Rules question: Remembering things

What can and can not be forgotten in a game of VtES? a.) In player B´s turn, player A remembered that his garou (which did not act in his turn) should have regenerated 1 life in his turn. I ruled that this is a mandatory thing that could not be forgotten, and it was easy to "roll back", and I put 1 life on the garou. Correct? b.) In player B´s turn, player A remembered that his hunting ground should have put 1 blood on one of his vamps. I ruled that this could be forgotten, as it normally involves a choice from the player (ie, which vamp should have the blood) and thus is hard to "roll back" as some his vamps acted in that turn. Was this incorrect of me? Thankful for any help/discussion.

as...@hotmail.com wrote: > What can and can not be forgotten in a game of VtES? Mandatory effects cannot be skipped. Optional ones can be. > a.) In player B愀 turn, player A remembered that his garou (which did > not act in his turn) should have regenerated 1 life in his turn. I > ruled that this is a mandatory thing that could not be forgotten, and > it was easy to "roll back", and I put 1 life on the garou. Correct? Correct. That's not "rolling back", though (unless you reset game state to the untap phase) -- it's just a correction. > b.) In player B愀 turn, player A remembered that his hunting ground > should have put 1 blood on one of his vamps. I ruled that this could > be forgotten, as it normally involves a choice from the player (ie, > which vamp should have the blood) and thus is hard to "roll back" as > some his vamps acted in that turn. Was this incorrect of me? It was correct.

LSJ wrote: > as...@hotmail.com wrote: >> b.) In player B愀 turn, player A remembered that his hunting ground >> should have put 1 blood on one of his vamps. I ruled that this could >> be forgotten, as it normally involves a choice from the player (ie, >> which vamp should have the blood) and thus is hard to "roll back" as >> some his vamps acted in that turn. Was this incorrect of me? > > It was correct. Be careful here though. Some people (myself included in years gone by) thought that, say, paying for contestion (and other similar effects) was an 'optional' thing, and that if the methuselah didn't pay a pool, you'd correct the game state by having them automatically yield. However, as contestion is a choice, the correct way to fix it is to roll back to the time where they need to make the choice, and then proceed from there (but you can often avoid rolling back if it seems apparent everything since then would have happened the same regardless of the choice, and just make them make the choice). Also, don't forget to give a warning or verbal caution or whatever it is these days to the garou player to help them remember for next time ;) -- salem (replace 'hotmail' with 'gmail' to email) "In *my* Assamite deck, this would pwn you in teh FAEC, so shut up." "Thats only cos u've never sene mi Gionavvi PUNCHnMUCNH u asshat." - James Coupe

On 20 Nov, 13:25, Salem <kella...@hotmail.com> wrote: > LSJ wrote: > > as...@hotmail.com wrote: > >> b.) In player B´s turn, player A remembered that his hunting ground > >> should have put 1 blood on one of his vamps. I ruled that this could > >> be forgotten, as it normally involves a choice from the player (ie, > >> which vamp should have the blood) and thus is hard to "roll back" as > >> some his vamps acted in that turn. Was this incorrect of me? > > > It was correct. > > Be careful here though. Some people (myself included in years gone by) > thought that, say, paying for contestion (and other similar effects) was > an 'optional' thing, and that if the methuselah didn't pay a pool, you'd > correct the game state by having them automatically yield. > > However, as contestion is a choice, the correct way to fix it is to roll > back to the time where they need to make the choice, and then proceed > from there (but you can often avoid rolling back if it seems apparent > everything since then would have happened the same regardless of the > choice, and just make them make the choice). > > Also, don't forget to give a warning or verbal caution or whatever it is > these days to the garou player to help them remember for next time ;) > > -- > salem Yes, this contestthingy is one of the few rules I know :) Although, a rollback is sometimes hard, we handle it as if the choice of paying/ not paying for contest not can be forgotten - ie, no "autoyield".

On Nov 20, 6:45 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > as...@hotmail.com wrote: > > What can and can not be forgotten in a game of VtES? > > Mandatory effects cannot be skipped. > Optional ones can be. > > > a.) In player B´s turn, player A remembered that his garou (which did > > not act in his turn) should have regenerated 1 life in his turn. I > > ruled that this is a mandatory thing that could not be forgotten, and > > it was easy to "roll back", and I put 1 life on the garou. Correct? > > Correct. > > That's not "rolling back", though (unless you reset game state to the untap > phase) -- it's just a correction. > The issue becomes a little more complicated once the garou entered combat and the other player spent cards in a certain way to eliminate a garou with 2 life and not 3. What happens if we see that the garou should have had 3 and thus should not be burned? (since now we all know what the opposing player can do in combat...)

[ quoted text not captured ] In a friendly game? You work something out. In a tournament, judges decision. I would say, rewind to the beginning of the action, put a 3rd life on the Garou, and force the Garou to take the same action. The rushed minion is free to do whatever he likes in combat.

On 20 Nov, 16:24, Chris Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > I would say, rewind to the beginning of the action, put a 3rd life on > the Garou, and force the Garou to take the same action. The rushed > minion is free to do whatever he likes in combat. Eh? But if there have been other actions after the garou-combat? I would never do such a rollback.

[ quoted text not captured ] It's not up to you, it's up to the judge.

[ quoted text not captured ] I am the judge. I AM the law! :) At least sometimes.

Salem <kell...@hotmail.com> wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> as...@hotmail.com wrote: >>> b.) In player B愀 turn, player A remembered that his hunting ground >>> should have put 1 blood on one of his vamps. I ruled that this could >>> be forgotten, as it normally involves a choice from the player (ie, >>> which vamp should have the blood) and thus is hard to "roll back" as >>> some his vamps acted in that turn. Was this incorrect of me? >> >> It was correct. > > Be careful here though. Some people (myself included in years gone by) > thought that, say, paying for contestion (and other similar effects) > was an 'optional' thing, and that if the methuselah didn't pay a > pool, you'd correct the game state by having them automatically yield. We all understand the group interest to raise the group to the highest possible level of play, but if you have to be a jerk to do that, and it's bordering on the unsportsmanlike, e.g. forcing 'BWAHAHA YOU'RE SCREWEDDD1!!' as the default choice position rather than just correcting the situation as cleanly as possible, then it is clearly a wrong way to play. Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/ Las Vegas NAQ 2009! http://members.cox.net/vtesinlv/

Ruben Feldman <fru...@gmail.com> wrote: > LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> as...@hotmail.com wrote: >> > What can and can not be forgotten in a game of VtES? >> > >> > a.) In player B愀 turn, player A remembered that his garou >> > (which did not act in his turn) should have regenerated 1 life >> > in his turn. I ruled that this is a mandatory thing that could not >> > be forgotten, and it was easy to "roll back", and I put 1 life >> > on the garou. Correct? >> >> Correct. >> >> That's not "rolling back", though (unless you reset game state >> to the untap phase) -- it's just a correction. > > The issue becomes a little more complicated once the garou entered > combat and the other player spent cards in a certain way to eliminate > a garou with 2 life and not 3. What happens if we see that the garou > should have had 3 and thus should not be burned? (since now we all > know what the opposing player can do in combat...) If it were me judging, and the two players couldn't figure it out themselves, I'd have said that the game has become corrupted and fixed the situation in the way to least damage the game -- continue the combat without the additional life. Then I would give warnings to *all* remaning players that they need to remember these things and it is the responsibility of all of them to follow the game state. [ quoted text not captured ]