Rule book error Part 2

I double checked the rule book after the last thread. Section 6.5.5 DIABLERIE Last sentence definately is in error. It says a Blood Hunt may be called, which as you can see is the following paragraph. Section 6.5.6 THE BLOOD HUNT. Be definition section 6.5.6 is optional since 6.5.5 (previous sentence) just told me that its a *may*, then if the *may* option is obtained then the manditory referendum is called. we all know thats incorrect, Sooo... the last Sentance of 6.5.5 should be removed. It will eventually mean I don't have to argue myself blue in the face with some new player about why 6.5.6 is not optional and who the Referendum is required. Raille Can't wait till the Black Hand rules come out fixing this

> we all know thats incorrect, Sooo... the last Sentance of 6.5.5 should > be removed. It will eventually mean I don't have to argue myself blue > in the face with some new player about why 6.5.6 is not optional and who > the Referendum is required. "May" implies either an option (you may or may not call one), or a possibility (it may or may not be called). In this case, the word is used in reference to the possibility. Muaziz, Theo, and a few other vampires, as well as any vampire that's been made an Archon, can diablerize without a possibility of a Blood Hunt being called. In these cases, a Blood Hunt may NOT be called. So the wording is correct. Fanboy, using his degree in Semantics.

In message <3EDE9F1...@mich.com>, Raille <rai...@mich.com> writes: >I double checked the rule book after the last thread. > >Section 6.5.5 DIABLERIE >Last sentence definately is in error. It says a Blood Hunt may be >called, which as you can see is the following paragraph. > >Section 6.5.6 THE BLOOD HUNT. >Be definition section 6.5.6 is optional since 6.5.5 (previous sentence) >just told me that its a *may*, then if the *may* option is obtained >then the manditory referendum is called. > >we all know thats incorrect, We do? The Blood Hunt may (in this instance, being pretty much synonymous with might) be called. The referendum will be called.[0] The Blood Hunt is not the referendum. Per [6.5.6]: If the referendum passes, a blood hunt is called 6.5.6 is about the Blood Hunt, and why it might be called; the referendum to determine if the Blood Hunt is called is not the Blood Hunt. [0] Barring an illegal target for such, by card text. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D Lucky that my breasts are small and humble, EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 So you don't confuse them with mountains. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D

[ quoted text not captured ] Changing "may" to "must" wouldn't change any of the examples you mention. Section 1.4 takes care of that. Sten During

James Coupe wrote: > The Blood Hunt may (in this instance, being pretty much synonymous with > might) be called. The referendum will be called.[0] > > The Blood Hunt is not the referendum. Per [6.5.6]: Correct. See Part 1 of this thread where this is explained as well. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

Sten During wrote: The Fanboy wrote: we all know thats incorrect, Sooo... the last Sentance of 6.5.5 should be removed. It will eventually mean I don't have to argue myself blue in the face with some new player about why 6.5.6 is not optional and who the Referendum is required. "May" implies either an option (you may or may not call one), or a possibility (it may or may not be called). In this case, the word is used in reference to the possibility. Muaziz, Theo, and a few other vampires, as well as any vampire that's been made an Archon, can diablerize without a possibility of a Blood Hunt being called. In these cases, a Blood Hunt may NOT be called. So the wording is correct. Fanboy, using his degree in Semantics. Changing "may" to "must" wouldn't change any of the examples you mention. Section 1.4 takes care of that. Sten During Precisely. Which is what I've been pointing out. As is 6.5.5 seems to allow the player to skip 6.5.6,, dropping that sentence remove a point of confusion and 1.4 allows it to be voided as needed to fit various card effects and vampire specials. Raille

In message <3EE1E236...@mich.com>, Raille <rai...@mich.com> writes: >As is 6.5.5 seems to allow the player to skip 6.5.6,, dropping that >sentence remove a point of confusion and 1.4 allows it to be voided as >needed to fit various card effects and vampire specials. You are the one who is confused. The Blood Hunt *is* optional. The Blood Hunt *may*, maybe, might be called. 6.5.5 notes that the Blood Hunt may be called. 6.5.6 details how the referendum is conducted to see if that Blood Hunt is called. The Blood Hunt is *not* the referendum. The referendum *is* called, save for the provisions of 1.4. The Blood Hunt *may* be called, dependent on that referendum. 6.5.5 details the potential threat to a vampire; 6.5.6 details how you determine if that threat is invoked. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:<738rhIO0...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>... > In message <3EE1E236...@mich.com>, Raille <rai...@mich.com> writes: > >As is 6.5.5 seems to allow the player to skip 6.5.6,, dropping that > >sentence remove a point of confusion and 1.4 allows it to be voided as > >needed to fit various card effects and vampire specials. > > You are the one who is confused. > > The Blood Hunt *is* optional. The Blood Hunt *may*, maybe, might be > called. > > > 6.5.5 notes that the Blood Hunt may be called. 6.5.6 details how the > referendum is conducted to see if that Blood Hunt is called. > > The Blood Hunt is *not* the referendum. The referendum *is* called, > save for the provisions of 1.4. The Blood Hunt *may* be called, > dependent on that referendum. > > > > 6.5.5 details the potential threat to a vampire; 6.5.6 details how you > determine if that threat is invoked. Let me try a different tack. The Blood Hunt is a World of Darkness way of describing how the condemned vampire is burned. People sometimes refer to the referendum as the "Blood Hunt". This is where the confusion comes from, I believe. May is used in 6.5.5 because whether or not the Blood Hunt happens depends on whether the referendum is sucessful. If the referendum is successful then there is a Blood Hunt. If the referendum is not successful, then there is *no* Blood Hunt. Hope this makes it clearer and not muddier... Doug

