Kestrelle Hayes and multiple targets

RTR 080808

Each of the actual targets is considered a target, which means that effects like
Hide's "the action fails" or Talley's "+1 intercept" can be used if any one (or
more) of the targets would be enough to enable the effect.

This means Kestrelle gets +1 stealth on D actions against multiple Methuselahs if one of the targets controls no ready Sabbat vampire.

(If two Methuselahs control no ready Sabbat vampire, Kestrelle would only get +1 stealth from her cardtext, not +2 stealth).

TwoRazorReign wrote:

You wrote: "No, stealth is just one value that goes up or down, you don't track stealth differently for each Methuselah on the table."

Why not? Is there a ruling or something else your assertion is based on? It's a D action targeting multiple Methuselahs. If the targeted Methuselah does not control a ready sabbat vampire, the criteria to gain stealth against that Methuselah is met. This seems logical. But I wonder if there is a ruling that counteracts this logic.

There is a logical (and 7-year-old) ruling that has been quoted above that counteracts your logic.

This may seem like nit picking, but the card text states "a Methuselah." It should state "any Methuselah."

Sabbat. Black Hand: Kestrelle gets +1 stealth on actions directed at a Methuselah who doesn't control a ready Sabbat vampire.

TwoRazorReign wrote:

You wrote: "No, stealth is just one value that goes up or down, you don't track stealth differently for each Methuselah on the table."

Why not?

Because that's how stealth is defined in the rules. The acting minion has a stealth. He doesn't have a stealth against a particular Methuselah.

TwoRazorReign wrote:

This may seem like nit picking, but the card text states "a Methuselah." It should state "any Methuselah."

That would be potentially acceptable wording, but why is that wording supposedly necessary? It targets "a Methuselah" without a Sabbat vampire (and it also targets some other Methuselahs). Works fine with "a".

Targeting a Methuselah that meets certain requirements doesn't, for example, imply that it must target only Methuselahs who meet those requirements, any more than Kalila only gets +stealth if she does an action that targets a location and something else (e.g. Rewilding). Similarly, Talley 's intercept works if one of your other minions is targetted, even if other minions are also affected e.g. superior Wave of Insanity tapping an ally with the same controller as Talley, but also another Methuselah's Renegade Garou.

You are not wrong, but let’s focus on Kestrelle’s card text. The confusion outlined in the original post stems from Kestrelle’s card text stating that stealth is gained when performing a D action “directed at a Methuselah.” Had Kestrelle’s card text said “directed at any Methuseah,” it would help to clarify that the card text applies even if multiple Methuselahs are targeted, and stealth is gained when “any” Methuselah targeted doesn’t control a Sabbat vampire.

TwoRazorReign wrote:

You are not wrong,

Then you're fabricating a nit that doesn't exist. Please don't do that.

TwoRazorReign wrote:

Had Kestrelle’s card text said “directed at any Methuseah,” it would help to clarify that the card text applies even if multiple Methuselahs are targeted, and stealth is gained when “any” Methuselah targeted doesn’t control a Sabbat vampire.

Given that Kestrelle was issued close to two years prior to multi-target actions existing, it would be rather remarkable if she'd been able to foresee that rule change. (It rumbled along in the summer of 2008, was brought in during Keepers of Tradition in late 2008, and Kestrelle was issued at the start of 2007.)