Declining to block (Deflection, Direct Intervention)

If you still don't believe me, here is direct quote from LSJ.

Declaring that one is not blocking is implicit in playing Deflection (unlike playing Telepathic Counter). That is, Deflection (and other bleed bounce cards) are played after blocks are declined. [LSJ 20000507] [LSJ 20061213]

Klaital wrote:

Yes I read your post. The whole point why LSJ changed all bounce cards to clearly state only usable after blocks are declined was to avoid the whole 'but I didn't decline to block yet!' weaseling after your bounce is cancelled by making it clear that you can only bounce AFTER declining to block.

It is really clear, you cannot play a bounce card if you haven't declined to block yet, so then even if that card is cancelled, you still have already declined to block. Because a card cannot be canceled before it is played, and you cannot play a bounce card before you have declined to block. I really don't understand what is not clear in that.

What's unclear is that, as far as I understood it, the added text to bounce cards about only being usable after declining to block was only added to clarify (the rulings are older than the card text change and still talks about that particular thing, which I think supports this).
If the card text changes was just that, card text changes (not rules changes), I don't think it's crystal clear that these rulings shouldn't be in affect. The premise might be wrong though, the card text changes may be due to rules changes. I can't find any support for that though, been searching around for Rules Team Rulings where this would've been brought up but haven't found any.

I don't think those rulings oppose the current card text, they just define when and how the declining of blocks happen.

I'm not saying you're wrong though, as I stated in my first post I've always though of declining to block as a "use" of the impulse (or at least a passing of it to the next player in line). Knowing whether old rulings are still active is kinda hard, and I actually do think it's unclear in this case.

Klaital wrote:

If you still don't believe me, here is direct quote from LSJ.

Declaring that one is not blocking is implicit in playing Deflection (unlike playing Telepathic Counter). That is, Deflection (and other bleed bounce cards) are played after blocks are declined. [LSJ 20000507] [LSJ 20061213]

That's no different from the quotes in my first post. It supports that playing Deflection and declining to block can be done simultaneously. If that is possible than either playing or resolving (and paying) should be the point where blocks are actually declined. Direct Intervention would work differently depening on which of these timing windows the decline to block happens in.

First, you need to implicitly or explicitely decline block attempts.

After that, you can play the bounce card.
If the card is DI'ed, you still have already declined to block.

Card text.

Reminders in card text are printed in partentheses (like: discard afterward, reshuffle, and other stuff).

Even if your Deflection is canceled, it is still 'played' which is evident in for example that you cannot play another deflection with the same vampire on the same action, even if the first one is canceled.

In conclusion, you have to play a deflection before it can be canceled, and you have to decline to block before you can play deflection, and a canceled deflection has still been played.