In message <2778f4d5.03060...@posting.google.com>, Doug <mess...@yahoo.com> writes: >People sometimes refer to the referendum as the "Blood Hunt". Tell them they're wrong and point them to: "If the referendum passes, a blood hunt is called" [6.5.6] Confusion ends. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > In message <3EE1E236...@mich.com>, Raille <rai...@mich.com> writes: > >>As is 6.5.5 seems to allow the player to skip 6.5.6,, dropping that >>sentence remove a point of confusion and 1.4 allows it to be voided as >>needed to fit various card effects and vampire specials. > > > You are the one who is confused. > > The Blood Hunt *is* optional. The Blood Hunt *may*, maybe, might be > called. > > Perhaps you should actually pick up the rule book and look at it. 6.5.6 is call the Blood Hunt, and according to 6.5.5 it is optional. Recall that the rule book is NOT for the grognards like us, its for the new player. They will end up confused, and thats Not a good thing. Please show me in the rule book on who you determine when the blood hunt (6.5.6) *may* be called. And you'll see that there is Nothing there. Dropping the last sentance of 6.5.5 does nothing to confuse the game play and allows you to drop right into the next rules section governing the Referendum and resulting blood hunt. Raille

In message <3EE3632C...@mich.com>, Raille <rai...@mich.com> writes: >Perhaps you should actually pick up the rule book and look at it. >6.5.6 is call the Blood Hunt, The Blood Hunt is called the Blood Hunt. 6.5.6 is sub-titled the Blood Hunt, because it is about it. >and according to 6.5.5 it is optional. It, the Blood Hunt, may occur. Please not that "may" occur is not the same as optional. If it occurs, it is not optional. If it does not occur, it is still not optional. But it may, might, maybe occur. If you are explaining to players that it is optional, you are only going to confuse them. The rule book does not define it as optional. Optional is not the same as "may be called", can occur, might happen, maybe. This explains that it may be called, or it may not. It doesn't dictate *how* it may be called, or *why* it may be called. So then you read 6.5.6 which, being called Blood Hunt, is about the Blood Hunt! So, someone actually *reading* 6.5.6 will find that it details the Blood Hunt and how it might occur. A player reading 6.5.6 will find: "As stated, vampiric society condemns the act of diablerie. " Gosh, you mean we might be going over bits of things already mentioned? Such shocking, shocking behaviour. "When a vampire commits diablerie, a referendum is automatically conducted to determine if a blood hunt will be called on the diablerist. " So, a vampire committing diablerie will automatically cause a referendum to be conducted, which *may* result in a blood hunt being called on them. So the referendum -> blood hunt. referendum != blood hunt Hence, they can even see that the Blood Hunt is not the referendum, by *reading* the text. And the Blood Hunt may occur, but only if the referendum passes. What's even remotely tricky about this? A player sees a Blood Hunt may be called in 6.5.5. A player reads 6.5.6 to find out how this may happen. By your bizarre logic, a player reads 1.6.3.1 and finds that a minion *can* take an action with an action card. They can then safely ignore the rest of the rest of the rules because it's obviously optional. Or they can read the rest of the rules to find out how it can occur! May. They don't know when it may occur, and when it might not occur. So they read 6.5.6 and it tells them all about the Blood Hunt, including when it may or may not occur! Ta-da! [ quoted text not captured ]

