Work-In-Progress preview of the upcoming Anarch-themed set

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

TwoRazorReign wrote:

Well-Aimed Car

[pot] Strike 4R damage; only usable at long range.


Taste of Death

[qui] Strike: 1R damage. Only usable at long range.

You would argue that Well-Aimed Car is incorrect because the card is saying you can either strike for 4R damage or only use the strike at long range?

Only usable at long range is a condition of use, not an effect. So it doesn't matter how they are separated.

Both are functionally equivalent to:

Only usable at long range; Strike: 4R

and

Only usable at long range. Strike: 1R

Thnaks for the responses. The punctuation is not really the issue then. It is the sentence structure on Aire of Elation.

You are confusing a 'requirement to play' with an 'effect from play'.

Aire of Elation has one requirement to play "Does this vampire have

?".

If yes, then it can be played and there are no further 'requirements'.  It will give it ONE effect of +2 bleed at Superior or +3 bleed if the acting vampire is a Toreador... as it is written.



If you changed it to be two sentences, then it would have two effects.

Effect 1: +2 Bleed.

Effect 2: If you are a Toreador +3 Bleed.



This would mean Toreadors would get +5 bleed from using the card.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

You are confusing a 'requirement to play' with an 'effect from play'.

Aire of Elation has one requirement to play "Does this vampire have

?".

If yes, then it can be played and there are no further 'requirements'.  It will give it ONE effect of +2 bleed at Superior or +3 bleed if the acting vampire is a Toreador... as it is written.



If you changed it to be two sentences, then it would have two effects.

Effect 1: +2 Bleed.

Effect 2: If you are a Toreador +3 Bleed.



This would mean Toreadors would get +5 bleed from using the card.

I understand what you are saying, but I think I'm not stating my point clearly. Normally, a semicolon and period can be used interchangably without changing meaning. You have illustrated quite nicely that previous rules teams have attributed a difference in meaning to clauses ending in semicolons and periods. People who are not well-versed in how previous rules teams used punctuation may interpret the card to mean something other than "or +3 bleed if the acting vampire is a Toreador". Aire of Elation needs to say ", or +3 bleed" instead of "; +3 bleed," which is a different (and clearer) sentence structure.

TwoRazorReign wrote:

Aire of Elation needs to say ", or +3 bleed" instead of "; +3 bleed," which is a different (and clearer) sentence structure.

Considering the cards that should get a text edit, and haven't... I think that idea is pie-in-the-sky.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

TwoRazorReign wrote:

Aire of Elation needs to say ", or +3 bleed" instead of "; +3 bleed," which is a different (and clearer) sentence structure.

Considering the cards that should get a text edit, and haven't... I think that idea is pie-in-the-sky.

Pie in the sky indeed. I'm just being an arm chair editor, haha!