cons.agit/kine res cont question?

These two vote cards say to divide X/4 among two or more methuselahs. Can I therefore assign 4 blood loss to one and 0 to another for example? Or must it be at least 1 to each of two or more methuselahs? T

<Talo...@hotmail.com> wrote > These two vote cards say to divide X/4 among two or more methuselahs. > Can I therefore assign 4 blood loss to one and 0 to another for > example? Or must it be at least 1 to each of two or more methuselahs? No, it must be 2 or more Methuselahs. Had it been written 'Divide X among 1 or more Methuselahs' it would be as you say (and much more powerful). As it is, you have to either assign at least one point of damage from the vote to someone else... depending on who has the votes or if there are only two players left, this might even be yourself. Another slightly ambiguous card, Rumors of Gehenna says you can assign its effect to a 'set of Methuselahs'. You have the perogative of defining the size of that set, be it just yourself, two players not including yourself, every player in the game, etc. Cheers, WES

On Sun, 18 Feb 2001 09:57:47 GMT, Talo...@hotmail.com wrote: Still looking for clarification on these cards, if possible. [ quoted text not captured ]

> >These two vote cards say to divide X/4 among two or more methuselahs. > >Can I therefore assign 4 blood loss to one and 0 to another for > >example? Or must it be at least 1 to each of two or more methuselahs? It must be at least 1 to each of two or more Methuselahs. Carpe Noctem. Lasombra http://lasombra.tripod.com http://legbiter.tripod.com http://vekn_clans.tripod.com

The Lasombra wrote: >>> These two vote cards say to divide X/4 among two or more methuselahs. >>> Can I therefore assign 4 blood loss to one and 0 to another for >>> example? Or must it be at least 1 to each of two or more methuselahs? >> > > It must be at least 1 to each of two or more Methuselahs. Correct. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

"wes" <gh...@mnsi.net> wrote: >Another slightly ambiguous card, Rumors of Gehenna says you can assign its >effect to a 'set of Methuselahs'. You have the perogative of defining the >size of that set, be it just yourself, two players not including yourself, >every player in the game, etc. Set theory would indicate that the null set (*no* player get the bonus) would be acceptable. Would this be allowed? And yes, I can easily see a reason for it - combined with Bribes and Voter Captivation, for instance. ----------------------------------------------------------- Johan Lundstrom <jo...@algonet.se> "Knowledge is power. Power corrupts."

Johan Lundstrom wrote: > Set theory would indicate that the null set (*no* player get the > bonus) would be acceptable. Would this be allowed? And yes, I can > easily see a reason for it - combined with Bribes and Voter > Captivation, for instance. "A Set of Item X" means one or more Item X. [RTR 19960112] [ quoted text not captured ]