Carrion Crows & First Strike Strikes (Not Anaesthetic Touch)

My two cents, avoiding the war if possible.

Pascal, who (can only speak for myself) is the guy who gets to make rules decisions and seems fine at it, and he said first strike outruns birds on rules reasons.

Firat strike sucks, so it should for thematic reasons.

But...

First strike strikes resolve before normal strikes. That, to me, and is from rulebook snippetxin this thread, says it still happens when strikes are resolved.

Thats how I read it, and my problem is:
Does FS give the other, non FS strike "second strike"
Birds happen when strikes happen, a FS strike is a strike, so...

Birds happen when strikes happen?

Ruling has been made, ive declared support for it, im just pointing out how the rules read to me personally. And again, not stirring things, not imposing my unbreakable will upon things to change them, but that is how the rulebook reads, and sce rules go over them, but by CC text and the rule book, it does say what it says.

ReverendRevolver wrote:

Does FS give the other, non FS strike "second strike"
Birds happen when strikes happen, a FS strike is a strike, so...

Birds happen when strikes happen?

Except if you actually believed that, you wouldn't think Carrion Crows should happen at the same 'speed' as First Strike, they'd have to happen at the same 'speed' as Strike: Combat Ends.

I demand my right to play Majesty, and still have you take the damage from Carrion Crows and Drawing Out the Beast.

James,

The quoted rule specifies that STRIKES resolve simultaneously. "During strike resolution" does not mysteriously change Carrion Crows into a strike or S:D would be effective against it.

In the text of the rules and the CRR there is no explicit way to deal with damage that is NOT caused by a strike.

Having this game function like law courts (with legislation and rafts of caselaw) could be another reason why people find the learning curve harder than it needs to be. So in effect what I am advocating is the broad-reaching rulings result in AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES.

To be honest, I don't want to have to Google search ANYTHING to find out how VTES. I want to read the RULEBOOK, the CARD and maybe a list of specific-card-to-card interactions where the Rules and the Card don't clearly resolve things. I think VTES would be in a good place for people to learn quickly if on the left of this form it read "Rules: Rulebook, Card Lists, Card Rulings, Tournament Rules, Judge's Guide". The CRR and the General Rulings shouldn't exist, they should have resulted in amendments to the rules.

I don't see why you feel the need to cling to a scattered raft of ad hoc rulings as a sensible way to adjudicate this game.

Thats what im getting at.

Also, James, DotB is during the press step. I never said we got there, just that crows says during strike resolution and first srike does as well, per its rule in the book in fact, it resolves before not first strike strikes.

Unrelated to this interaction are seperate rules for dodge amd combat ends, which specify that the former trumps dirst strike and the latter is "faster" than all.

Now, as stated, i see the rules guy has issued a ruling. And i find that since first strike sucks it needs all the help it can get.

Now, the problem is that as the rules read, its confusing as hell, because i see a strike resolving and something happening with first strike is a strike resolving.

So, yes, i already said it SHOULDNT WORK LIKE THAT. its just worded in a way insinuating otherwise.

If we ever want to help the learning curve, we need to streamline information amd its accessability. If the playerbase werent so intelligent, this would be an impossible thing. But we have smart people, some of which are great trolls who can find inconsistancies if they exist.

Getting all rules related to a given card in one spot, or hell, even two(vekn and secret library) would remove alot of this barrier were players are solid enough to try new things but new enough to neex to ask questions, all while being timid enough to maybe not ask.

I know the rules most of the time, and here i didnt. But my assumption was contradictory to the way it reads on the card sitting next to the rulebook, which is an issue for me when id like to see more people getting into the game. Thats what im after.

Sure, that was implicit

Roberto wrote:

Sure, that was implicit

Ummmm.....

The implication was implicit in the confusion, or the confusion was inplicit in the implication?



I didnt say jack about the game being learned origionally, but plainly, i read the rules the wrong way, looking at it knowing how it should/does work, so somebody not familiar with the game would probably see things the wrong way.

Or they could rummage through lsj rulings or this thread. But the card and the rules should be the optimal resources, even in this age of smartphones and inescapable 4G data coverage.