Rastacourere (LSJ)

Please answer as much of this as you can. I hear that Rastacourere does not give -1 vote to a Priscus title. To understand this, I have a statement to consider: [ Statement: Any "kind" of vote can be cancelled or reduced by any card which cancels or reduces votes (without special text being needed), rather like any "kind" of damage can be prevented or ignored by any card which prevents or ignores damage. If this is true, then Rastacourere, being a card which reduces a title's votes, would reduce Priscus votes, because it does not need a clause. If untrue, what special clause does a card which reduces or cancels votes need in order to reduce or cancel Priscus votes? ] If I am missing something, please tell me, what is it? If Rastacourere reduces a title's votes by one, why does it fail to reduce a priscus' title's votes by 1? Surely a Priscus' title is worth 1 vote in the Priscus sub-referendum, and if it were worth one less vote during referendums, then it would be worth 0 votes in that referendum. -- Brian

firstco...@aol.com wrote: > Please answer as much of this as you can. > > I hear that Rastacourere does not give -1 vote to a Priscus title. To > understand this, I have a statement to consider: > > [ > Statement: Any "kind" of vote can be cancelled or reduced by any card > which cancels or reduces votes (without special text being needed), > rather like any "kind" of damage can be prevented or ignored by any > card which prevents or ignores damage. > > If this is true, then Rastacourere, being a card which reduces a > title's votes, would reduce Priscus votes, because it does not need a > clause. > > If untrue, what special clause does a card which reduces or cancels > votes need in order to reduce or cancel Priscus votes? > ] > > If I am missing something, please tell me, what is it? Consider the title: Pairscus. This title is worth one vote in the main referendum and one vote in the Priscus referendum. Rastacourere makes the title worth one fewer votes. Since it doesn't specify which number, main or sub, it is affecting, it affects the main by default. The Prisci title is worth 0 votes in the main referendum and 1 vote in the sub referendum. > If Rastacourere reduces a title's votes by one, why does it fail to > reduce a priscus' title's votes by 1? It reduces the Priscus' title's votes in the main referendum (zero) by 1. Which is meaningless, like a strength of -1 is meaningless (equivalent to zero when it lands). > Surely a Priscus' title is worth 1 vote in the Priscus sub-referendum, > and if it were worth one less vote during referendums, then it would be > worth 0 votes in that referendum. If it were worth one fewer votes in the sub referendum you'd be right. But it's worth one fewer in the main referendum. -- LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply) Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

> Consider the title: Pairscus. This title is worth one vote in the main > referendum and one vote in the Priscus referendum. Is this a spoiler for the next set? <ducks> Ankur

> Consider the title: Pairscus. This title is worth one vote in the > main referendum and one vote in the Priscus referendum. > > Rastacourere makes the title worth one fewer votes. Since it doesn't > specify which number, main or sub, it is affecting, it affects the > main by default. If a sub-referendum is a referendum, and a "Pairscus" cast one fewer vote in each referendum, it would cast 0 votes in a main referendum and 0 votes in a Priscus referendum, since that would be one less vote in each referendum. Do you mean to suggest that a sub-referendum is part of a referendum, but not, in fact, a referendum? > The Prisci title is worth 0 votes in the main referendum and 1 > vote in the sub referendum. > > Surely a Priscus' title is worth 1 vote in the Priscus sub-referendum, > > and if it were worth one less vote during referendums, then it would be > > worth 0 votes in that referendum. > > If it were worth one fewer votes in the sub referendum you'd be right. > But it's worth one fewer in the main referendum. If a title is worth one less vote in referendums, and it is not worth one less vote in sub-referendums, then sub-referendums must not be referendums. Your ruling is clear and consistant. However, it implies that a sub-referendum is not a referendum. Is it? -- Brian

