 1 pool in this case. Paying the pool would oust Player A. AFAIK, the blood cost of the Red List rush is paid before the combat occurs.

Would Player A still get to resolve the action (namely entering combat) before paying the pool cost and being ousted?

As I see it, the action in question is to enter combat, not the combat itself. So if the action is successful (not blocked) you pay the cost (1 pool and 1 blood) and resolve the action (enter combat). Combat ends at the start of combat as player A's minion is no longer ready because player A is in 0 pool and is ousted.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

1) Where in the rulebook/CRR does it state that 'checking for being ousted' occurs only AFTER resolving a card and not when the card is paid for?

You appear to be under the impression that the rulebook and CRR cover every card interaction ever. They don't. They essentially can't. There are 3000 cards in the game with English card text, not formal mathematical logic.

If the rulebook and CRR perfectly covered everything, we wouldn't have as many rulings as we do!

If we're under the assumption that not everything can be covered in the rulebook (which is fine), it's not that crazy to ask why similar situations cannot have similar rulings.

Play Eternals: "Put yourself on 0 pool to do X, but since resolving X puts you above 0 pool, you're not ousted"

Lorrie: "Put yourself on 0 pool to do X, and even though resolving X puts you above 0 pool, you're still ousted."

i.e. If Lorrie Dunsirn had instead called Autarkis Persecution and not taken an action which would oust your prey, would you be ousted?

This is actually an interesting question. I have a feeling the answer is "you're ousted", but this is of course the direct opposite of the "referendum is part of the action" that is the basis of many other rulings (like the Freak Drive one).

Come to think of it, the whole "you pay when the action succesfully resolves" is nonsense in the case of rush cards and political actions. You pay when the thing that's on the card happens and the action happily continues afterwards.

What happens when I'm on 2 pool, call a politcal with Lorrie and a DT gets played? Do I get my pool back? I'm guessing not, but I thought I'd throw it out here.

As I see it, the action in question is to enter combat, not the combat itself.

The combat is part of the action (see again Freak Drive). You probably still have to pay before combat because things would get weird with rush cards that cost blood, so maybe combat is only part of the action when entering combat has a cost?

Some rulings are just there "because Scott said so". We've been over a similar non-sensical difference in the Kindred Spirits / Unnamed / The Rising thread. Asking for logic and consistency based on what's actually in the rules instead of invoking an alledged difference of handling pool costs between master cards and minion cards is not by any means unreasonable.

Asking for a rulebook basis for making nonsensical rulings isn't unreasonable either.

(For the record, I'd be all for reversing the Eternals of Sirius ruling and make things logical).

The difference between Lorrie bleeding and you playing Eternals of Sirius: gaining the pool is part of Eternals of Sirius, but not Lorrie's bleed action. Gaining the pool after Lorrie's bleed is completely other mechanic (oust) that is only checked after the bleed has been paid and simultaneously for all players.

That's your interpretation of it, which is fine, but it has no basis other than "because Scott said so".

One could just as well interpret it as follows:

Lorrie bleeds. Upon resolution, her bleed target is ousted, so everal things trigger:

1) The action must be paid
2) My prey is ousted, so I gain 6 pool and a VP

As acting Meth, I can arrange these triggered effects as I see fit, and thus I get 6 pool first and then pay Lorries pool.

And what if Lorrie had somehow gotten Dementation and bleeds with a Kindred Spirits? Or what if she becomes !Tor by some means and plays Art Scam?

a-e wrote:

AaronC wrote:

What about the following scenario?:

Lorrie's controller, player A, has 1 pool. Player A's prey, player B, has 3 pool and a Red List minion with Fame. In his master phase, Player A marks Player B's Red List minion. During Player A's minion phase, Lorrie successfully takes the Red List rush action. If combat were to occur, Lorrie would send the Famed Red List minion to torpor, thus dealing 3 pool damage to Player B and ousting him.

The Red List rush action costs 1 blood and 1 pool in this case. Paying the pool would oust Player A. AFAIK, the blood cost of the Red List rush is paid before the combat occurs.

Would Player A still get to resolve the action (namely entering combat) before paying the pool cost and being ousted?

As I see it, the action in question is to enter combat, not the combat itself. So if the action is successful (not blocked) you pay the cost (1 pool and 1 blood) and resolve the action (enter combat). Combat ends at the start of combat as player A's minion is no longer ready because player A is in 0 pool and is ousted.

Correct.
Similarly, a Consanguineous Boon called by Lorrie (perhaps for Abominations) would oust Lorrie's controller if she's on 1 pool when the action ("call the referendum") resolves. That's earlier than setting the terms. Or casting votes / ballots. Or ttallying the results. Or applying the effects.