Blissful Agony vs allies

@James: It has been a long principle of card interpretation that different sentences are different resolution effects of the same card. (e.g. Psyche! vs Rotschreck). So while you cannot choose an 'opposing vampire' it doesn't exclude the S:CE effect; they are not conjoined into an "and" effect.

The mechanics of Illusions of the Kindred (creating a false vampire from your own crypt to enter combat to replace the CHI-using vampire) should be an exception to the general principle rather than cornerstone for the rest.

As has been stated there is no "Only usable in combat with a X", I'd be happy to interpret Illusions of the Kindred as having "Only usable if there is are crypt cards in your Crypt" instead of breaking the principle that full-stops separate effects.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

The same could apply to strikes, if there was some way of making an opponent ineligible.)

There is way to do it, and it's called infernal familiar.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

It has been a long principle of card interpretation that different sentences are different resolution effects of the same card.

You're extremely confused about the difference between several things written on the same card happening in a sequence (which can be interrupted), and having to fully declare the entire effect including legal targets when you play a card.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

The mechanics of Illusions of the Kindred (creating a false vampire from your own crypt to enter combat to replace the CHI-using vampire) should be an exception to the general principle rather than cornerstone for the rest.

No, as stated, Illusions of the Kindred was moved back to fit the general ruling on this issue. Previously, it was an exception.

Your claims are spurious.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

You don't get to partially play a card and have it fizzle part way through if there aren't legal targets for all mandatory effects. (Though targets may disappear part-way thruogh an unresolved action, you need all mandatory targets to be there when declaring the whole effect. The same could apply to strikes, if there was some way of making an opponent ineligible.)

Ergo, Blissful Agony (superior) cannot be played when in combat with an ally.

I tend to follow this logic - can't play a card to have it partially fizzle.
I'm looking for other examples - or situations where this ruling couldn't apply.

Regarding Rötschreck, the course is different. You play it and would have it fully applied, but something (Psyche!, in your example) interrupts its resolution, just as Telepathic Tracking could interrupt Illusions of the Kindred's resolution.

Pascal wrote:

I tend to follow this logic - can't play a card to have it partially fizzle.

Along the same lines.

V:TES printing of Second Tradition: "Requires a ready Prince or Justicar. Only usable by a tapped vampire. Untap this vampire. This reacting vampire gets +2 intercept." Can't play it just to untap (one sentence) and have the intercept fizzle (next sentence). [LSJ 19970707]