Is it possible and legal to say, for the sake of shorter wordings : "from
now on in the game, when I will ask you if you have any "wake", this will
include any card which enables a tapped vampire either to untap or to react
as if untapped" ? And must the player accept this, or if he accepts keep his
word ?
This, of course, is an example. The goal being, making games and
declarations shorter.
Thanks,
Orpheus
"Orpheus" <orph...@free.fr> wrote in message
news:3f57b030$0$16572$626a...@news.free.fr...
> Is it possible and legal to say, for the sake of shorter wordings : "from
> now on in the game, when I will ask you if you have any "wake", this will
> include any card which enables a tapped vampire either to untap or to
react
> as if untapped" ? And must the player accept this, or if he accepts keep
his
> word ?
nothing forces him to accept this. And he may accept now (when you ask) and
refuse later since questions about the future are not binding. =)
[ quoted text not captured ]
Of course. Any question the player understands is fine.
--
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/
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Orpheus wrote:
> Is it possible and legal to say, for the sake of shorter wordings : "from
> now on in the game, when I will ask you if you have any "wake", this will
> include any card which enables a tapped vampire either to untap or to react
> as if untapped" ? And must the player accept this, or if he accepts keep his
> word ?
Freak Drive allows a tapped vampire to untap. So does Majesty. So does
Earth Meld. You might want to alter your definition slightly. :)
-Matt
I just ask if they have any wake type effects in their hand. It is
still a short sentence and it covers all the reaction cards I can
think of. Since a wake effect is commonly known as something that
will allow the minion to either uptap or play cards as if untapped, it
would take some very smooth talking to convince a judge otherwise.
I do the same with bleed bounce and the like.
I would think any definition of terms agreed upon by other methuselahs
would be binding, but just have a judge there when you do it :). As
it was said above, you have to be carefull how you phrase it, lest the
sneaky jerks find a loophole.
The Corpse-Monger,
Dr. Fish
Orpheus <orph...@free.fr> wrote:
> Is it possible and legal to say, for the sake of shorter wordings : "from
> now on in the game, when I will ask you if you have any "wake", this will
> include any card which enables a tapped vampire either to untap or to react
> as if untapped" ? And must the player accept this, or if he accepts keep his
> word ?
If you plan on using the Monocle to ask about certain cards in their hand,
you can write a list on paper beforehand, and say "Do you have any of these
cards in your hand?"
For example, make a list that says (I may miss a few, but this is just an
example):
DOMINATE: Deflection, Redirection
AUSPEX: Telepathic Misdirection, My Enemy's Enemy
WAKE: Forced Awakening, Wake with Evening's Freshness, Special Report
ANIMALISM: Guard Dogs, Rats' Warning
SPIRITUS: Speak with Spirits
And then your question can be:
"Do you have any cards in your hand from the WAKE or ANIMALISM list on this
paper?"
or whatever, depending on their ready minion situation.
On 5 Sep 2003, Dr. Fish wrote:
> I just ask if they have any wake type effects in their hand. It is
> still a short sentence and it covers all the reaction cards I can
> think of. Since a wake effect is commonly known as something that
> will allow the minion to either uptap or play cards as if untapped, it
> would take some very smooth talking to convince a judge otherwise.
>
> I do the same with bleed bounce and the like.
A couple of different times I have tapped out in an attempt to oust my
prey and failed to do so when my predator had the Monocle.
His question, "Do you have any bounce in hand?"
Turned out I had just drawn some, so I replied in the affirmative. He
didn't bleed for fear of ousting my prey for me. The funny part is that I
had no Wakes. Just the bounce. Thank you Monocle of Clarity!
Matt Morgan
In message <xCj6b.372765$o%2.168219@sccrnsc02>,
Jozxyqk <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> mumbled something about:
[ quoted text not captured ]
"As a centuries-old Methuselah, I only read Latin, sorry. Could you
please state your question verbally?"
-- Derek
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
- C. Darwin, 1871
Dr. Fish wrote:
> I just ask if they have any wake type effects in their hand. It is
> still a short sentence and it covers all the reaction cards I can
> think of. Since a wake effect is commonly known as something that
> will allow the minion to either uptap or play cards as if untapped, it
> would take some very smooth talking to convince a judge otherwise.
Only if you and the player in question have agreed on that meaning.
It is completely plausible for the player in question to think you mean
"allow to block/react as if untapped without untapping" effect.
> I do the same with bleed bounce and the like.
Bleed bounce seems pretty clear, yes.
> I would think any definition of terms agreed upon by other methuselahs
> would be binding, but just have a judge there when you do it :). As
Yes. Any mechanism whereby the question has the same meaning to both the
questioner and the answerer is fine.
[ quoted text not captured ]