LSJ (or some other knowledgeable person),
Methuselah A brings out Leandro, who is ready. Methuselah B starts
his minion phase and realizes that he forgot to choose between losing
a pool or losing all transfers. Does he make that choice then, or
does he lose all transfers by default?
I thought I'd read somewhere that you can't "forget" to choose like
you can forget to take pool from the Edge or gain blood from a hunting
ground.
thanks,
dancingmummy
>LSJ (or some other knowledgeable person),
>
> Methuselah A brings out Leandro, who is ready. Methuselah B starts
>his minion phase and realizes that he forgot to choose between losing
>a pool or losing all transfers. Does he make that choice then, or
>does he lose all transfers by default?
Really depends on how strict everyone is playing. In most of the playgroups I
play with, the generally rule is you snooze, you lose. If my playgroups are in
a good mood, they might let you off the first time though. In stricter areas
like L.A., if you didn't pay the pool too bad, you're loss.
Similarly, I'd expect most tournaments to be fairly strict about this as well.
LSJ will probably state that failing to choose one of the options does not
force one to automatically choose one option or the other. He'd probably say
that you'd rewind back to that point so that you'd be allowed that choice. More
appropriately, it would probably be ruled that you just pay the pool now or
lose it. And then you should probably get a warning as well. LSJ will probably
make a comparison to forgetting to pay for contestation. Forgetting to pay for
contestation does not automatically mean you yield.
However, as I stated earlier, you'd probably find most tournaments and judges
to be more strict. Most judges won't force you to yield if you forgot to pay
for contestation, but they probably will let you lose your transfers for
forgetting, IMO.
> I thought I'd read somewhere that you can't "forget" to choose like
>you can forget to take pool from the Edge or gain blood from a hunting
>ground.
Gaining pool for the Edge and using locations are explicitly optional (in
rulings, not on the cards).
Halcyan 2
Halcyan 2 wrote:
>
> >LSJ (or some other knowledgeable person),
> >
> > Methuselah A brings out Leandro, who is ready. Methuselah B starts
> >his minion phase and realizes that he forgot to choose between losing
> >a pool or losing all transfers. Does he make that choice then, or
> >does he lose all transfers by default?
>
> Really depends on how strict everyone is playing. In most of the playgroups I
> play with, the generally rule is you snooze, you lose. If my playgroups are in
> a good mood, they might let you off the first time though. In stricter areas
> like L.A., if you didn't pay the pool too bad, you're loss.
That's less strict (i.e., playing loose with the rules) rather than more strict.
> Similarly, I'd expect most tournaments to be fairly strict about this as well.
Strict as in the card text must be followed, yes.
> LSJ will probably state that failing to choose one of the options does not
> force one to automatically choose one option or the other. He'd probably say
> that you'd rewind back to that point so that you'd be allowed that choice. More
> appropriately, it would probably be ruled that you just pay the pool now or
> lose it. And then you should probably get a warning as well. LSJ will probably
> make a comparison to forgetting to pay for contestation. Forgetting to pay for
> contestation does not automatically mean you yield.
One should rewind when it is possible (i.e., when nothing significant has
transpired between the error and the present), and find a suitable fix in
the other case (such as making the decision "out of turn" when the error is
noticed), yes.
> However, as I stated earlier, you'd probably find most tournaments and judges
> to be more strict. Most judges won't force you to yield if you forgot to pay
> for contestation, but they probably will let you lose your transfers for
> forgetting, IMO.
I'm sorry to hear you think VTES judges would not be able to see the inherent
parallel between those two things (contesting and paying Leandro for your
transfers). I don't think that most VTES judges would have that problem.
I feeel confident that most of them would be very strict in this matter,
requiring the decision to be made by the player (either by rewinding or
"out of turn", as approriate) rather than choosing the lax road of making
the decision for the player by fiat.
> > I thought I'd read somewhere that you can't "forget" to choose like
> >you can forget to take pool from the Edge or gain blood from a hunting
> >ground.
>
> Gaining pool for the Edge and using locations are explicitly optional (in
> rulings, not on the cards).
Correct, except for that locations thing. Locations are optional by card
text, as of CE.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
>
>I'm sorry to hear you think VTES judges would not be able to see the inherent
>
>parallel between those two things (contesting and paying Leandro for your
>transfers). I don't think that most VTES judges would have that problem.
>I feeel confident that most of them would be very strict in this matter,
>requiring the decision to be made by the player (either by rewinding or
>"out of turn", as approriate) rather than choosing the lax road of making
>the decision for the player by fiat.
I don't know. I just see parallels where you have stated that a player who has
forgotten to do something (i.e. get Edge pool or HG blood) and has done
something else since then like play a Master card can claim that he is still in
his untap phase and incorrectly played the Master card. Most judges I know
would state that it was too late but on numerous times you have stated that the
player may rewind and go back (assuming nothing very significant has happened)
and receive a warning. Because of this divergence, my conclusion is that the
other divergence which I mentioned earlier was likely to occur.
