Justicar Retribution

Pascal wrote:

AaronC wrote:

If LSJ wanted it to work that way, then he shouldn't have changed the text of all those "if your prey has a ready X, vampire gets an additional +Y bleed" (since a positive 'if' condition clearly adds to the current bleed) OR he should have changed the text of Justicar Retribution to clearly state how it should be played.

Doesn't work with Deflections.

Uh, sure it did. In the past, if Contanza Vinti's prey controlled a ready Ventrue and then changed the target of Constanza's bleed (using, for example, Deflection), Constanza Vinti still got her +2 bleed. Plus, at the time that the Justicar Retribution was played, it would be apparent to anyone who read English that Constanza's current bleed was 3.

Anyways, the current ruling is: Justicar Retribution burns vampires who would bleed for 3 or more if they declared a default bleed action right now.

Right. It's a ruling. It's not card text. When card text says "+X bleed durng a bleed action" then it would require a ruling to add that bleed to the vampire's current bleed total during a referendum.

That's bad rules management. Wow, it could have been so straight forward.

AaronC wrote:

Plus, at the time that the Justicar Retribution was played, it would be apparent to anyone who read English that Constanza's current bleed was 3.

It's also apparent now. Or at least exactly as apparent than with your ruling.

AaronC wrote:

Right. It's a ruling. It's not card text. When card text says "+X bleed durng a bleed action" then it would require a ruling to add that bleed to the vampire's current bleed total during a referendum.

But it's a pretty understandable and solid ruling. Ruling are just clarification / disambiguation.

AaronC wrote:

That's bad rules management. Wow, it could have been so straight forward.

I don't see a way for Justicar Retribution to be straightforward without reshaping entirely the rules. I just don't understand your rant, you propose a ruling exactly as unintuitive and arbitrary than the existing one and rant against the existing one because ... it's not the one you would have done if you were LSJ ?

Ohlmann wrote:

I don't see a way for Justicar Retribution to be straightforward without reshaping entirely the rules. I just don't understand your rant, you propose a ruling exactly as unintuitive and arbitrary than the existing one and rant against the existing one because ... it's not the one you would have done if you were LSJ ?

Justicar Retribution should have counted base bleed plus static bleed modifiers. In other words, it should check bleed during the referendum of the political action. Other bleed modifiers are not "current" during the referendum; they are hypothetical.

Bleed modifiers that are gained during a bleed should not be considered part of the current bleed for the purposes of Justicar Retribution because JR cannot be played during a bleed. Checking to see what a vampire's bleed might be when bleeding prey should be irrelevant because vampires are not restricted to bleeding their controller's prey because of the existence of reaction cards like Deflection and action cards like Kindred Spirits.

This card was reprinted in KoT, and with good rules management, the definition of "current bleed" would have been incorporated into the text of the card rather than forcing those who buy the card to have to gain access to online rulings.

Example:
Successful referendum burns all vampires who bleed their controller's prey for 3 or more when taking the default bleed action.

AaronC wrote:

Right. It's a ruling. It's not card text. When card text says "+X bleed durng a bleed action" then it would require a ruling to add that bleed to the vampire's current bleed total during a referendum.

If this were the ruling, then Justicar Retribution would be one of the most useless cards in the game. It would only burn the Great Beast, who was not in print at the time Justicar Retribution came out. Arika's text says +2 bleed and it of course follows that the bleed is only added during a bleed action. The Great Beast is the only vampire that has 3 bleed straight up. There are two allies with 3 bleed, but Justicar Retribution only burns vampires.

So when you realize the card is intended to do something, it's not that hard to figure out what it should do.

AaronC wrote:

Pascal wrote:

AaronC wrote:

If LSJ wanted it to work that way, then he shouldn't have changed the text of all those "if your prey has a ready X, vampire gets an additional +Y bleed" (since a positive 'if' condition clearly adds to the current bleed) OR he should have changed the text of Justicar Retribution to clearly state how it should be played.

Doesn't work with Deflections.

Uh, sure it did. In the past, if Contanza Vinti's prey controlled a ready Ventrue and then changed the target of Constanza's bleed (using, for example, Deflection), Constanza Vinti still got her +2 bleed. Plus, at the time that the Justicar Retribution was played, it would be apparent to anyone who read English that Constanza's current bleed was 3.

Past rulings are important, as they show the intent of the designer (when the designer issued the ruling).
I'll rephrase my sentence:
With the current wording of Constanza Vinti, your suggestion "doesn't work with Deflections", i.e. you're changing the behaviour of a card (in our case, Constanza).

Anyways, the current ruling is: Justicar Retribution burns vampires who would bleed for 3 or more if they declared a default bleed action right now.

Right. It's a ruling. It's not card text. When card text says "+X bleed durng a bleed action" then it would require a ruling to add that bleed to the vampire's current bleed total during a referendum.

That's bad rules management. Wow, it could have been so straight forward.

So, you'd rather have an updated non-printed cardtext than a ruling in the Rulings page. It's a fair call, but there's no reason to be that harsh. OK.

vtesocrates wrote:

If this were the ruling, then Justicar Retribution would be one of the most useless cards in the game. It would only burn the Great Beast, who was not in print at the time Justicar Retribution came out. Arika's text says +2 bleed and it of course follows that the bleed is only added during a bleed action. The Great Beast is the only vampire that has 3 bleed straight up. There are two allies with 3 bleed, but Justicar Retribution only burns vampires.

So when you realize the card is intended to do something, it's not that hard to figure out what it should do.

Bleed is a calculated number. Vampires have a base bleed of 1. When they have card text or card in play that changes it, then the bleed number is increased or decreased accordingly. If the bonus (or negative) is permanent, then the change to bleed is permanent.

For instance, Arika's bleed when she is in play is 3. 1 (base) +2 (card text) = 3.

That is why you do not calculate the extra bleed from Cybele's bleed action, the extra bleed from a Camera Phone action, or the additional bleed from Spiridonas's special when determining the current bleed for the purposes of JR. They only exist during a bleed action.

Or maybe it says in the rulebook that bleed modifiers are only calculated during a bleed action, and that case, I would be interested in seeing it.