Example: Great Kircher uses Nose of the Hound to rush a prince. The prince then uses a Second Tradition: Domain to untap. The action fizzles, since the prince is no longer a valid target for the Nose of the Hound action, but combat still occurs since the action was blocked.
The prince is (of course) still untapped after playing Second Tradition: Domain, but is tapped then for successfully blocking, even though the actual action has fizzled due to a missing target.
Similar examples apply to cards like Ambush or Blood of the Sandman.
- References: Post in Usenet Newsgroup 2008
- References: Post in Usenet Newsgroup 2002
6 comments:
in your example the action fizzles at his conclusion so the blok attempt occurs (and i think howler will certainly let it happens)
there is a flaw in your example :)
if the prince plays 2nd tradition, he is commited to intercept the Nose of the Hound action, thus resulting in a combat.
However, if he did untap with Eluding the arms of morpheus, he would have no obligation to block (and no intercept) so he stays untapped and the action fizzles.
oh, crap, i juste realized there is another problem with this example : If howler plays nose of the hound, as she masters superior spiritus, we must assume she played it at superior "enter combat with any minion". So regardless the tapped/untapped state of the target, the combat will occur. Sorry mate :)
No, actually I wasn't aware of this. Thank you sir, you rock!
-TH
I changed the attacking vampire in the example from "Howler" to "Greta Kircher" so that the "Nose of the Hound" action (requiring Auspex) needs a tapped minion as target.
I am still convinced that the action fizzles and there is no resulting block/combat (as the first commenter wrote), simply because there is no more action to block.
After some discussion on #vtes and checking the original posts again, I have changed the text, as the other commenters had already remarked.
Post a Comment