Additional strikes?

Let's put this one on hold as long as I don't find LSJ's response (and stick to what the rulebook reads: "only after normal strike resolution").

Kraus wrote:

Additional strikes are announced (gained) and performed (used) only after the first pair of strikes are completed.

I've always interpreted this so that additional strikes can only be gained after the inital strikes have been resolved. Emphasis on announced, only and first.

The only after the first pair part doesn't mean that additional strikes cannot be gained later in the round, though, since it's possible to use multiple sources of additional strikes.

From the rulings list on this site:

General rulings: Combat wrote: If you have any pending (additional) strikes, wait until those strikes are resolved before gaining further additional strikes (if you are allowed to use more than one additional-strike-gaining effect in a round). (link)

Relevant other discussions:

Hell-for-Leather

Jacko and Quickness

The ruling that a minion can gain additional strikes later in the round after previously having passed on additional strikes is what's surprising, and, even it's currently a valid reading of the rules, is something I personally feel shouldn't be legal. Based on the reaction in this thread, I'm far from alone in that opinion.

Are you sure it's not supposed to mean that you can play cards that give additional strikes before or after preventing damage.

E.g.
Both vampires strike for 1 damage.
Vamp1 plays blur and then prevent the damage with soak.
Vamp2 prevent the damage with sideslip and then play blur for additionals.

Or does the "strikes are completed" mean after strike resolution is completed, with soak and everything?

You can't play Blur while you are still in a strike's resolution. This includes damage resolution.

drnlmza wrote: The only after the first pair part doesn't mean that additional strikes cannot be gained later in the round, though, since it's possible to use multiple sources of additional strikes.

So what you are saying is that only after the first pair is not the same as only immediatelyafter the first pair?

That is not the way I have been interpreting the rules all this time, but I have to admit, it is not a non-valid interpretation.

Pascal Bertrand wrote: Let's put this one on hold as long as I don't find LSJ's response (and stick to what the rulebook reads: "only after normal strike resolution").

Just to be clear: "only immediately after normal strike resolution"?