Derange

Just to prevent any mistakes in future gameplay: Card Text of Derange is: This is a +1 stealth action. (D) Put this card on a vampire who is not a Malkavian antitribu. The vampire with this card is now considered to be a Malkavian antitribu and is no longer a member of his or her original clan. The vampire with this card may move it to another vampire as a (D) action. As above, and the vampire with this card does not untap as normal. He or she may burn 1 blood to untap. So the initial restriction to play this card is that it cannot be played on a Malk Antitribu. Is there a restriction to the subsequent (D) actions to pass on the Madness, that is, is it possible to derange a Malkavian Antitribu with the (D) action Derange provides? Another issue is the clan-changing aspect of the card. Assume a Camarilla vampire, titled with a Camarilla Title (Prince, for example). RTR062398 states as follows: Titles can only be held by vampires of the appropriate clan or sect. A clan Justicar title can only be held by a member of that clan, Camarilla vampires cannot hold Sabbat titles and vice-versa, etc. If a titled vampire changes clan or sect inappropriate to his title, he loses the benefit of the title unless and until he changes his clan or sect appropriately. If his title is contested while he is a member of an inappropriate sect, he immediately yields the title. (Losing capacity is not sufficient to lose the benefit of a title.) What exactly happens? I assume that a Sabbat vampire holding the title of a Prince would - holds the title of Prince The first paragraph seems to imply that the vampire looses the title entirely ("Camarilla vampires cannot hold Sabbat titles and vice-versa,..."), but the following text seems to mean that the title is not lost, but is somewhat dormant. - cannot cast the prince votes (which would belong to the "benefit" category) - cannot use Prince/Justicar cards (which would be a "benefit" too) - cannot call Votes restricted to Camarilla Vampires (since she belongs to the Sabbat) LSJ, please clearify the situation with the new errata in mind. Thanx Michael Beer

Michael Beer wrote: > > Just to prevent any mistakes in future gameplay: > > Card Text of Derange is: > > This is a +1 stealth action. (D) Put this card on a vampire who is not a > Malkavian antitribu. The vampire with this card is now considered to be > a Malkavian antitribu and is no longer a member of his or her original > clan. The vampire with this card may move it to another vampire as a (D) > action. As above, and the vampire with this card does not untap as > normal. He or she may burn 1 blood to untap. That text (from the spoiler list) is incorrect. The actual text on the card is, according to Tom Wylie, (inferior): Put this card on a vampire. The vampire with this card is now considered to be a Malkavian antitribu and is no longer a member of his or her original clan. The vampire with this card may move it as a (D) action. This card cannot be played on a Malkavian antitribu. > So the initial restriction to play this card is that it cannot be played > on a Malk Antitribu. It is a standing restriction. > Is there a restriction to the subsequent (D) actions to pass on the > Madness, that is, > is it possible to derange a Malkavian Antitribu with the (D) action > Derange provides? No. > Another issue is the clan-changing aspect of the card. > > Assume a Camarilla vampire, titled with a Camarilla Title (Prince, for > example). > > RTR062398 states as follows: > > Titles can only be held by vampires of the appropriate clan or sect. A > clan Justicar title can only be held by a member of that clan, > Camarilla vampires cannot hold Sabbat titles and vice-versa, etc. If > a titled vampire changes clan or sect inappropriate to his title, he > loses the benefit of the title unless and until he changes his clan or > > sect appropriately. If his title is contested while he is a member of > an inappropriate sect, he immediately yields the title. > (Losing capacity is not sufficient to lose the benefit of a title.) > > What exactly happens? > > I assume that a Sabbat vampire holding the title of a Prince would > > - holds the title of Prince Well, "holding a title" is a little ambiguous - typically implying the priviledges of the title. He would hold the title if he were Camarilla, but he's not. If his sect changes back to Camarilla, then he will again hold the title. Sorry for using such an ambiguous phrasing. > The first paragraph seems to imply that the vampire looses the title > entirely ("Camarilla vampires cannot hold Sabbat titles and > vice-versa,..."), but the following text seems to mean that the title is > not lost, but is somewhat dormant. It's dormant, right. > - cannot cast the prince votes (which would belong to the "benefit" > category) > - cannot use Prince/Justicar cards (which would be a "benefit" too) > - cannot call Votes restricted to Camarilla Vampires (since she belongs > to the Sabbat) Correct. > LSJ, please clearify the situation with the new errata in mind. He is not a Prince in any way until he becomes Camarilla again. (And only if no one else has laid claim to his title while he was away.) -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Searchable database of official card text, errata, and rulings: http://deckserver.net/cgi-deckserver/rulemonger.cgi/powersearch

> > LSJ, please clearify the situation with the new errata in mind. > > He is not a Prince in any way until he becomes Camarilla again. > (And only if no one else has laid claim to his title while > he was away.) That brings up an interesting situation. So what happens? I would think that bringing the former Prince (or whatever) would then contest the title and the usual pissing contest would begin - is this correct - or is the formerly titled vampire just SOL? Kevin

[ quoted text not captured ] SOL. He immediately yields the title. -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Searchable database of official card text, errata, and rulings: http://deckserver.net/cgi-deckserver/rulemonger.cgi/powersearch -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum

> > > LSJ, please clearify the situation with the new errata in mind. > > > > He is not a Prince in any way until he becomes Camarilla again. > > (And only if no one else has laid claim to his title while > > he was away.) > > That brings up an interesting situation. So what happens? I would > think that bringing the former Prince (or whatever) would then contest > the title and the usual pissing contest would begin - is this correct - > or is the formerly titled vampire just SOL? > As per the rulings, the formerly titled vampire is SOL. A vampire with an "inactive" title that is contested must yield that title. -Chris [ quoted text not captured ]