Taken Out Result

[Blackblade]

If the target is taken out by ranged incite emotion and the player still wants to feed, I'd say a valid Take Out result could be "The victim is drawn closer to the vampire, and offers no resistance to the feeding."   

[Tedronai]

"The victim is drawn closer to the vampire, and offers no resistance to the feeding."   

If the WCV is a Raith, sure.

[Silverblaze]

My interpretation, above (allowing the combination, when both are applicable, with all benefits of both, but not two instances of stress), is probably the LEAST generous interpretation supported by the RAW.

I totally agree.  One can do as they please in their games, but I'd never allow it were I running the game nor would I play in a game where that system was being used.

X2 stress with proper upgrades and tagging aspects can "one shot" about anything in game. 

[Belial666]

Except things that feel no emotions, like zombies or constructs or the Black Court. Or a prepared wizard under a Mind Blank spell. Or...


You get the idea.

[Silverblaze]

Except things that feel no emotions, like zombies or constructs or the Black Court. Or a prepared wizard under a Mind Blank spell. Or...


You get the idea.

I do get the idea.

"about anything" denotes not everything. 
Key point.  Wizards are/can be invulnerable given enough prep time.  Most times, they're slightly more steeled mentally than humans.  I'm pretty sure black court vampires feel emotions.

However, the point is you like/allow it and I don't I see neither of us budging on that opinion.  I don't mind debating reasons, but it may be a waste of time on both counts.  I'd rather have a wizard throw a 10-15 point evocation than get double incited.

[Becq]

The rules for this are vaguely written, and could be interpreted to allow double damage with Incite+Feeding.  However, given the pains through which the designers went to ensure that in every other aspect of the game, there was no way of generating damage twice with one attack, or two attacks with one action, or an attack plus a maneuver with one action, etc, etc ... I think I feel comfortable in assuming they did not mean for that to happen here.

I think the core of the confusion lies in the following section in the Emotional Vampire rules:

When a victim is in the throes of an eligible emotion (usually easy for a White Court vampire using his Incite Emotion ability, page 172), you may draw some of his life force out of him to sustain you. This is done as a psychological attack with an appropriate skill (usually Deceit or Intimidation).

The "This is done" sentence is refering to how one gets the viction into the throes of an eligible emotion (ie, by making a psychological attack); it is not saying that the feeding itself is a psychological attack.  So an Emotional Vampire without Incite Emotion could use a psychological attack (for example, a seduction attempt for lust vampires, which would be handled as mental combat complete with stress and consequences) to create the emotion, which he could then feed on.  This would take quite some time, generally, and would not be appropriate for combat (because such mental attacks are slow).

Emotional Vampires who also have Incite Emotion can use Incite to 'create the mood' in place of a normal psychological attack (not in addition to), and can gain the benefits of feeding as part of the same action.  This means that you get either the maneuver or stress from the Incite plus the benefits of feeding (which don't appear to have any mechanical benefits unless the target is taken out and killed as a result of the attack+feeding), but not 'double damage'.

At least, that's my read.  Your mileage may vary.

As to the original question, the attacking player dictates the Taken Out results within reason (ie, the GM and group should agree that the results are reasonable), and death is very specifically a reasonable result for the feeding done by an Emotional Vampire.  But the player decides whether he draws deeply enough to kill; he can choose not to do so (and wouldn't gain the benefits of feeding to death, of cours

[Tedronai]

Immediately followed by:

If you have the
Incite Emotion ability, inciting the emotion
and feeding on it may be done as a single
action, based on a single roll.

Which definitely does go a long way to imply that the preceding passage you quoted is, in fact, referring to the feeding as being an attack (as it can be combined in a single roll with a power that is, by default, not and attack in and of itself).

[ways and means]

If you are going by the RAW you can incite emotion and feed on it can be done as a single action, the incite emotion attack is still inciting an emotion so by the RAW you can make two attacks as a single action. Given this though it does seem obvious that this is probably not the way this power was intended to work and it probably should be errataed, my house rule is that a person can incite emotion (manouvre) and feed on it (attack) in the same turn but cannot incite emotion (attack) and feed (attack) in the same turn, this is still very powerful but is in my opinion how the rules where intended to be run.

[Blackblade]

This brings up another question: if you incite as a maneuver and feed off of it, would you get a weapon bonus to your attack if you had lasting or potent emotion? 

Additionally, does the +2 you get for inciting as a maneuver apply to just the maneuver, or to the maneuver and the attack, since they're done on the same roll?

[ways and means]

This brings up another question: if you incite as a maneuver and feed off of it, would you get a weapon bonus to your attack if you had lasting or potent emotion?  

Additionally, does the +2 you get for inciting as a maneuver apply to just the maneuver, or to the maneuver and the attack, since they're done on the same roll?

I run on no for the first one as the weapons bonus only applies to the incite emotion attack and yes for the second, as the second one you are dealing with a single actions so it would make sense having only one roll result. Still though what this ends up meaning is an attack of 7 then 8 subsequent turns (deceit 5).

[Blackblade]

Which could get up to ten if you tag the emotion incited in the previous turn.

[Taran]

There needs to be an emotion to feed.

If you used incite emotion and didn't hurt the target enough to cause a consequence then you couldn't feed and therefore cause more stress.

It seems a maneuver is better if you need to immediately cause a target to be "lustful" or "fearful".

If the target is already feeling the emotion, then I wouldn't allow the player to use both the incite and the feeding because there's no need to incite MORE lust in order to feed.

If the target is not feeling a strong emotion, I'd allow an incite emotion then, if it works (through causing stress and consequences), I might allow additional damage from the feeding for that one exchange at least.  

I think the "do it in one round" thing is just so you can start feeding in one exchange, otherwise a WCV would have to go through multiple exchanges to feed: 1 to incite, 1 to feed.  I think the purpose is to make the attack smoother, not encourage double damage.

[Becq]

Immediately followed by:
Which definitely does go a long way to imply that the preceding passage you quoted is, in fact, referring to the feeding as being an attack (as it can be combined in a single roll with a power that is, by default, not and attack in and of itself).

My point was that the sentence I quoted says (in my opinion) "you may gain the effects of feeding while performing a psychological attack that creates the required emotion (ie, engaging in a seduction 'conflict')", while the next sentence which you quoted says "Oh, and you can also feed as part of other types of attacks that create the require emotion, such as Incite Emotion".  The key being that the feeding (which is not an attack in and of itself) can be latched onto an actual attack (whether it's a basic 'everyman' attack using social/mental combat that might take an hour-long exchange and a bottle of expensive wine to complete, or an Incite Emotion attack which is very fast) without requiring a seperate action.

[ways and means]

Your Story - Emotional Vampire

When a victim is in the throes of an eligible emotion
(usually easy for a White Court vampire
using his Incite Emotion ability, page 172), you
may draw some of his life force out of him
to sustain you. This is done as a psychological
attack with an appropriate skill (usually
Deceit or Intimidation).

This states that feeding is a pyschological attack which means a mental attack.  Then again my opinion from the Novels is that the actual feeding should be physical damage.