In message <1118036924....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, firstco...@aol.com writes: >Your ruling is clear and consistant. However, it implies that a >sub-referendum is not a referendum. Is it? It's a part of the larger referendum in which it takes place. It is not a full-blown referendum of its own - consider all the restrictions on what can affect the sub-referendum. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

firstco...@aol.com wrote: > Your ruling is clear and consistant. However, it implies that a > sub-referendum is not a referendum. Is it? It is a sub-referendum. Although you can burn the Edge for a vote in a referendum, you cannot burn it to gain a vote in the sub-referendum, for example. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: > firstco...@aol.com wrote: > > Your ruling is clear and consistant. However, it implies that a > > sub-referendum is not a referendum. Is it? > > It is a sub-referendum. Although you can burn the Edge for a vote in a > referendum, you cannot burn it to gain a vote in the sub-referendum, for > example. And presumably, you could not affect the sub-referendum (as opposed to the main referendum) in other common ways, like playing a Bewitching Oration or pitching vote cards. > LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply) -John Flournoy

In message <1118073164.4...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, John Flournoy <carn...@gmail.com> writes: >And presumably, you could not affect the sub-referendum (as opposed to >the main referendum) in other common ways, like playing a Bewitching >Oration or pitching vote cards. During a referendum, the prisci block of 3 votes is cast "for" or "against" the referendum according to the prisci subreferendum. Each ready priscus provides 1 vote for this subreferendum, and no other votes may be used in this subreferendum. Since this is a rule, you need card text to break the rule. Bewitching Oration does not have that card-text, hence you cannot use those votes in the sub-referendum. [ quoted text not captured ]

> > Your ruling is clear and consistant. However, it implies that a > > sub-referendum is not a referendum. Is it? > > It is a sub-referendum. Although you can burn the Edge for a vote in a > referendum, you cannot burn it to gain a vote in the sub-referendum, for > example. "Is a sub-referendum a referendum?" "It is a sub-referendum." Sorry, but this seems recursive. Compare: "Is a miniature dog a dog?" "It is a miniature dog." No offense, but I find that this answer avoids the question. Of course you cannot burn the edge for a vote in that referendum, but that's covered in the rulebook, that no other votes may be cast from any other source (other than Prisci) (6.3.3) : "Each ready priscus provides 1 vote for this subreferendum, and no other votes may be used in this subreferendum." Other effects, like action modifiers, are not restricted by text in the rulebook. And I THINK the rulebook implies that prisci do not vote in the main referendum at all, but _instead_ vote in a sub-referendum. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can play Telepathic Vote Counting in the sub-referendum to cancel a priscus' votes, right? My understanding of the sub-referendum is that it is at least _conducted_ like a referendum. I'm curious now about whether it is considered technically a referendum. Also, to understand the Rastacourere ruling in more detail, assume there is a card which reads, "Master. Put this card on a titled vampire. This vampire's title is not worth votes in bloodhunts." A Prince with Rastacourere would have 1 vote, but a Prince with Rastacourere and this card as well would have -1 votes, and 2 conditional votes which are usable outside of bloodhunts. Correct? -- Brian

firstco...@aol.com wrote: >>>Your ruling is clear and consistant. However, it implies that a >>>sub-referendum is not a referendum. Is it? >> >>It is a sub-referendum. Although you can burn the Edge for a vote in a >>referendum, you cannot burn it to gain a vote in the sub-referendum, for >>example. > > > "Is a sub-referendum a referendum?" > "It is a sub-referendum." > > Sorry, but this seems recursive. Compare: > > "Is a miniature dog a dog?" > "It is a miniature dog." > > No offense, but I find that this answer avoids the question. It answers it sufficiently, at least after the main question has been answered. The concept should be clear. > And I THINK the rulebook implies that prisci do not vote in the main > referendum at all, but _instead_ vote in a sub-referendum. It does not. A Prisci who plays, say, Bewitching Oration is free to cast those votes in the main referendum (and, indeed, can cast them only in the main referendum). > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can play Telepathic Vote Counting in the > sub-referendum to cancel a priscus' votes, right? It makes him abstain (card text), yes. > My understanding of the sub-referendum is that it is at least > _conducted_ like a referendum. I'm curious now about whether it is > considered technically a referendum. Semantics not germane to the topic of reducing a number of votes, so if "it is a sub-referendum" means to you that it is a referendum, then fine. That works just as well as if you take it to mean that it isn't. The fact remains that cards which affect (or key off of) the number of votes a vampire has in a referendum are working with the vampire's main referendum vote count by default. > Also, to understand the Rastacourere ruling in more detail, assume > there is a card which reads, "Master. Put this card on a titled > vampire. This vampire's title is not worth votes in bloodhunts." A Such a card would be written as "During blood hunt referendums, this vampire must abstain." But is seems like your wording above would make the Prisci title worth no votes as well. > Prince with Rastacourere would have 1 vote, but a Prince with > Rastacourere and this card as well would have -1 votes, and 2 > conditional votes which are usable outside of bloodhunts. Correct? No. The Prince with Rasta + fictional would have zero votes in blood hunts and 1 vote in other referendums. (But not in sub-referendums) [ quoted text not captured ]

