Confirmation needed about Garrote
12 Jun 2021 20:01 #102471
by Timo
Replied by Timo on topic Confirmation needed about Garrote
Ok. And aside from "LSJ said so". Why is it handled differently for blood rage ?
And what about Arhiman's Demesne sup ?
And what about Arhiman's Demesne sup ?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
13 Jun 2021 09:47 - 13 Jun 2021 09:48 #102474
by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Confirmation needed about Garrote
I can't see anything in the ruling you link demonstrating your assertion.I think now what we need is for Ankha to give an official answer.
Because even if yes, for garrote (or sup Arhiman's Demesne for that matter) the 2 parts of the text seems to be separated, it could be argued (and it is !) that the second effect is part of the strike effect and therefore would be dodged.
And it has been ruled like that by LSJ for Blood Rage/Blood Fury (groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/GBcR6aNjIk4/m/DXPyqBM1R8kJ)
Last edit: 13 Jun 2021 09:48 by Ankha.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
14 Jun 2021 07:54 #102477
by inm8
Replied by inm8 on topic Confirmation needed about Garrote
I think what is being asked and that i also wonder about is why does the dodging minion get to disregard/protection against the secondary effect (ie. if the opposing vampire..) of cards like Ahriman's Demesne, Blood Fury, Blood Rage, Soul Burn etc. but not from Garrote´s secondary effect when it is worded the same? Per the ruling linked LSJ says "Dodge protects the dodger from all effects of the strike." when talkng about Soul Burn, meaning that the "if the opposing vampire..." effect is also part of the strike itself. In regards of Garrote LSJ says "It's something that can be done if something else (opposing vampire to torpor) happens during the resolution of the strike." which means that it seems these two rulings are contradicting if there isnt something we are/I am missing. Is the difference justified by that Garrote is an equipment/a weapon and not a combat card?
Ahriman's Demesne
Cardtype: Combat
Cost: 2 blood
Discipline: Obtenebration
Only usable at long range. Not usable during the first round of combat.
[obt] Strike: 1R aggravated damage.
[OBT] As above, and if the opposing vampire would go to torpor during the resolution of this strike, instead they are burned.
Cost: 2 blood
Discipline: Obtenebration
Only usable at long range. Not usable during the first round of combat.
[obt] Strike: 1R aggravated damage.
[OBT] As above, and if the opposing vampire would go to torpor during the resolution of this strike, instead they are burned.
Blood Fury
Cardtype: Combat
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Thaumaturgy
Only usable at close range.
[tha] Strike: hand strike at +1 damage. This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for]. If the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage.
[THA] As above, but for strength+2 damage.
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Thaumaturgy
Only usable at close range.
[tha] Strike: hand strike at +1 damage. This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for]. If the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage.
[THA] As above, but for strength+2 damage.
Blood Rage
Cardtype: Combat
Discipline: Thaumaturgy
Only usable at close range.
[tha] Strike: hand strike. This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for]. If the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage.
[THA] As above, but for strength+1 damage.
Discipline: Thaumaturgy
Only usable at close range.
[tha] Strike: hand strike. This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for]. If the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage.
[THA] As above, but for strength+1 damage.
Soul Burn
Cardtype: Combat
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Thaumaturgy
[tha] Strike: 1R damage. This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for]. If the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage.
[THA] As above, but for 2R damage.
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Thaumaturgy
[tha] Strike: 1R damage. This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for]. If the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage.
[THA] As above, but for 2R damage.
Garrote
Cardtype: Equipment
Cost: 1 pool
Melee weapon.
Strike: strength damage, only usable at close range. If the opposing vampire {would go to 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 {instead}. This is not considered diablerie.
Cost: 1 pool
Melee weapon.
Strike: strength damage, only usable at close range. If the opposing vampire {would go to 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 {instead}. This is not considered diablerie.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Timo
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
14 Jun 2021 08:16 - 14 Jun 2021 08:22 #102478
by Timo
This part. (aggreed he doesn't speak about Blood Rage/Blood Fury in this part but about Soul Burn)
But if you think that both rulings contradict each other (*I* think so ^^), you could easily revert the Soul Burn one ^^.
Or for clarity, Soul Burn and other similar
strike cards could be reworded like that :
"This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for] and if the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage."
Replied by Timo on topic Confirmation needed about Garrote
I can't see anything in the ruling you link demonstrating your assertion.I think now what we need is for Ankha to give an official answer.
Because even if yes, for garrote (or sup Arhiman's Demesne for that matter) the 2 parts of the text seems to be separated, it could be argued (and it is !) that the second effect is part of the strike effect and therefore would be dodged.
And it has been ruled like that by LSJ for Blood Rage/Blood Fury (groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/GBcR6aNjIk4/m/DXPyqBM1R8kJ)
> 2. If soul burn is dodged, does the "weapon inflict no damage" thing
> take effect or not ? (i believe not)
"Not" is correct. Dodge protects the dodger from all effects of the
strike.
