Paths and burn blood requrement
Tadori, you are misquoting the ruling. This is [LSJ 19970224] :
No. It is the cost for setting the range. Shadow Step (superior) merely
Is the 2 blood the cost for playing superior Shadow Step? If so, can it be reduced by the Citadel or ignored by Dragos? If not, can a vampire with 0 blood use the effect (ignoring burn blood effects past his current blood supply?)
grants the vampire the (mandatory) ability to use that effect. The cost
cannot be reduced by the Citadel nor ignored by Dragos, since it is not
the cost of playing a card. A vampire with zero blood cannot pay the cost,
so cannot set the range.
Thank you Lip I totally was misled by the summary tekst on site saying "nor used by a vampire with less than two blood". Your are right.
LSJ never ruled you can't play it if you don't have the blood.
Link to the same as the above but with a more static link (if anyone wants to read it in the future)
I have been reading this thread and in regards to the original question i believe it has been answered, the Path´s kind of cards (reducing cards blood cost) only apply to the card costs which is shown as a number in a red "blood" drop on the attribute bar on the left. side of the card.
It now seems focus have turned to a second question (perhaps it should be in its own thread) of whether cards can be played or not when not being able to pay the cost of the effect to among other things possibly try to cycle cards. I don´t have a ruling I can link to but my understanding is that besides the requirements of playing a card one must be able to actually execute the effect intended at the time of playing it ...meaning that as much as for example a target of a card/effect must be valid to be able to play the card/effect, the ability to pay the cost of the effect also must be possible... a card/effect can´t by its own effect be played with the intent to make it fizzle, that would only be the result because of other cards/effects changing the state of things... like not having a valid target anymore.
My understanding when it comes to blood cost is that only Actions have a delayed payment of cost that only is paid upon a successful action and that the cost of the action is the sum of the cost of the card plus the cost of the effect played which is paid all at the same time as a single payment.
Card cost refers only to the cost printed in the lower left corner. These can be reduced by a Path for instance.
"Burn X blood to " is a "do X to Y" effect that involves burning blood to produce an effect. Those are not considered to be card costs and cannot be reduced.
I was ambiguous when I wrote (www.blackchantry.com/2020/12/25/)
Requirements for Playing Cards (p. 7)
Unless explicitly stated, costs you pay must be paid with resources you control: your pool, blood on vampires you control, cards in your ash heap, etc. For instance, you cannot play Enticement if you do not control the Edge, since you must burn it as part of its cost.
It should read "as part of its 'burn the Edge to...' effect".
"costs you pay must be paid with resources you control" is a valid statement: in order to pay the cost of a "burn the Edge to..." effect, you must control the Edge.
Correct. When one plays a card, one must announce all the effects and how costs (whether printed in the lower left corner of the card or otherwise indicated on the card as part of an effect) must be paid.
For instance, it is legal to play an Embrace (costs 2 blood) with a vampire that has only 1 blood if you declare using 1 or 2 blood for a Ravnos Carnival.
A vampire cannot however play a Shadow Step at superior if they don't have 2 blood to burn.
A vampire cannot play Enticement if their controller does not control the Edge.
The sum is not the "cost". The sum is the amount of blood (for instance) that the vampire would burn.
For an action card, the sum is paid when the action resolves successfully.
Some other cards (such as Form of Mist) have a "burn blood to..." effect that is declared (and paid) later.