Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (
More info?)
"Joshua Duffin" <jtduffin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:36a6t7F4v2kv7U1@individual.net...
>
> "LSJ" <vtesrep@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
> news:36a14sF4s15d1U1@individual.net...
>> "Joshua Duffin" <jtduffin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:369p84F4uo7g2U1@individual.net...
>
>> > > > Ossian
>> > > > Ally, 3 Pool
>> > > >
>> > > > Unique Werewolf with 4 life, 2 strength, 0 bleed. Red
>> > > > List.
>> > > >
>> > > > Ossian May enter combat with any vampire as a +1
>> > > > stealth (D) action. In the first round of combat with
>> > > > a vampire who has played a card that requires Auspex
>> > > > during this action, that vampire cannot use any
>> > > > maneuvers or strikes. Ossian gains 1 life at the end of
>> > > > each round for each blood the opposing vampire used to
>> > > > heal damage or prevent destruction that round.
>> "This action" refers to the current action, whatever it may
>> be.
>
> Oh, okay. The phrase "this action" makes it seem like it's
> referring back to a previously mentioned action.
Eh? It _does_ refer back to the previously mentioned action:
whatever action got him into a combat with a vampire who was
played a card that requires Auspect. (Well, anyway, I didn't
think twice about it. And I'm usually pretty adept at seeing
alternative meanings depending on how a sentence is construed.)
>> > If he takes his enter-combat ability and the target plays
>> > Read Intentions in the first round for a strike: dodge,
>> > does that strike: dodge work as normal?
>
>> Yes.
>
> I like this answer fine. But doesn't "use" normally (as with
> Grenades) include both the declaration of a strike and the
> resolution of a strike? It seems like someone could make the
> argument that resolving the Dodge is "using" the strike, and
> since the vampire has played a card requiring Auspex during
> the current action, that vampire shouldn't be able to "use"
> that strike.
Granted, I don't know a lot about the finer points of this
interpretation to know if your objection holds much water or
not. But if you were right, this reduces to: "A minion who
plays Read Intentions (against Ossian) may not strike with Read
Intentions."
My one-word response: "Ugh!".
Fred