Relentless Reaper vs Blissful Agony and scheduled combat rulings ambiguity

kschaefer wrote:

Nauro wrote:

Main question (happened two days ago in a casual game) :
After a minion schedules a combat by striking Blissful Agony at superior VAL, can the opposing player play Relentless Reaper at superior THN (assuming there's blood to burn to make use of the effect) to make the scheduled combat void?
Bonus: Can you play a Relentless Reaper after Psyche?

You can play Relentless Reaper. The Relentless Reaper continuation of the current combat prevents the new combat from ever happening.

You cannot play Relentless Reaper in response to Psyche! since the window for playing Psyche! is after the window for playing Relentless Reaper. "is about to end" is later than "would end".

Nauro wrote:

Here is the general ruling from 2002, combat section:
An effect which would cause (a new) combat cannot be used if there is already a pending combat queued. [RTR 20020501]
Links to groups-beta.google.com/groups?selm=3CD0043D.410398C1%40white-wolf.com

What about that (a new) part? Is it reminder text? It it a clarification?

Nauro wrote:

Does causing combat include both Relentless Reaper and Telepathic Tracking, which technically extend an already existing combat, but could be said to cause more combat?

Nauro wrote:

If you read the linked email from LSJ, the line preceding the quoted sentence at the ruling is about interrupting scheduled effects, and it gives equivalence to effects that extend combat (ie RR or TT) and those that shedule a new one (psyche, blissful agony, etc):

If an effect resolves and sets up an effect to be resolved later (e.g.,
Undead Persistence's torpor effect or Siren's Lure's combat), then the
effect will not be canceled by "interruptions" (extending combat/starting
combat/etc.).

Nauro wrote:

The bolded part of the quoted text is what implies the equivalence.

Given this context, we return to the sentence of the ruling, to the question of why "(a new)" is in brackets. If (a new) means a mandatory condition, then it shouldn't be in brackets. We have two interpretations, as the ruling is currently written:

1) If the [RTR 20020501] is meant to cover only effects that schedule a new combat (Psyche, Blissful Agony, Marie-Pierre, Fast Reaction, etc) and their interactions with each other, removing brackets would remove the confusion.

Nauro wrote:

2) If the [RTR 20020501] covers all similar effects, including Relentless Reaper and Telepathic Tracking, I'd suggest adding an unambiguous addition to the ruling.
Perhaps rewording it into "Neither an effect which would cause a new combat, nor extend the existing combat can be used if there is already a pending combat queued." would work?

Nauro wrote:

There is no ruling in General Rulings or Card Rulings for Psyche, Blissful Agony, Telepathic Tracking nor Relentless Reaper that clarifies this case.

But, if you're Relentless enough, you can find a forum post by Pascal Bertrand, when Psyche's window of opportunity was changed:
www.vekn.net/forum/rules-questions/16788#16794
This is in 2011, and there are no rulings mentioning this, nor does the post reference any rulings itself (meaning that according to the tournament rulebook it has no bearing on the rules of the game until it becomes an official ruling - as per 2.1. of Tournament Rules) :

>what happens if the acting minion plays a Psyche, then the reacting plays Telepathic Tracking?

A new round of combat will happen (TT's "combat does not end"). Psyche!'s "start a new combat after this round" effect is lost (as much as Rotschreck's "send that vampire to torpor after combat has ended" is lost)

Is this 2011 post correct?

Nauro wrote:

That would mean that since Telepathic Tracking can void a scheduled combat by Psyche, it should also be able to void a scheduled combat by Blissful Agony, same with Relentless Reaper.

Nauro wrote:

Since the 2011 post talks about "as much as Rotschreck's", we can see that the Rötschreck ruling is in the very same email from LSJ - [RTR 20020501] (linked above) . There, it specifically is said:

Effects that end combat and then do something else after combat (all in the
single resolution of the effect) will fizzle if combat doesn't end or if a
new combat is started.

How can Psyche be beaten by Telepathic Tracking "as much as Rotschreck's" when there's no direct equivalence? Psyche is not an effect that ends combat and does something else after combat. Psyche resolves as it is played, and a new combat is scheduled (caused). Why can TT be played? Is it not covered by the original [RTR 20020501], about causing new combats?

Nauro wrote:

If Pascal's post is an active ruling, then general ruling [RTR 20020501] should be updated to not have brackets, as to leave room for Telepathic Tracking and Relentless Reaper (and other future cards with the same effect) to trump over already scheduled combats.
Also, Pascal's ruling of TT trumping Psyche should be included in the general rulings, allowing all combat continuation effects to trump over all new combat scheduling effects. Current rulings on Rötschreck and Psyche do not cover this exact case, unless by huge leaps of logic.

Nauro wrote:

If Pascal's 2011 post is not a ruling, but rather a misleading interpretation, then please consider rewording the general ruling about combat [RTR 20020501] to lose the ambiguity.
I have suggested "Neither an effect which would cause a new combat, nor extend the existing combat can be used if there is already a pending combat queued." but I am not a native speaker, and it might be put more eloquently without the ambiguity.

Nauro wrote:

Still, Blissful Agony is an effect that ends combat and then does something else after combat. Remember that LSJ email? That's the bit that didn't get written into any general rulings, but if it applies, Blissful Agony surely is covered by such a definition.

So... Can you play a Relentless Reaper after Blissful Agony?
Seems like yes, if the whole LSJ email applies in 2018, even while only parts of it are used for rulings.

Nauro wrote:

Or no, if the part about scheduled combats applies to RR.

Bonus: Can you play a Relentless Reaper after Psyche?
I would say no, but Pascal's post disagrees. Not yet an official ruling. Eager to find out the truth, and hopefully at least get a glimpse to the reasoning and the rulings that support it.

PetriWessman wrote:

So, for clarity: we have the general rule "you cannot queue a combat if there's already a combat queued".

PetriWessman wrote:

So, Blissful Agony does not count as a queued combat, since it first ends combat and then does X (where X happens to be new combat)?

PetriWessman wrote:

Because of this, you can apparently play Relentless Reaper, Psyche!, Telepathic Tracking etc to continue combat or start a new combat (which cancels BA's combat).

PetriWessman wrote:

Siren's Lure *does* count as a queued combat

PetriWessman wrote:

, so you cannot play Reaper, Psyche, Telepathic Tracking etc after it has been played?

• A combat cannot be queued if there is already a combat queued.
• Effects that end combat and then do something else after combat (all in the single resolution of the effect) will fizzle if combat doesn't end or if a new combat is started.
• Telepathic Tracking and Relentless Reaper replaces the end of a combat by a new round, so they don't count as "queuing up a new combat": they can be played if a Siren's Lure has queued a combat.
• Psyche! is played when the combat is about to end to queue a new combat. It cannot be played if another combat is already queued (eg., Siren's Lure, Blissful Agony).
• Telepathic Tracking and Relentless Reaper are played before Psyche! could be played, and since the combat is no longer ending, Psyche! cannot be played.