Strike at the True Flesh and Garrote

Hello; here's the deal;

'Parnassus' with 'Garrote' = strike 2 strength damage.
If i use 'Strike at the True Flesh' in QUI superior gives me the +1 damage on the 'Garrote' strike?

Thank you.

Normal and proper way to present such questions is to quote all the relevant card texts...

nergalmcl wrote:

Hello; here's the deal;

'Parnassus' with 'Garrote' = strike 2 strength damage.
If i use 'Strike at the True Flesh' in QUI superior gives me the +1 damage on the 'Garrote' strike?

Thank you.

Lonkka is not just being pedantic about card text, he actually has a point.
Read through the card text, then answer yourself.
SatTF requires a melee weapon. Is Garrote a melee weapon? Check.
SatTF requires QUI for +1 dmg. Does Parnassus have QUI? Check.

Better option than garrote is wooden stake though..... Guaranteed torpor trip with that


Strike at the True Flesh
Type: Combat
Requires: Quietus
[qui] Only usable before resolution of a melee weapon's strike. For the remainder of the round, non-aggravated damage from this weapon's strikes cannot be prevented except by equipment or by other strikes.
[QUI] As above, and this weapon's strikes inflict +1 damage.

Garrote
Type: Equipment
Cost: 1 pool
Melee weapon.
Strike: strength damage, only usable at close range. If the opposing vampire goes into torpor during the strike resolution step of this strike and the bearer remains ready, the bearer may burn this card to burn the opposing vampire. This is not considered diablerie.

Parnassus
Clan: Assamite (group 2)
Capacity: 7
Disciplines: CEL QUI aus tha
Independent: +1 strength. Blood cursed.

Blooded wrote:

Lonkka is not just being pedantic about card text, he actually has a point.

Mainly trying to be pedantic...

I mean, since the people who will (try to) answer your question will (probably) need to go fetch the card texts I think it is only fair that you make that effort yourself and save time for multiple people trying to help you out. So it is good form to include the card texts in your original question. (and like Blooded Sans said, you might be able to figure the answer out yoruself while getting the texts)

Besides, I seem to remember the questions guidelines requesting you to do so, but now can't find that anywhere.

First, let's answer the poster's question, which was clearly stated: "If i use 'Strike at the True Flesh' in QUI superior gives me the +1 damage on the 'Garrote' strike?"

The answer the question is yes.

Now, to respond to the other answers in this post, for example:

Lönkka wrote:

Normal and proper way to present such questions is to quote all the relevant card texts...

It may be helpful to point to where the card texts exist on this website for copy/paste, instead of simply insinuating that the poster had bad etiquette for not properly posting a rules question. For what it's worth, the card texts can be found here: www.vekn.net/images/stories/downloads/cardlist.txt

Blooded wrote:

Lonkka is not just being pedantic about card text, he actually has a point.
Read through the card text, then answer yourself.
SatTF requires a melee weapon. Is Garrote a melee weapon? Check.
SatTF requires QUI for +1 dmg. Does Parnassus have QUI? Check.

Better option than garrote is wooden stake though..... Guaranteed torpor trip with that

The problem here is that there is no clear yes or no answer to the question. Instead, there is a directive that the poster should read the card text more carefully. Presumably, the poster already read the card text, had an understanding of what effects happen, but still posted here looking for confirmation. Which is perfectly fine. The poster is likely looking for a clear answer to their question, not someone telling them to answer their own question. A simple "yes" would be better.

Lönkka wrote:

I mean, since the people who will (try to) answer your question will (probably) need to go fetch the card texts I think it is only fair that you make that effort yourself and save time for multiple people trying to help you out. So it is good form to include the card texts in your original question. (and like Blooded Sans said, you might be able to figure the answer out yoruself while getting the texts)

This is not the reason why card text is requested in rules questions. The reason given is that card texts from sources other than this website (at the link I provided previously) may be outdated. There was never an etiquette reason for including card texts in rules questions. Now, is it helpful to add card texts to rules questions for those answering the questions? Sure. But all card texts are 2 or 3 clicks away. Lets not act like it's some major sin that card text was not added to rules questions. People who are new to these forums may not know to add card texts. Can we just answer the questions and politely tell the poster to copy/paste the card text with a link to the card texts next time? Thank you.