>> Gaining pool for the Edge and using locations are explicitly optional (in
>> rulings, not on the cards).>
>Correct, except for that locations thing. Locations are optional by card
>text, as of CE.
Some locations (particularly Camarilla Hunting Grounds) have been made optional
by card text in CE. However, non-Camarilla Hunting Grounds (Park HG, Political
HG, etc.) and Palatial Estate still do not have the keyword "may" (making it
optional). Some Powerbases (Madrid and Mexico City) and the Rack do not have
card text to make it optional.
Sidenote: Traditionally, it has been argued that Hunting Ground blood is
optional because it is from a location. However, doesn't it follow that blood
from a Tabriz Assembly is *not* optional since it is from a Master card not a
location?
Halcyan 2
Halcyan 2 wrote:
>
> >
> >I'm sorry to hear you think VTES judges would not be able to see the inherent
> >
> >parallel between those two things (contesting and paying Leandro for your
> >transfers). I don't think that most VTES judges would have that problem.
> >I feeel confident that most of them would be very strict in this matter,
> >requiring the decision to be made by the player (either by rewinding or
> >"out of turn", as approriate) rather than choosing the lax road of making
> >the decision for the player by fiat.
>
> I don't know. I just see parallels where you have stated that a player who has
> forgotten to do something (i.e. get Edge pool or HG blood) and has done
> something else since then like play a Master card can claim that he is still in
> his untap phase and incorrectly played the Master card.
I think you're misremembering some a suggested response to players trying to rules
lawyering to gain an advantage that isn't there.
Naturally if a player leaves his untap phase and begins his master phase and
plays a master card, it is too late to get a pool from the Edge.
> Most judges I know
> would state that it was too late but on numerous times you have stated that the
> player may rewind and go back (assuming nothing very significant has happened)
> and receive a warning.
No. If the player is in his master phase, I do not suggest that he be allowed
to back up to his untap phase to retrieve some forgotten optional bonus.
Now if there's a non-optional effect that has to be handled in his untap phase
and he (and the rest of the table) forgot about it until his master phase, then
naturally he should back up (unless something has transpired in the meantime
to make backing up difficult).
> Because of this divergence, my conclusion is that the
> other divergence which I mentioned earlier was likely to occur.
I think your conclusion is based on false data.
Even given the false data as true, the two scenarios (contesting and Leandro)
as so obviously parallel as to warrant similar judging.
> Sidenote: Traditionally, it has been argued that Hunting Ground blood is
> optional because it is from a location. However, doesn't it follow that blood
> from a Tabriz Assembly is *not* optional since it is from a Master card not a
> location?
Tabriz Assembly is non-optional.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In message <3DF54F3F...@white-wolf.com>,
LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> mumbled something about:
>No. If the player is in his master phase, I do not suggest that he be allowed
>to back up to his untap phase to retrieve some forgotten optional bonus.
>
>Now if there's a non-optional effect that has to be handled in his untap phase
>and he (and the rest of the table) forgot about it until his master phase, then
>naturally he should back up (unless something has transpired in the meantime
>to make backing up difficult).
The key words here are "non-optional".
Spending a pool in your untap for the "Leandro tax" is optional.
>> Because of this divergence, my conclusion is that the
>> other divergence which I mentioned earlier was likely to occur.>
>I think your conclusion is based on false data.
>Even given the false data as true, the two scenarios (contesting and Leandro)
>as so obviously parallel as to warrant similar judging.
I don't agree. Contestation requires that a decision be made; either
pay a pool, or yield the card. Each portion of the decision in question
requires an action on the player's part; therefore if everyone forgets
and he takes NO action, it was not a valid decision; he didn't pick a
choice off the list, so to speak.
The decision required by Leandro is similar, except that one of the
choices equates to "do nothing, and suffer a penalty later". Forgetting
to pay a pool to retain one's transfers should, accordingly, result in
the loss of those transfers, as you have chosen to "do nothing".
Also, the timing is critical here. You must choose to not fish for new
vampires or influence out another one PRIOR to your master phase/minion
phase. During your master or minion phase, it is very likely that you
could gain possession of information that would change that prior
decision (getting a minion unexpectedly burned or put in torpor, for
example). With this in mind, I'd say that a "rewind" here provides an
opportunity to gain an advantage where one shouldn't exist.
We're fairly permissive around here, and you'll generally find me on the
"let 'em play the game" side of arguments. But this one is a special
case to me BECAUSE of the timing involved between the decision and
"penalty", and if you permit rewinds from there, someone will surely
take advantage of it by repeatedly "forgetting" to pay the tax unless
his predator constantly reminds him -- effectively postponing the
decision that should be made in his untap phase to his influence phase.
--
"There's no gray. There's just white that's got grubby." -- T.P.
"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20021209192737...@mb-fc.aol.com...
>
> Some locations (particularly Camarilla Hunting Grounds) have been made optional
> by card text in CE. However, non-Camarilla Hunting Grounds (Park HG, Political
> HG, etc.) and Palatial Estate still do not have the keyword "may" (making it
> optional). Some Powerbases (Madrid and Mexico City) and the Rack do not have
> card text to make it optional.http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=3B568878%40MailAndNews.com
LSJ: "The 'you do X' of locations isn't mandatory in general."
LSJ *did* state in that post some 16+ months ago that he would update the card lists to reflect this ruling, but I'm SURE he has had
more important things to do than add the word "may" to all the non-Cam hunting grounds. ;)
>
> Halcyan 2
Kevin M., Prince of Henderson, NV (USA)
"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
Why wasn´t there a change in Leandro's text box? It would have been so
much easier if you would choose at the beginning of the inpluence
phase instead, and it only matters when you´re low on pool, and at
that time it´s less likley to use transers anyway. The current text is
screaming "human error".
And for contesting I think the whole table is involved. You should
remind players to make these deciscions (including Arika costs,
contestinf and so on). This makes for better play.
The player who is also contesting a card might wait until the master
phase and then state that you should burn the contested card, but this
kind of power-gaming doesn´t belong in this game, not even at
tournament level, IMO. Instead, the other player should kindly ask if
you want to keep contesting if he belives that have forgotten the
card. That´s sportsmanship and good playing.
/Mathias
Derek Ray wrote:
> Spending a pool in your untap for the "Leandro tax" is optional.
So is not spending your pool.
Leandro's effect - making the decision - is not optional.
Card text: "That Methuselah chooses".
> >> Because of this divergence, my conclusion is that the
> >> other divergence which I mentioned earlier was likely to occur.
> >
> >I think your conclusion is based on false data.
> >Even given the false data as true, the two scenarios (contesting and Leandro)
> >as so obviously parallel as to warrant similar judging.
>
> I don't agree. Contestation requires that a decision be made; either
So does Leandro.
> pay a pool, or yield the card. Each portion of the decision in question
> requires an action on the player's part; therefore if everyone forgets
> and he takes NO action, it was not a valid decision; he didn't pick a
> choice off the list, so to speak.
>
> The decision required by Leandro is similar, except that one of the
> choices equates to "do nothing, and suffer a penalty later". Forgetting
> to pay a pool to retain one's transfers should, accordingly, result in
> the loss of those transfers, as you have chosen to "do nothing".
No.
Failing to choose to pay to contest (i.e. to avoid losing the vampire) is not the
same as choosing to yield.
Failing to choose to pay to Leandro (i.e. to avoid losing your transfers) is not
the same as choosing to lose transfers.
> Also, the timing is critical here. You must choose to not fish for new
> vampires or influence out another one PRIOR to your master phase/minion
> phase. During your master or minion phase, it is very likely that you
> could gain possession of information that would change that prior
> decision (getting a minion unexpectedly burned or put in torpor, for
> example). With this in mind, I'd say that a "rewind" here provides an
> opportunity to gain an advantage where one shouldn't exist.
Likewise contesting. One could gain information about how much pool one
needs that would change that prior non-decision.
> We're fairly permissive around here, and you'll generally find me on the
> "let 'em play the game" side of arguments. But this one is a special
> case to me BECAUSE of the timing involved between the decision and
> "penalty", and if you permit rewinds from there, someone will surely
> take advantage of it by repeatedly "forgetting" to pay the tax unless
> his predator constantly reminds him -- effectively postponing the
> decision that should be made in his untap phase to his influence phase.
Then penalize that player for his actual infraction; don't penalize
normal players for non-infractions.
[ quoted text not captured ]
per_m...@hotmail.com (agzocgud) wrote in message news:<6f108788.02121...@posting.google.com>...
> Why wasn´t there a change in Leandro's text box? It would have been so
> much easier if you would choose at the beginning of the inpluence
> phase instead, and it only matters when you´re low on pool, and at
> that time it´s less likley to use transers anyway. The current text is
that would make his ability less useful...right now, it makes any
effect affecting the uncontrolled region that you MIGHT be able to
play or get through guesswork.
for instance:
in your master phase, you play effective managment. when the managed
vamp is, say, a duplicate of a controlled one or too expensive for
you, you propably wouldn't want to influence him anyway, but if it's
the vamp you really need, you sure would. with leandro out, you'll
have to guess that
or:
you draw a govern in your turn that would allow you to get that
six-cap that was too expensive before...but with leandro, you won't
get those three transfers unless you risk the pool in the untap...and
the action could be blocked
halc...@aol.com (Halcyan 2) wrote:
> Forgetting to pay for contestation does not automatically mean you yield.
It did in a tournament I played in this Saturday. I placed a master
card on the table having forgotten to pay for a contested Info
Highway, and my predator thanked me for yielding.
He obviously really wanted it (had been unhappy about ot drawing it in
his first hand!) and I'd deduced that my table seating was appalling
anyway, so I let him have it.
james