rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Political Flux and simultaneous deaths

6 messages from 5 participants · 27 March 1995 – 09 April 1995
original thread on Google Groups

Daniel Taylor

This nearly happened the other day... What happens if a Political Flux goes through (say, to make the award for the next ousting 12 instead of 6) and then two players are ousted at once (e.g. due to a vote, Consanguinous Condem. or similar?) - Daniel (mat...@leeds.ac.uk - please email because I can't read this group regularly. TIA).

Joseph Cochran

In article <1995Mar27.1...@leeds.ac.uk>, Daniel Taylor <mat...@leeds.ac.uk> wrote: >This nearly happened the other day... What happens if a Political Flux >goes through (say, to make the award for the next ousting 12 instead of >6) and then two players are ousted at once (e.g. due to a vote, >Consanguinous Condem. or similar?) Assuming that both of the predators of those ousted stay alive long enough to get the blood prize, I would rule that both get the Fluxed prize. | If you've got a hot lead on a new | *--Joe--* | PC game, call the announce line at | js...@vt.edu | ** csi...@discus.ise.vt.edu ** | +-------------------------------------+---------------------------------- "Carnivores, oy!" -- Timon, TLK

cb_m...@smcvax.smcvt.edu

[ quoted text not captured ] Hello Daniel. First, a minor point, is that Con. Condemnation in and of itself will not oust people. But, say for instance a Kine Resources Contested was played on your prey and the guy to his immediate left, both of whom only had two pool and the vote got through. The way we play it at home is to have the vote work to the best benefit of the Meth that called the successful vote. As he decided the vote, he decided the outcome. In that case, he would naturally choose that his prey went out first, getting him 12 pool and a vp, then the next guy, now his prey goes out for another 6 pool and another vp. This way the meth who called the vote nets 18 pool, 2 vp's, and the undying hatred of the rest of the table, wherein Mr. Swifty Politician gets his butt kicked and that is the end. Political actions are powerful stuff, and situations like this are rare in the extreme. This vote probably would not have succeded as the rest of the players would have fought to prevent it. But generally where two outcomes can occur on the results of the same vote, it is the Meth who called the vote's choice. It does not make sense nor for rapid gaming to let the other Meth's decide the outcome. Hopefully, WotC will clarify these situations or the resident Hall of Famers here will give you something that you can work with. 'Till then though, try this. Good luck and goood gaming, Cliff Murphy cb_m...@smcvax.smcvt.edu >

David Leader

: First, a minor point, is that Con. Condemnation in and of itself will not oust : people. But, say for instance a Kine Resources Contested was played on your : prey and the guy to his immediate left, both of whom only had two pool and the : vote got through. The way we play it at home is to have the vote work to the : best benefit of the Meth that called the successful vote. As he decided the : vote, he decided the outcome. In that case, he would naturally choose that his : prey went out first, getting him 12 pool and a vp, then the next guy, now his : prey goes out for another 6 pool and another vp. This way the meth who : called the vote nets 18 pool, 2 vp's, and the undying hatred of the rest of the : table, wherein Mr. Swifty Politician gets his butt kicked and that is the end. : Political actions are powerful stuff, and situations like this are rare in the : extreme. This vote probably would not have succeded as the rest of the players : would have fought to prevent it. But generally where two outcomes can occur : on the results of the same vote, it is the Meth who called the vote's choice. : It does not make sense nor for rapid gaming to let the other Meth's decide the : outcome. : Hopefully, WotC will clarify these situations or the resident Hall of Famers : here will give you something that you can work with. 'Till then though, try : this. : Good luck and goood gaming, : Cliff Murphy : cb_m...@smcvax.smcvt.edu : > This is COMPLETY wrong. WoTC ruling is that the oustings are SIMELTANIOUS. The ruling concerning this is that victory points are accumlated the minute the ousting happens, the blood the minute after. Therefore, if you oust your prey and your prey's prey, you'd get the victory point for your prey and your prey would get the victory point for his prey. However, only you would collect blood, since your prey is no longer in the game to collect his portion of the blood. Therefore, you would get 6 blood (1-12 with parity shift is involed) and 1 victory point, your prey gets 1 victory point. No buts, arguements, etc. This is official Unofficial is this: What would happen if parity shift was involved? My personal answer (not neccessarily correct) is that since oustings count simeltaniously, for better or for worse the parity shift would give blood to both people. This is completly debatle.

Thomas R Wylie

David Leader <dle...@curly.cc.emory.edu> wrote: >Unofficial is this: What would happen if parity shift was involved? My >personal answer (not neccessarily correct) is that since oustings count >simeltaniously, for better or for worse the parity shift would give >blood to both people. This is completly debatle. Since Parity Shift can only oust one player, I'm not sure what the question is. Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

David Leader

Thomas R Wylie (aa...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Whoops, typo... read this as "If Political Flux were in play"