> > No offense, but I find that this answer avoids the question. > > It answers it sufficiently, at least after the main question > has been answered. The concept should be clear. What was the answer to the main question, again? Does a sub-referendum count as a referendum, or not? > A Prisci who plays, say, Bewitching Oration is free to cast those > votes in the main referendum (and, indeed, can cast them only in > the main referendum). Sorry, I should have been more careful. What I meant to say is that any _priscus votes_ are not cast in the main referendum at all, but instead in a sub-referendum. Is this correct? (If it's not, I don't see how Priscus votes differ from any other conditional votes.) > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can play Telepathic Vote Counting in the > > sub-referendum to cancel a priscus' votes, right? > > It makes him abstain (card text), yes. So, can I play Disarming Presence in a sub-referendum to make every vampire who casts votes in the sub-referendum tap? If so, would it also affect the main referendum? > > Prince with Rastacourere would have 1 vote, but a Prince with > > Rastacourere and this card as well would have -1 votes, and 2 > > conditional votes which are usable outside of bloodhunts. Correct? > > No. The Prince with Rasta + fictional would have zero votes in > blood hunts and 1 vote in other referendums. So then, exactly how conditional must votes be in order to not be affected by Rastacourere? -- Brian

In message <1118162598....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, firstco...@aol.com writes: >What was the answer to the main question, again? Does a sub-referendum >count as a referendum, or not? A sub-referendum is a sub-referendum, and a referendum is a referendum. The two are different things. However, during one the other is conducted. [ quoted text not captured ]

firstco...@aol.com wrote: >>>No offense, but I find that this answer avoids the question. >> >>It answers it sufficiently, at least after the main question >>has been answered. The concept should be clear. > > > What was the answer to the main question, again? Does a sub-referendum > count as a referendum, or not? The answer to the main question (see threat subject) was: ===== >> If Rastacourere reduces a title's votes by one, why does it fail to >> reduce a priscus' title's votes by 1? > > It reduces the Priscus' title's votes in the main referendum (zero) > by 1. Which is meaningless, like a strength of -1 is meaningless > (equivalent to zero when it lands). ===== The answer to the other question: does a sub-referendum count as a referendum? was: ===== > if "it is a sub-referendum" means to you that it is a referendum, > then fine. That works just as well as if you take it to mean that > it isn't. The fact remains that cards which affect (or key off of) > the number of votes a vampire has in a referendum are working with > the vampire's main referendum vote count by default. ===== >>A Prisci who plays, say, Bewitching Oration is free to cast those >>votes in the main referendum (and, indeed, can cast them only in >>the main referendum). > > Sorry, I should have been more careful. What I meant to say is that > any _priscus votes_ are not cast in the main referendum at all, but > instead in a sub-referendum. Is this correct? Prisci (vampires who hold the title of Priscus) get one vote in the Prisci sub-referendum for that title. They get 0 votes in the main referendum for that title. In the Prisci sub-referendum, only the former votes may be cast, subject to the golden rule. > (If it's not, I don't see how Priscus votes differ from any other > conditional votes.) Conditional votes? I don't know what you mean. >>>Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can play Telepathic Vote Counting in the >>>sub-referendum to cancel a priscus' votes, right? >> >>It makes him abstain (card text), yes. > > So, can I play Disarming Presence in a sub-referendum to make every > vampire who casts votes in the sub-referendum tap? If so, would it > also affect the main referendum? You do not play Disarming Presence in a sub-referendum. You play it "during a referendum" (card text). Any vampire who does not abstain is tapped, even if the only votes they cast were in the Prisci sub-referendum (unless you control them and played DP at superior, of course). >>>Prince with Rastacourere would have 1 vote, but a Prince with >>>Rastacourere and this card as well would have -1 votes, and 2 >>>conditional votes which are usable outside of bloodhunts. Correct? >> >>No. The Prince with Rasta + fictional would have zero votes in >>blood hunts and 1 vote in other referendums. > > So then, exactly how conditional must votes be in order to not be > affected by Rastacourere? Conditional? Titles are not conditional -- in a referendum, a vampire is either titled or not. If he's titled, then the number of votes his title is worth in the main referendum is reduced by one (negative values treated as zero). Instead of trying to make an alternate set of rulings viable, try approaching the concept from the answers already provided instead. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: > firstco...@aol.com wrote: > > So, can I play Disarming Presence in a sub-referendum to make every > > vampire who casts votes in the sub-referendum tap? If so, would it > > also affect the main referendum? > > You do not play Disarming Presence in a sub-referendum. You play > it "during a referendum" (card text). > > Any vampire who does not abstain is tapped, even if the only votes > they cast were in the Prisci sub-referendum (unless you control > them and played DP at superior, of course). Disarming Presence Type: Action Modifier Requires: Presence Only usable during a referendum before any votes are cast. [pre] When a vampire votes in this referendum, tap him or her. [PRE] As above, but do not tap your vampires when they cast their votes. So you're saying a Priscus who votes *during a sub-referendum* is tapped by a Disarming Presence? Is this via the votes cast by the Priscus bloc? What if your Priscus abstains from the sub-referendum and the bloc casts their votes? What if your Priscus votes and the bloc abstains? Jeff