This part. (aggreed he doesn't speak about Blood Rage/Blood Fury in this part but about Soul Burn)
But if you think that both rulings contradict each other (*I* think so ^^), you could easily revert the Soul Burn one ^^.
Or for clarity, Soul Burn and other similar

"This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for] and if the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage."
Last edit: 14 Jun 2021 08:22 by Timo.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 Jun 2021 10:17 - 21 Jun 2021 10:18 #102529
by inm8
Replied by inm8 on topic Confirmation needed about Garrote
Ankha an explanation please.I think what is being asked and that i also wonder about is why does the dodging minion get to disregard/protection against the secondary effect (ie. if the opposing vampire..) of cards like Ahriman's Demesne, Blood Fury, Blood Rage, Soul Burn etc. but not from Garrote´s secondary effect when it is worded the same? Per the ruling linked LSJ says "Dodge protects the dodger from all effects of the strike." when talkng about Soul Burn, meaning that the "if the opposing vampire..." effect is also part of the strike itself. In regards of Garrote LSJ says "It's something that can be done if something else (opposing vampire to torpor) happens during the resolution of the strike." which means that it seems these two rulings are contradicting if there isnt something we are/I am missing. Is the difference justified by that Garrote is an equipment/a weapon and not a combat card?
Ahriman's DemesneCardtype: Combat
Cost: 2 blood
Discipline: Obtenebration
Only usable at long range. Not usable during the first round of combat.
[obt] Strike: 1R aggravated damage.
[OBT] As above, and if the opposing vampire would go to torpor during the resolution of this strike, instead they are burned.
Blood FuryCardtype: Combat
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Thaumaturgy
Only usable at close range.
[tha] Strike: hand strike at +1 damage. This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for]. If the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage.
[THA] As above, but for strength+2 damage.
Blood RageCardtype: Combat
Discipline: Thaumaturgy
Only usable at close range.
[tha] Strike: hand strike. This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for]. If the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage.
[THA] As above, but for strength+1 damage.
Soul BurnCardtype: Combat
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Thaumaturgy
[tha] Strike: 1R damage. This damage cannot be prevented by cards that require Fortitude [for]. If the opposing vampire attempts to strike with a weapon this round, he or she does no damage.
[THA] As above, but for 2R damage.
GarroteCardtype: Equipment
Cost: 1 pool
Melee weapon.
Strike: strength damage, only usable at close range. If the opposing vampire {would go to 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 {instead}. This is not considered diablerie.
Last edit: 21 Jun 2021 10:18 by inm8.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 Jun 2021 13:20 - 21 Jun 2021 13:22 #102534
by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Confirmation needed about Garrote
It's weird, because I posted an answer a few days ago...
A combat card that says: "Strike: X. And Y." is not the same as a weapon that says "Strike: X. And Y".
In the first case, X and Y are part of the strike effects.
In the second case, the weapon provide a strike (X). It also provides some permanent effect (Y) which is not part of the strike.
For instance, Blade of Enoch reads: "Strike: strength+1 damage. Damage inflicted by this weapon on a Brujah or Brujah antitribu is aggravated. Frenzy cards cannot be played on this vampire with capacity 6 or more."
The fact that the damage inflicted is aggravated and that frenzy cards cannot be played are not effects from the strike provided by the weapon (even if it refers to the strike: Garrote)
On the other hand, any effect on the dodging minion provided by "strike" combat card (the strike itself, or the fact that his or her weapons inflict no damage in the case of Blood Rage) are ignored.
Indeed, though I'm not really pleased with the distinction; still, it makes sense.Is the difference justified by that Garrote is an equipment/a weapon and not a combat card?
A combat card that says: "Strike: X. And Y." is not the same as a weapon that says "Strike: X. And Y".
In the first case, X and Y are part of the strike effects.
In the second case, the weapon provide a strike (X). It also provides some permanent effect (Y) which is not part of the strike.
For instance, Blade of Enoch reads: "Strike: strength+1 damage. Damage inflicted by this weapon on a Brujah or Brujah antitribu is aggravated. Frenzy cards cannot be played on this vampire with capacity 6 or more."
The fact that the damage inflicted is aggravated and that frenzy cards cannot be played are not effects from the strike provided by the weapon (even if it refers to the strike: Garrote)
On the other hand, any effect on the dodging minion provided by "strike" combat card (the strike itself, or the fact that his or her weapons inflict no damage in the case of Blood Rage) are ignored.
Last edit: 21 Jun 2021 13:22 by Ankha.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.100 seconds
- You are here:
-
Home
-
Foro
-
V:TES Discussion
-
Rules Questions
- Confirmation needed about Garrote