Quick question regarding voting

Okay...so I feel I should know why I think this is weird, but I can't think of a *good* reason why my new semi-playgroup shouldn't play this way. So they have this (house?) rule where they call a vote with a political action card, and then say something along the lines of "I'm not choosing to use the vote from this card yet." And then later toss down a different PA card and 'use the vote' from the second card. This all seems so wrong to me. I don't think the vote you gain from the initial card should be optional...I mean, that would presumably mean that I could toss down a few cards, but decide to only use the vote from one of them... Anyhow...clarification would be nice. I'm going to try to be polite when I bring it up...I mean call me crazy, but has anyone else seen this kind of thing? Xian "they look at you funny when you attack things like a hungry mountain lion on crack" --greensea -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

xi...@waste.org (Xian) wrote: >Okay...so I feel I should know why I think this is weird, but I can't think >of a *good* reason why my new semi-playgroup shouldn't play this way. > >So they have this (house?) rule where they call a vote with a political >action card, and then say something along the lines of "I'm not choosing to >use the vote from this card yet." And then later toss down a different PA >card and 'use the vote' from the second card. > >This all seems so wrong to me. I don't think the vote you gain from the >initial card should be optional...I mean, that would presumably mean that I >could toss down a few cards, but decide to only use the vote from one of >them... *laugh* heh... no, can't say as I've ever seen anything like it... I'm not sure what the official rule that disallows it, but there has to be one.... I mean, really, what's the difference between that and playing a lost-in-crowds but choosing to not take the stealth from it?? It's a blatant attempt to get around the new no-vote-pushing ordinance, and it's gotta be a crock.... was pretty funny to read, tho Bill Pyle (wp...@mindspring.com)

In article <7785dm$liq$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Xian <xi...@waste.org> writes >Okay...so I feel I should know why I think this is weird, but I can't think >of a *good* reason why my new semi-playgroup shouldn't play this way. > >So they have this (house?) rule where they call a vote with a political >action card, and then say something along the lines of "I'm not choosing to >use the vote from this card yet." And then later toss down a different PA >card and 'use the vote' from the second card. > It's wrong. The vote from the political action card counts, no choice. You don't get to say with any card that you'll only use part of its effect (cf using Acrobatics when you're prohibited from doing one part or the other). As a house rule, though, it's not so bad. I think most people would tend to agree that the "old" Golden Tenets rule of on any vote anyone can throw down one PA from their hand was not a bad one. -- James Coupe (Prince of Mercia, England) Vampire: Elder Kindred Network http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net

xi...@waste.org (Xian) wrote: > Okay...so I feel I should know why I think this is weird, but I can't think > of a *good* reason why my new semi-playgroup shouldn't play this way. > > So they have this (house?) rule where they call a vote with a political > action card, and then say something along the lines of "I'm not choosing to > use the vote from this card yet." And then later toss down a different PA > card and 'use the vote' from the second card. You can choose not to cast the vote (immediately), but you always gain the vote [6.3.3.1] (unless your house rules specify otherwise, of course). -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and DCI (tournament) rules: http://www.wizards.com/VTES/VTES_Rules.html [ quoted text not captured ]