firstco...@aol.com wrote: > If Rastacourere reduces a title's votes by one, why does it fail to > reduce a priscus' title's votes by 1? If Bewitching Oration gives a Priscus four votes, why are those votes cast in the main referendum and not in the sub-referendum?

In message <1118181182.6...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, jeff...@pacbell.net writes: >So you're saying a Priscus who votes *during a sub-referendum* is >tapped by a Disarming Presence? Is this via the votes cast by the >Priscus bloc? What if your Priscus abstains from the sub-referendum and >the bloc casts their votes? What if your Priscus votes and the bloc >abstains? # An individual Priscus is not tainted by the result of the Prisci sub-referendum. (This only matters for cards like Bribes and Scorn of Adonis that care which way individual minions voted.) A Priscus is considered to have voted "for" or "against" (or to have abstained from) the main referendum based on how he cast his vote(s) in the sub-referendum, regardless of the result of that sub-referendum. [RTR 20000501] From this, we can see that a Priscus who votes during the sub-referendum is considered to have voted (and it may be for or against, or an abstention). The outcome of the overall Priscus sub-referendum, and how the 3 votes are cast (if at all), has no bearing on this. There was, a long time ago, a ruling that if the 3 votes were cast in favour then all Prisci were considered to have voted in favour, and so on. But that hasn't been in effect for a long time. So, if your Priscus votes for in the sub-referendum, effects on the main referendum trigger as seeing them vote, and as voting for the referendum. [ quoted text not captured ]