Raille wrote: > James Coupe wrote: >> The Blood Hunt *is* optional. The Blood Hunt *may*, maybe, might be >> called. > > Perhaps you should actually pick up the rule book and look at it. > 6.5.6 is call the Blood Hunt, and according to 6.5.5 it is optional. 6.5.6 is "The Blood Hunt" (not "Call the Blood Hunt"). The Blood Hunt may be called. [6.5.5] It is more "conditional" than it is optional. The Blood Hunt isn't called if the referendum (which is automatically conducted) fails. Thus the "may". It might be called. Or it might not. Whether it is called or not depends on the outcome of the referendum. The referendum conducted to see if the Blood Hunt will be called is always called after a successful diablerie. [6.5.6] If the referendum passes, then the Blood Hunt is called. If the referendum fails, then the Blood Hunt is not called. > Recall that the rule book is NOT for the grognards like us, its for the > new player. They will end up confused, and thats Not a good thing. New players understand it just fine. Old players who have been misusing the terms (as I have done in the past) may be confused. If the new player learns from an old player who is misusing the terms, the new player may be confused as well. > Please show me in the rule book on who you determine when the blood hunt > (6.5.6) *may* be called. And you'll see that there is Nothing there. [6.5.6]: "When a vampire commits diablerie, a referendum is automatically conducted to determine if a blood hunt will be called on the diablerist. If the referendum passes, a blood hunt is called, and the diablerist is burned." > Dropping the last sentance of 6.5.5 does nothing to confuse the game > play and allows you to drop right into the next rules section governing > the Referendum and resulting blood hunt. Leaving the last sentence of 6.5.5 does nothing to confuse the game play and alerts the reader to the possible drawback of diablerie, serving as a nice segue to 6.5.6. But this is completely immaterial to the subject at hand - a rulebook "error" rather than an error on the part of the reader. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <3EE38608...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white- wolf.com> writes: >The Blood Hunt may be called. [6.5.5] It is more "conditional" than >it is optional. The obvious example being something like: "It may rain today." If it happens, it happens. If it doesn't, it doesn't. I wonder if people stand outside demanding that rain was optional so they didn't bring an umbrella with them. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > In message <3EE38608...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white- > wolf.com> writes: > >>The Blood Hunt may be called. [6.5.5] It is more "conditional" than >>it is optional. > > > The obvious example being something like: > > "It may rain today." > > If it happens, it happens. If it doesn't, it doesn't. > > I wonder if people stand outside demanding that rain was optional so > they didn't bring an umbrella with them. > I don't belive that the above post did anything to contribute to the conversation. Raille

In message <3EE3B830...@mich.com>, Raille <rai...@mich.com> writes: >> The obvious example being something like: >> "It may rain today." >> If it happens, it happens. If it doesn't, it doesn't. >> I wonder if people stand outside demanding that rain was optional so >> they didn't bring an umbrella with them. >> > >I don't belive that the above post did anything to contribute to the >conversation. And your repeated claims that "may" means "optional" do? The English language uses may in the sense detailed above very easily. May doesn't automatically mean optional. The Blood Hunt is not optional. It just sometimes occurs and sometimes doesn't. Depending on the referendum. Just like it sometimes rains and sometimes doesn't - it may rain today. That doesn't mean it's optional. If you can't understand that "may" in the rulebook doesn't automatically mean "optional", the above example may clarify it for you - it may rain, the blood hunt may happen, I may win the game. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3EE38608...@white-wolf.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] My feeling is that the use of the word "call" in reference to the Blood Hunt may be where the confusion comes from. The word "called" is used as part of the standard phrasing on all political action cards, i.e "Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. *Called* by any vampire at +1 stealth." Because vampires "call" referenda, it is easy to misunderstand that the Blood Hunt is another term for the referendum called after a diablerie. I agree that a careful reading of the text of 6.5.5 and 6.5.6 adequately explains the rules, but because the word "call" as a game term has such a specific use, it might be better to rephrase the statement as it relates to Blood Hunts in future rulebooks. Doug

Doug wrote: > My feeling is that the use of the word "call" in reference to the > Blood Hunt may be where the confusion comes from. The word "called" > is used as part of the standard phrasing on all political action > cards, i.e "Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. *Called* by any vampire at > +1 stealth." Because vampires "call" referenda, it is easy to > misunderstand that the Blood Hunt is another term for the referendum > called after a diablerie. "Call" has no specific game term - the standard English definition is used. Blood Hunts are called (if the appropriate referendum passes). Referendums are called (automatically in the case of diablerie, as part of the resolution of a successful political action in other cases). [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3EE38608...@white-wolf.com>... > The referendum conducted to see if the Blood Hunt will be called is > always called after a successful diablerie. [6.5.6] > If the referendum passes, then the Blood Hunt is called. If the > referendum fails, then the Blood Hunt is not called. This was all very clear, until i ran into Ilyana Ravidovich. Can anyone explain the use of the 2 votes, because as i now understand, when the blood hunt is called, the referendum has already passed, and so the time for voting is over ;) Graaf Tel Ilyana Ravidovich : You get 2 extra votes in blood hunts called against Ilyana. Once each action, Ilyana may burn 1 blood to get +1 intercept.