Rafe#
In a recent thread (apologies, I can't recall which one), an
interesting possibile use of Malkavian Rider Clause was mentioned:
i) Play MRC on a vote
ii) Save the MRC auto-pass until someone commits diablerie
iii) Call the blood hunt referendum, which then passes automatically
due to MRC
This all seems legal, as the White Wolf site lists the MRC card text
as "the next <referendum> you successfully call passes automatically,"
and whilst not a political action, 6.5.6 of the rulebook clearly
refers to the blood hunt as a 'referendum'. Also, whilst 6.5.6 states
that "Since this [the blood hunt] is not an action, it cannot be
blocked, and action modifiers and reaction cards cannot be played",
despite the MRC auto-pass being originally generated by a reaction
card, no card is being played at this point. It seems legal to use
the MRC auto-pass in this scenario.
Now, my question is: Who gets the first opportunity to call the blood
hunt? Who the second? etc.
Consider these alternative scenarios:
i) Methuselah A is playing a Lasombra deck, and has a clear vote
majority. He commits diablerie on one of Methuselah B's minions.
Methuselah C, controlling Malkavians, has a saved MRC auto-pass as
described above. He calls a blood hunt referendum, and the diabolist
is burned.
ii) Methuselah A is playing a Lasombra deck, and has a clear vote
majority. He commits diablerie on one of Methuselah B's minions.
Methuselah C, controlling Malkavians, has a saved MRC auto-pass as
described above. Methuselah A remembers this fact, and before
Methuselah C can open his mouth to call a blood hunt referendum, calls
one himself. Methuselah C cannot now use the MRC auto-pass, and
Methuselah A's vote majority means his minion escapes being burned.
So, what then is the order in which the option to call a blood hunt
progresses? All 6.5.6 states is that "any Methuselah may call for a
referendum to see if a blood hunt will be called on the diablerist" -
presumably 'any Methuselah' also includes the Methuselah controlling
the diablerist. Perhaps one of the following options:
i) It is literally the first person to shout out 'BLOOD HUNT!!!' or
similar - I can see this leading to arguments over who shouted out
first!
ii) It follows the 'acting Methuselah' rule - acting Methuselah gets
first option to call the vote (so scenario B would prevail, unless the
diablerie was committed out of turn - e.g. via Amaranth) - if so, what
happens if they decline? Who can call next?
iii) Controller of the minion being diabolised gets first option to
call the blood hunt - if so, what happens if they decline? Who can
call next?
iv) It follows undirected blocking priority - prey gets first call,
then predator - if so, what happens if they both decline? Who can
call next?
or
v) Errata MRC so that it is not usable during a blood hunt referendum
The sequencing rules (1.6.1) state that 'If two or more players want
to play a card or effect, the acting Methuselah plays first', perhaps
suggesting option 'ii' - however, calling a blood hunt does not seem
to fall under 'playing a card' or 'playing an effect' (although the
MRC auto-pass may be classed as 'playing an effect', the effect cannot
be invoked until after the Methuselah who originally played MRC has
called a blood hunt).
Opinions/LSJ ruling?
- Rafe