Emmit Svenson wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Because 6.3.3. says they cannot be cast in the subreferendum. Votes that are not explicitly marked for the subreferendum are main referendum votes. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ: PLEASE take the time to read and respond to this! I don't care if it's not immediately; I understand you're busy. I just want all 5 questions answered sometime this month cause I would hate to repost them, especially with all the context. This thread is about Rastacourere. The reason why I question a sub-referendum's status as referendum without being off topic: I was originally unsure whether 1a) the sub-referendum is a referendum unto itself, which uses a different kind of vote; or whether 1b) the sub-referendum is not a referendum, but a term used to describe a part of a referendum. I also wasn't sure whether 2a) all votes must be classified as either main-referendum or sub-referendum, and Rastacourere only deals with the former; or whether 2b) a vote is a vote, although some votes are usable in the sub-referendum and not usable in the main referendum. I assumed that if the latter were the case, Priscus' conditional votes would then fall under rulings for other conditional votes--they don't count for Island of Yiaros, etc. Summary: I went in assuming 1a, but you seem to imply 1b. I went in assuming 2b, but it seems you imply 2a. Is 1b representative of the way referenda work? Is 2a representative of the way votes work? Without these definitions in place, it is difficult to understand the nature of the relationship between cards like Rastacourere and titles like Priscus. ------------ > > (If it's not, I don't see how Priscus votes differ from any other > > conditional votes.) > > Conditional votes? > I don't know what you mean. I believe you do. In the thread, "Gehenna Rules Questions for LSJ!", you are asked: >> B. And on the flipside, conditional votes don't count? So Sundown, the extra >> vote from the right clan for a Barony, Paragon, and Aura of Invincibility >> don't count? and answer: > Correct. Later in the same thread, you are asked: >> How much conditionality is required for the "non-title" votes to not >> count for Leadership Vacuum (and Political Struggle too, I suppose)? and respond: > Any at all. I assumed that, since you knew what each of these people meant when they talked about conditional votes, you would know what I meant. If I need be explicit, I would best use your words to describe instead NON-conditional votes (from the thread "Political Struggle and Priscus votes"): "The votes a vampire would have in the main referendum of any generic referendum." Conditional votes would be, therefore, any votes other than those. To date, no title is worth "conditional" votes. This does not mean one could not be in the future, and I ask about how Rastacourere would interact with one at the bottom of this thread. > >>>Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can play Telepathic Vote Counting in the > >>>sub-referendum to cancel a priscus' votes, right? > >> > >>It makes him abstain (card text), yes. > > > > So, can I play Disarming Presence in a sub-referendum to make every > > vampire who casts votes in the sub-referendum tap? If so, would it > > also affect the main referendum? > > You do not play Disarming Presence in a sub-referendum. You play > it "during a referendum" (card text). Then I cannot play Telepathic Vote Counting in a sub-referendum, either. Also, this means a sub-referendum is not a referendum. Please verify this conclusion. > > So then, exactly how conditional must votes be in order to not be > > affected by Rastacourere? > > Conditional? > > Titles are not conditional -- in a referendum, a vampire is either I asked about conditional votes, not conditional titles. There already exist conditional votes. There do not happen to be titles yet which grant conditional votes, but (for example) Lithrac could be formalized in the future. Again, I address this at the bottom of the thread. ------------ A brief summary of why Rastacourere would affect a Priscus' vote without "main" in its text: Priscus is a title. It is also worth one vote. There are restrictions on how this vote may be cast, but it is still a vote. The subreferendum takes place during a referendum. Therefore, the title "Priscus" is worth one vote in a referendum. Rastacourere affects titles, making them worth one less vote in a referendum. It does not specify main- or sub-referendum. Rastacourere has been ruled to subtract only from main-referendum votes, but this ruling does not seem to come from a logical extension of another ruling, as did (for example) Psyche! vs. Rotschreck, and so I am trying to understand why Priscus votes are not reduced by this card. ------------ You presented me with the fictional title of "Pairscus", worth one vote in the main referendum and one in the sub-referendum. I present you with two fictional titles: "Opriscus", worth one vote which is usable in a main- or sub-referendum, and "Burnogen", worth two votes in each bloodhunt. How would Rastacourere interact with Opriscus? How would Rastacourere interact with Burnogen? -- Brian Thank you for your time.

firstco...@aol.com wrote: > LSJ: PLEASE take the time to read and respond to this! I don't care if > it's not immediately; I understand you're busy. I just want all 5 > questions answered sometime this month cause I would hate to repost > them, especially with all the context. I'm not sure why this plea is necessary. I've read and responded to everything else so far. > This thread is about Rastacourere. The reason why I question a > sub-referendum's status as referendum without being off topic: > > I was originally unsure whether 1a) the sub-referendum is a referendum > unto itself, which uses a different kind of vote; or whether 1b) the > sub-referendum is not a referendum, but a term used to describe a part > of a referendum. And it still doesn't matter. If you like to consider it a referendum, then fine -- but remember, in that case, that cards that refer to votes in a referendum are referring to main referendum votes by default. > I also wasn't sure whether 2a) all votes must be classified as either > main-referendum or sub-referendum, and Rastacourere only deals with the > former; or whether 2b) a vote is a vote, although some votes are usable > in the sub-referendum and not usable in the main referendum. 2a) has been answered several times already in this thread and elsewhere. 2b) A vote is a vote, sure. > I assumed that if the latter were the case, Priscus' conditional votes > would then fall under rulings for other conditional votes--they don't > count for Island of Yiaros, etc. It's not conditional. Yiaros just fails to meet 2a -- Island of Yiaros doesn't have explicit text about the sub-referendum, so its reference to number of votes means, by default, "in the main referendum" (and has since received explicit text to that effect as well -- in CE). > Summary: > I went in assuming 1a, but you seem to imply 1b. No, I've explicitly stated that both are fine. > I went in assuming 2b, but it seems you imply 2a. Both 2a and 2b are correct. > Is 1b representative of the way referenda work? If that suits you. It's just a matter of perspective. > Is 2a representative of the way votes work? Sure. > > Without these definitions in place, it is difficult to understand the > nature of the relationship between cards like Rastacourere and titles > like Priscus. Then it may be time for my own plea, as the relationship between the two has been explained in this thread repeatedly: Rastacourere deals with the number of votes and doesn't explicitly affect the sub-referendum, so it only affects the main referendum votes. > ------------ >>>(If it's not, I don't see how Priscus votes differ from any other >>>conditional votes.) >> >>Conditional votes? >>I don't know what you mean. > > I believe you do. > In the thread, "Gehenna Rules Questions for LSJ!", you are asked: (Best to give Google URLs when citing old thread, for ease of reference, especially for citing a particular post in a lengthy old thread) But titles are not conditional. You're use of "other" paints the titled votes as conditional, which does not match my usage in that thread, so I didn't know what you meant by conditional. >>>B. And on the flipside, conditional votes don't count? So Sundown, the extra >>>vote from the right clan for a Barony, Paragon, and Aura of Invincibility >>>don't count? > > and answer: >>Correct. > > Later in the same thread, you are asked: >>>How much conditionality is required for the "non-title" votes to not >>>count for Leadership Vacuum (and Political Struggle too, I suppose)? > and respond: >>Any at all. > > I assumed that, since you knew what each of these people meant when > they talked about conditional votes, you would know what I meant. If I Conditional votes are ones that are dependent on some other condition, as per the question ("conditionality") and the examples given: Clan Barony Condition: "If this anarch is Brujah or Brujah antitribu, ... in referendums he or she calls." (e.g.) Paragon Condition: "... in referendums called by younger vampires." Aura of Invincibility Condition: "... in referendums he or she calls." Titles are clearly not conditional, so painting the Priscus title as conditional led me to believe that you were using it to mean something else, something which I could not intuit, so I stated so. > need be explicit, I would best use your words to describe instead > NON-conditional votes (from the thread "Political Struggle and Priscus > votes"): > > "The votes a vampire would have in the main referendum of any > generic referendum." In context of "votes counted by Political Struggle", the "in the main referendum" is assumed, so was included in the answer to continue to conform to the already-answered "are Priscus votes counted by Political Struggle" question of the thread. Non-conditional votes are ones that don't have conditions attached. Political Struggle counts non-conditional, main-referendum votes. Priscus votes, though non-conditional, are not main-referendum votes, so are not counted by Political Struggle. > Conditional votes would be, therefore, any votes other than those. That is non-standard (and misleading, IMO) usage, but OK. (I'd suggest "Conditional or subreferendum votes" to match your usage). With that definition in place... > To date, no title is worth "conditional" votes. This does not mean one > could not be in the future, and I ask about how Rastacourere would > interact with one at the bottom of this thread. OK. >>>>>Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can play Telepathic Vote Counting in the >>>>>sub-referendum to cancel