I would like to daisy-chain some other questions regarding specific cards into the thread for some simple "yes/no" answers. These burn option uses may represent function changes. They probably escalate in absurdity as the list progresses.
1) RIDDLE PHANTASTIQUE: [action]: Ⓓ Put this card on an ally or younger vampire who is not Malkavian or Malkavian antitribu. Put X riddle counters on this card, where X is half the capacity of the acting vampire (round down). The minion with this card burns 1 riddle counter instead of unlocking during his or her unlock phase. Burn this card when it has no counters. You may not play this card if another Riddle Phantastique is in play.
Can I burn option Riddle if there are no younger non-Malk, non-!Malk or ally targets even though I control a Kiasyd? In the past, the answer was no. Now, it appears to be yes.
Yes, since LSJ issued the ruling
boardgamegeek.com/thread/662413/article/6920306
2) DEEP COVER AGENT: [action]: +1 stealth action. Requires a ready Seraph. Unique.
Ⓓ Put this card on a younger ready vampire. You still control this card. During your unlock phase, you may look at this vampire's controller's hand. This vampire can burn this card as a Ⓓ action.
Can I burn option DCA if there are no vampires younger than my ready Seraphs? Again, the pre-V1.1 answer would be no, with V1.1 it would seem to be yes.
Yes, since LSJ issued the ruling
boardgamegeek.com/thread/662413/article/6920306
3) HIGH ORUN: [action modifier] Requires a Laibon with three or more Orun. For the remainder of this action, cards that require any Disciplines cost this Laibon 1 less blood, and your hand size is one card larger.
There is an existing ruling if the minion meeting the requirements of a burn option card is in torpor, the burn option on a subset of cards can be used (actions, combat cards and reactions). In effect, the ruling states an implicit "ready minion" requirement exists on these cards. It does not apply to action modifiers, which are playable in torpor
(groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/JBdmMh1udN8/m/1bdYBRBxCAEJ)
I have a vampire with 3 Orun in torpor. High Orun is both a reaction (burnable) and an action modifier (not burnable) - can the card be burned if the only vampire can can play it is in torpor by referencing "the part of it that is unplayable?" It appears not, since LSJ's ruling referenced above specifically mentions High Orun.
I just wanted to make sure nothing has changed.
No, the ability to meet the requirements of a card (which includes having valid targets **1) in hand is for the entirety of the card and not only for a subset of it **2.
**1
boardgamegeek.com/thread/662413/article/6920306
**2
groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/JBdmMh1udN8/m/1bdYBRBxCAEJ
4) TRACKER'S MARK: [combat] Play when the opposing minion burns blood or life due to damage. Put this card on the opposing minion. This Salubri antitribu gets +1 intercept when attempting to block the minion with this card. If the vampire with this card is Tremere or Baali, this Salubri antitribu can enter combat with him or her as a Ⓓ action. The minion with this card may burn it as a +1 stealth action. A vampire can play only one Tracker's Mark each combat.
Can I burn this in any unlock phase, because "opposing minion" is not a valid target during the unlock phase? Previously, no. Now....maybe?
Yes, since LSJ issued the ruling
boardgamegeek.com/thread/662413/article/6920306
Maybe it is a way to make the card more viable in a deck as it is very situational.
5) CONSUME THE DEAD: [action] +1 stealth action. Ⓓ Enter combat with a wraith ally or burn a wraith retainer. [reaction] Only usable when a minion or retainer is being burned by any means except diablerie. Usable during combat. Usable by a locked Nagaraja. Remove that minion or retainer from the game instead. This Nagaraja gains 1 blood if the minion was a vampire or gains X+1 blood, where X is the blood or pool cost of that ally or retainer.
Can I burn option CtD if other players control no wraith allies or retainers? Previously no, now unsure.
Or does the [reaction] text prevent burning the card? Or does the presence of no currently burning target to remove during the unlock phase get around preventing a burn option?
Yes (the latter for the last portion similar to 4), since LSJ issued the ruling
boardgamegeek.com/thread/662413/article/6920306
Maybe it is a way to make the card more viable in a deck as it is very situational.
GENERAL POINT: Finally, I wanted to ask if this "target" thing has been added to the Rulebook version 1.1 to make this specific card actually burnable?
TRANSCENDENT LIABON: Unique master. Put this card on a Laibon with at least three Aye and three Orun. During your unlock phase, this Laibon gains 1 blood. Allies and younger vampires must burn 1 blood or life to attempt to block this Laibon or to perform an action directed at this Laibon. Burn this card if this minion is not ready or has fewer than three Aye or three Orun.
If that's the driver for the change (I can't find many other possibilities) - it feels like the cart driving the horse. How about just changing that one card to read "Requires a Liabon with at least 3 Aye and 3 Orun" and then leaving the target part out of the rules?
can only assume based on the ruling
boardgamegeek.com/thread/662413/article/6920306
where LSJ also wrote the below was referring to the fact that valid targets for the cards with burn option is also a relevant requirement that is to be evaluated and not only disciplines, clan and "Requires X" text.
The rulebook text could benefit from some tightening
Burn Option wording in Rulebook v1.1
