file Maris Streck giving intercept to another Methuselah's vampire, vs. sequencing...

15 Apr 2018 12:05 #86241 by hardyrange
Hello all,

this almost happened in a game yesterday, and the players agreed that this was something we should follow up on. :-)

Methuselah A is taking an action.
Methuselah B attempts to block with one of his minions.
Methuselah A uses stealth.
Methuselah B now wants to decline to block...
...but Methuselah C, who controls Maris Streck, would like to have that block (and combat) to happen, and uses Maris' special to give intercept to the blocking minion.

Is that possible?

Our first gut reaction was "Yes, of course", but then we had a very interesting "legalese" discussion on how the sequencing rules actually do interact with the rules on blocking....

www.vekn.net/rulebook/6-minion-phase:
6.2.2. Resolve Any Block Attempts
[...]If a block fails (the acting minion's stealth exceeds the blocker's intercept and the blocker's Methuselah cannot add or does not wish to add more intercept), either another attempt is made (with the same or a different minion) or the defending Methuselah declares that she will not make any further attempts to block the action. Note that this declaration is an effect and so allows the acting Methuselah (and others) to play more cards and effects.[...]

www.vekn.net/rulebook/1-terms-and-components-of-the-game:
1.6.1. General
[...]5. Sequencing. If two or more players want to play a card or effect, the acting Methuselah plays first. At every stage, the acting player always has the opportunity to play the next card or effect. So after playing one effect, she may play another and another. Once she is finished, the opportunity passes to the defending Methuselah (in the cases of directed actions and combat), then to the rest of the Methuselahs in clockwise order from the acting Methuselah. Note that if any Methuselah uses a card or effect, the acting Methuselah again gets the opportunity to play the next effect.[...]

So, the argument is:
After the stealth card was played by Methuselah A, the "impulse" passes to Methuselah B - who now is free to decide if she wants to add more intercept, or if she wants to attempt to block with another minion, or if she wants to declare that she is not blocking.
Methuselah B goes for tha latter option.
Only after this decision is made, the impulse passes (clockwise) to other players who want to play any further cards or use any effects.
Which means Methuselah C's declaration to give intercept to Methuselah B's minion would happen after Methuselah B has already declared "No blocks.".

Your opinions on this? :-)

Maris Streck, 9, ani dem dom AUS OBF, Malkavian, 3, [CE:V, BSC:X]
Camarilla Malkavian Justicar: Maris can burn a blood to give a blocking minion +1 intercept. She can take a +1 stealth action to allow you to look at and rearrange the top 5 cards of your library.

"It was a perfect plan - until it had contact with reality"
---
Hardy Range
Playgroup Council Chairman Bochum

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
15 Apr 2018 13:09 #86242 by Boris The Blade
Failing to block is not an effect played by B, it is one of the possible outcomes of a block attempt resolution. Resolution is only reached after everyone passed, including Maris Streck.

Declining other attempts is an effect declared by B, but that cannot be delcared during a block attempt. The sequence is:

1) B declares a block attempt.
2) Play stealth, intercept, do stuff, including Maris Streck.
3) Resolve block attempt.
4) If the block was not successful, B declares another block attempt or declines to block.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
15 Apr 2018 14:33 #86244 by jamesatzephyr
Here's LSJ talking about a similar situation.

> All I can think of is, declaring your block unsuccessful isn't
> announced by B, it is announced by everyone in consensus, because when
> everyone passes on an unsuccessful block attempt, it fails, and then
> you move to the next minion who attempts to block (or B declares he
> does not wish to block). Everyone passing makes the block fail, which
> is an event (although nobody specific declared it), and the chance to
> play effects passes back to A, before the action is unblocked.
>
> Is the above correct?

All except th passing back to A.

[LSJ 20070226]

A follow-up a couple of posts later clarifies what the "except the passing back to A" point means.

> I believe that LSJ was saying that there is no further chance to play effects
> **before the action is unblocked**. After the block fails, the action, is by
> definition, unblocked. A *now* has a chance to play further effects, but he
> cannot play pre-block effects (of which there are few that matter, Kiss of Ra
> being one of them, but it requires an attempted block).

Correct.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 May 2018 12:04 - 14 May 2018 12:05 #86881 by Bloodartist

Failing to block is not an effect played by B, it is one of the possible outcomes of a block attempt resolution. Resolution is only reached after everyone passed, including Maris Streck.


I'd imagine that the issue is that if B says "no blocks" then player C controlling Maris Streck cannot give intercept anymore to B's vampire, and B cannot go back to his word because thats not how VTES works. B has already declined to block.

In practice (afaik), C has to vocally point out to B that he can give intercept if B wants to block, when B has option to block. C cannot force B to block anyway, it is always B's choice. B must attempt to block before intercept can be given, right?

If B attempts to block, A plays stealth, C can then give intercept and make the block attempt succeed without B's consent, however.

A heretic is a man who sees with his own eyes.
—Gotthold Ephraim Lessing



Last edit: 14 May 2018 12:05 by Bloodartist.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 May 2018 13:20 #86886 by kschaefer
B's "no block" is really, I do not gain any more intercept. There is no way to stop a vampire's block attempt without succeeding or failing. B's declaration is inaccurate, but often sufficient because most tables lack WMRH, Maris Streck, etc. In such cases, the player C can simply give the minion the intercept regardless of what B chooses. The evaluation for the success or failure of the block occurs when all Methuselah's pass the impulse. In the case above, C has not passed the impulse, in fact quite the opposite because he activates Maris Streck's special.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 May 2018 20:29 #86901 by jamesatzephyr

I'd imagine that the issue is that if B says "no blocks" then player C controlling Maris Streck cannot give intercept anymore to B's vampire, and B cannot go back to his word because thats not how VTES works. B has already declined to block.

In practice (afaik), C has to vocally point out to B that he can give intercept if B wants to block, when B has option to block. C cannot force B to block anyway, it is always B's choice. B must attempt to block before intercept can be given, right?

If B attempts to block, A plays stealth, C can then give intercept and make the block attempt succeed without B's consent, however.


Your third paragraph is why the scenario in your first paragraph works the way you say it doesn't. C can give B intercept without B's permission. C simply needs the impulse. When B says "I'm out of intercept, so I guess that block attempt is over", C gets the impulse, and C can give B the intercept.

Since C can only give intercept to B when one of B's minions is attempting to block, and since C can only give intercept to B when B's intercept is less A's stealth, and since C can only get the impulse when B says "No more intercept from me", it's the only way it can work.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.079 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum