Independent vs Non-Camarilla

Just checking something for personal interest and the playtest card group thing. Independent is well-defined, isn't it? Independent measn all the vampires with the Non-Camarilla text on them from DS/AH, doesn't it? Or, more accurately, all vampries from the four clans - Giovanni, Assamite, Follower of Set, Ravnos. Yeah? Just checking that it does work that way because it is necessary? Also, I was just checking that it means that, with Covenant of Blood (since it states Non-Camarilla) that all Independent and Sabbat vampires may rush all Camarilla vampires, and the other way round with Imperial Decree. IIRC, LSJ did state it at one point but it's a bugger to find and I don't think it was ever entered into the errata. It's not in the current one as far as I can see. It's just that I was flicking through Duelist (I know, I know) and I came across that dreadful "Crusade!" article again and saw a fair few things that were glaring errors (like the fact that you can't play political action cards during Bloodhunts and that during Crusade, any opposing vampire may diablerise your vampires in torpor (well they could do that anyway)) but saw the bit on Imperial Decree/Covenant of Blood and it did make me think especially seeing as I want to make a deck which might use either to good effect. -- James Coupe (remove some crap to reply) Pah!! I hope it shits in your jogging suit!

Actually, I believe you can use political cards to pump the vote. What you can't do is play reactions ro action modifiers because it isn't a political action per se. VampC...@AOL.com> It's just that I was flicking through >Duelist (I know, I know) and I came across that dreadful "Crusade!" >article again and saw a fair few things that were glaring errors (like >the fact that you can't play political action cards during Bloodhunts >and that during Crusade, any opposing vampire may diablerise your >vampires in torpor (well they could do that anyway)) but saw the .....

In article <19971228020...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, VampChamp1 <vampc...@aol.com> writes [ quoted text not captured ] Sorry, didn't make it very clear. That was what the *article* said. As you rightly say, I can throw down political cards from my hand (or even tap locations in play which don't specifically relate to political actions since the bloodhunt vote isn't a political action) for votes in a bloodhunt. The thing that always gets me is that loads of people seem to think that each Methuselah gets a vote and doesn't have to rely on their political power in play. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <pVQSDAA8...@obeah.demon.co.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@obeah.demon.co.uk.bloodyunsolicitedcommerciale-mail> wrote: > Independent is well-defined, isn't it? Independent measn all the > vampires with the Non-Camarilla text on them from DS/AH, doesn't it? > Or, more accurately, all vampries from the four clans - Giovanni, > Assamite, Follower of Set, Ravnos. Yeah? Yeah: "Independent" is the same as "Not aligned with any sect". Currently, the only two sects in the card game are Camarilla and Sabbat. > Also, I was just checking that it means that, with Covenant of Blood > (since it states Non-Camarilla) that all Independent and Sabbat vampires > may rush all Camarilla vampires, and the other way round with Imperial > Decree. Right. > IIRC, LSJ did state it at one point but it's a bugger to find > and I don't think it was ever entered into the errata. It's not in the > current one as far as I can see. It isn't errata - it's just a clarification. -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet