What happens when two methuselahs (Joel and Neil) contest a prince, and
then a third (Jack) passes a praxis seizure on that prince's title?
Is the title simply given to Jack's vampire (since the contested vampires
aren't in the game)?
Or does the title become contested also? In which case, do the contested
vampires each pay 1 blood to contest the title? What happens if Neil
decides to yeild the title (and still contest the prince) and Joel
continues to contest both the vampire and the title?
Mike
ps: thanks for all the recent suggestions about Oracle questions. This
combo REALLY annoyed my prey.
Q: What will your answer be next turn?
A: No.
Q: Will you attempt to block any of my minions actions for the rest of the
game?
Michael B. Moore (mmo...@linc.cis.upenn.edu) wrote:
: What happens when two methuselahs (Joel and Neil) contest a prince, and: then a third (Jack) passes a praxis seizure on that prince's title?: Is the title simply given to Jack's vampire (since the contested vampires
: aren't in the game)?
My thought would be that Jack's would have the title (since the other two
are not ready) until one of you conceeds. Then the title would be in contest.
However, if I recall, titles in contest only result in neither vamp being
able to use those votes, and not an actual blood loss.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Matt the Wired (Justicar)
Matt Dworkin (mdwo...@force.stwing.upenn.edu) wrote:
> However, if I recall, titles in contest only result in neither vamp being
> able to use those votes, and not an actual blood loss.
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
If two vamps contest titles, blood has to be paid, but the blood is taken
from the vampire, not the methuselah--so yes, your wrong, I believe.
> Matt the Wired (Justicar)
Been taking some No-Doze [tm], Matt?
-ben
--
"I've seen things you wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the
shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tann-
hauser gate. All these moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."
In article <3c95ku$4...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
Michael B. Moore <mmo...@linc.cis.upenn.edu> wrote:
>ps: thanks for all the recent suggestions about Oracle questions. This
>combo REALLY annoyed my prey.
>Q: What will your answer be next turn?
>A: No.
Be careful on this one, the question that you asked is not a yes or no
question(even though the answer yes or no is valid). Therefore, since you are
not asking a yes or no question, you victim does not have to answer yes or no.
>Q: Will you attempt to block any of my minions actions for the rest of the
>game?
Even if the first part of the question gets through, the wording on the card
says if possible. If the victim being asked the question doesn't think its
possible to follow his answer from the last round, does he really have to
follow his old answer?
jo...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Josh Hsu) writes:
>In article <3c95ku$4...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
>Michael B. Moore <mmo...@linc.cis.upenn.edu> wrote:>>ps: thanks for all the recent suggestions about Oracle questions. This
>>combo REALLY annoyed my prey.
>>Q: What will your answer be next turn?
>>A: No.>Be careful on this one, the question that you asked is not a yes or no
>question(even though the answer yes or no is valid). Therefore, since you are
>not asking a yes or no question, you victim does not have to answer yes or no.
Try:
Q: Will your answer to my next question be 'yes'?
>>Q: Will you attempt to block any of my minions actions for the rest of the
>>game?>Even if the first part of the question gets through, the wording on the card
>says if possible. If the victim being asked the question doesn't think its
>possible to follow his answer from the last round, does he really have to
>follow his old answer?
Come on.
It is possible to answer 'no' (try it, it's easy), so you must validate your
prior answer by answering 'no' this time.
You must then validate that by not attampting to block the minion actions
for the rest of the game. (Again, very easy to do - just don't block :-)
L. Scott Johnson
In article <3c95ku$4...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
Michael B. Moore <mmo...@linc.cis.upenn.edu> wrote:
>What happens when two methuselahs (Joel and Neil) contest a prince, and
>then a third (Jack) passes a praxis seizure on that prince's title?
>
Jack's vampire is the prince. When Joel gives up the contest and Neil's
comes into play, the title of prince is then contested. Jack's vampire
and Neil's vampire can both act, but neither gets the title until one
of them gives it up.
| If you've got a hot lead on a new | *--Joe--*
| PC game, call the announce line at | js...@vt.edu
| ** csi...@discus.ise.vt.edu ** |
+-------------------------------------+----------------------------------
"Carnivores, oy!" -- Timon, TLK
: However, if I recall, titles in contest only result in neither vamp being: able to use those votes, and not an actual blood loss.: Someone correct me if I'm wrong.: Matt the Wired (Justicar)
Actually, there is a blood loss, but from the vamps, not from the
metheuseluh. Stops those upstart three pool neonates from taking out the REAL
prince of Boston.
Larrx...
Michael B. Moore <mmo...@linc.cis.upenn.edu> wrote:
>What happens when two methuselahs (Joel and Neil) contest a prince, and
>then a third (Jack) passes a praxis seizure on that prince's title?
All copies of a unique card/title get contested, not just two at a time.
Jack's title will go into contention, and the vampire will have to start
paying to contend it.*
>Is the title simply given to Jack's vampire (since the contested vampires
>aren't in the game)?
The vampires are "in the game" enough to mark their title, or future copies
of themselves, as contested.
>Or does the title become contested also? In which case, do the contested
>vampires each pay 1 blood to contest the title? What happens if Neil
>decides to yeild the title (and still contest the prince) and Joel
>continues to contest both the vampire and the title?
The contested vampires don't pay to contest the title; Joel and Neil just
pay pool to contest the entire vampire. Jack's vampire will pay blood to
keep the title contested. Joel and Neil cannot just yield the title, but
would have to yield the entire vampire.
Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
aa...@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
* Actually, I suppose I should check on that part of it, but that's what
the rules seem to say.
Before I could do anything to stop it, L. Scott Johnson wrote:
> Q: Will your answer to my next question be 'yes'?
A: That all depends. What's your next question?
--
Arrogantly twisting the sterile canvas snoot of a | a-Henh!
fully charged icing annointment utensil, he poots forth |
a tiny green rosette near the summit of a dense but | Brian
radiant muffin of his own design. | Wilson
|
We miss you, Frank! |
Michael B. Moore (mmo...@linc.cis.upenn.edu) wrote:
: What happens when two methuselahs (Joel and Neil) contest a prince, and: then a third (Jack) passes a praxis seizure on that prince's title?: Is the title simply given to Jack's vampire (since the contested vampires
: aren't in the game)?
Yes.
: Or does the title become contested also?
Only when Joel or Neil give up contesting the Prince. Then you
will have two vampires with the same Prince title, and then the
title becomes contested.
On Wed, 14 Dec 1994, Peter M Deglopper wrote:
> Questioner: I don't have to tell you that. Read the card. You must
> answer truthfully, and if the question pertains to the future, as this
> one does, you must abide by your answer if possible. Is it a yes-or-no
> question? Yes, it is. So you have to answer it.
There is no way for me to answer that question truthfully, and, although
you admit that it would be incredibly cheesy to try this in a game (which
it certainly would), you would *not* get a yes or no answer out of me on
this one. I would say, "I don't know - could you rephrase the question?,"
as many times as you might care to ask it. Eventually you would tire of
this charade and ask a real question.