rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Q: Charming Lobby (Tom?)

6 messages from 4 participants · 10 January 1995 – 24 January 1995
original thread on Google Groups

Shane Hamish William Travis

In the Dec 22 rulings, Tom wrote: > **5) Charming Lobby: This card requires three vampires to be > effective. one to call the first vote, another to play Charming Lobby, > and the third to call the third vote. > ** We have had problems with this card, and this is definitely not the way we were playing it, but I can go with this. What I am wondering is this: This ruling states that to be *effective* it requires three vampires in play and untapped on my side - does not say that I *must* have 3 vampires, or that _I_ must call the 2nd vote (which then passes). IMHO, the following scenario would work - It would not be terribly intelligent, but work according to my understanding of the rules. Setup: I have two vampires and no minions. Both have presence. 1) My first vampire plays Charming Lobby. 2) My second vampire calls a vote, which (we shall say) passes. This fulfills the prerequisites of the Charming Lobby, and now the next vote called will pass. 3) I have no more vampires, so I have basically wasted the action of the first one in using the Lobby, but now the next vote called automatically passes, no matter who calls it, or when. NOT EFFECTIVE, (pretty damn dumb, actually) but still _legal_ according to this ruling... Opinions? Rulings from official netreps? Shane Travis | If you can't grant someone else's reasoning as sht...@duke.usask.ca | superior when it plainly is, what's the point Saskatoon, Saskatchewan | of reasoning at all? | - Harry Turtledove, _Prince of the North_

Dale Hurtt

In article <3et18f$f...@tribune.usask.ca>, sht...@duke.usask.ca (Shane Hamish William Travis) wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Given the clearly stated ruling on how the card is played, it is obvious to me that the original card text is downright incorrect, because I remember reading the ruling then reading the card and thinking "how did he comeup with that." Bottom line -- it sounds like the ruling is how they *want* the card to be played. -- Dale Hurtt dhu...@harris.com

Dale Hurtt

In article <3f9r6m$i...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, sgra...@aol.com (SGrant777) wrote: > You are reading the card incorretly. Charming lobby is, in effect, a > political card in itself. You call a vote that says "The next vote will > pass." That means that you don't necessarily have to play the next > political card. It is just saying that the next vote WILL pass. So you > only need Two vampires for it to help. Except that this whole thread started when Tom Wylie, the official Netrep for Wizards of the Coast, stated that Charming Lobby *requires* 3 vampires and someone objected. As I stated in an earlier response, the card must be clearly misprinted, given that it is does not read like it requires 3 vampires. For your reference, here is an excerpt from the ruling: -- Path: news.ess.harris.com!jabba.ess.harris.com!hearye.mlb.semi.harris.com!usenet.ufl.edu!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!emory!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!hookup!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!cats.ucsc.edu!aahz From: aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad Subject: Design Team Rulings: 12/22/94 Date: 23 Dec 1994 08:42:47 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz Lines: 61 Message-ID: <3de2i7$4...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu Jyhad Rulings 12/22/94 [ snip excess ] 5) Charming Lobby: This card requires three vampires to be effective. one to call the first vote, another to play Charming Lobby, and the third to call the third vote. -- I believe the reference to "the third to call the third vote" should read "the third to call the second vote", but the above is the original text. -- Dale Hurtt dhu...@harris.com

Thomas R Wylie

The design team ruling is that Charming Lobby requires three actions for the whole process to be complete. Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

Shane Hamish William Travis

L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote: : Since action modifiers are (unless the card says otherwise) played by : the acting minion, why doesn't (1) play this one? Charming Lobby is not an action modifier, but an action. Thus, three vampires for three separat actions. (CL, vote, auto-vote). The question I asked which started this whole thread (and was not answered by Tom's response) is: do I _have_ to have three untapped vampires (as it says in the ruling?) IMHO, two would do it (get the CL out and the first vote passed, that is) but then the _next_ vote (wheover called it) would pass automatically. A legitimate tactic if you know that your opponent doesn't play with (many) vote cards... Shane Travis | Due to circumstances beyond my control, sht...@duke.usask.ca | I am master of my fate and captain of my soul. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan | -- Ashleigh Brilliant

Jack Vinson

>>>>> "TRW" == Thomas R Wylie <aa...@cats.ucsc.edu> writes: TRW> The design team ruling is that Charming Lobby requires three actions TRW> for the whole process to be complete. This is just plain dumb! The card must be fixed and will be thrown out of my deck if this rule is enforced. It makes it worse than Cryptic Rider or whatever the modifier is that lets you automatically pass your next vote when the vote just called passed. -- Jack Vinson "You have to be sleeping with vin...@unagi.cis.upenn.edu at least one person to be http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~vinson/home.html non-monogamous." Daria _Go Fish_ Philadelphia, PA