a priscus' votes, right? >>>> >>>>It makes him abstain (card text), yes. >>> >>>So, can I play Disarming Presence in a sub-referendum to make every >>>vampire who casts votes in the sub-referendum tap? If so, would it >>>also affect the main referendum? >> >>You do not play Disarming Presence in a sub-referendum. You play >>it "during a referendum" (card text). > > Then I cannot play Telepathic Vote Counting in a sub-referendum, > either. Also, this means a sub-referendum is not a referendum. > > Please verify this conclusion. No. The sub-referendum votes must be cast in the same "alignment" as the vampire's other votes (for, against, or not at all = abstain). All votes from a single source, both in the main referendum and in the sub referendum, must be cast in agreement. E.g., Genevieve cannot cast her Prisci vote against while casting he main-referendum vote in favor (nor can she abstain with one while voting the other). TVC causes a vampire to abstain. Therefore, it must "echo" that abstention in the sub-referendum. In essence, you can think of the vampire itself as being "for", "against", or "abstaining" with regards to the current referendum at the table. All of that vampire's votes are then automatically set to match his political leaning (his alignment) on that. TVC sets his alignment to neutral/abstain. >>>So then, exactly how conditional must votes be in order to not be >>>affected by Rastacourere? >> >>Conditional? >> >>Titles are not conditional -- in a referendum, a vampire is either > > I asked about conditional votes, not conditional titles. There already Votes from titles are not conditional in the usual sense. Votes from Prisci titles are not main-referendum votes, so would qualify are conditional in your definition, which would mean that the Priscus title is conditional in the obvious extension of that definition. > exist conditional votes. There do not happen to be titles yet which > grant conditional votes, but (for example) Lithrac could be formalized > in the future. Again, I address this at the bottom of the thread. Still OK. > ------------ > > A brief summary of why Rastacourere would affect a Priscus' vote > without "main" in its text: > > Priscus is a title. It is also worth one vote. There are restrictions > on how this vote may be cast, but it is still a vote. The > subreferendum takes place during a referendum. Therefore, the title > "Priscus" is worth one vote in a referendum. Rastacourere affects > titles, making them worth one less vote in a referendum. It does not > specify main- or sub-referendum. A brief summary of why Rastacourere would not affect the Priscus's sub-referendum votes: Rastacourere lacks subreferendum-affecting text, and it deals with number of votes, so its reference to number of votes is a reference to number of main referendum votes, since that is the default. See also Island of Yiaros, etc. > Rastacourere has been ruled to subtract only from main-referendum > votes, but this ruling does not seem to come from a logical extension > of another ruling, as did (for example) Psyche! vs. Rotschreck, and so > I am trying to understand why Priscus votes are not reduced by this > card. It comes from the logical extension of the "effects that refer to number of votes refer to the number of main referendum votes by default". See Island of Yiaros, Political Struggle, burning the Edge, etc. > ------------ > > You presented me with the fictional title of "Pairscus", worth one vote > in the main referendum and one in the sub-referendum. I present you > with two fictional titles: "Opriscus", worth one vote which is usable > in a main- or sub-referendum, and "Burnogen", worth two votes in each > bloodhunt. > > How would Rastacourere interact with Opriscus? If the title were used in the main referendum, it would be worth one fewer vote. > How would Rastacourere interact with Burnogen? If the title were used in the main referendum, it would be worth one fewer vote. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: > Emmit Svenson wrote: > > > > > firstco...@aol.com wrote: > > > >>If Rastacourere reduces a title's votes by one, why does it fail to > >>reduce a priscus' title's votes by 1? > > > > If Bewitching Oration gives a Priscus four votes, why are those votes > > cast in the main referendum and not in the sub-referendum? > > Because 6.3.3. says they cannot be cast in the subreferendum. > > Votes that are not explicitly marked for the subreferendum are main > referendum votes. My apologies for causing you to waste time on a reply...the question was meant to answer the original question by counterexample. I should have known it would just look like a straight question.

LSJ wrote: > firstco...@aol.com wrote: > > > LSJ: PLEASE take the time to read and respond to this! I don't care if > > it's not immediately; I understand you're busy. I just want all 5 > > questions answered sometime this month cause I would hate to repost > > them, especially with all the context. > > I'm not sure why this plea is necessary. I've read and responded to > everything else so far. [clip] Ugh. That was a painful read. I like the old succint Scott better. Just give a terse "Correct" or "No" and move on. :-) -Robert

> Ugh. That was a painful read. I like the old succint Scott better. > Just give a terse "Correct" or "No" and move on. :-) > > -Robert Head Hurting.... Brain Cells exploding in Chain Reaction..... Ouch... Arfab....

[ quoted text not captured ] Like many of the examples given in this thread so far, if there is not explicit text stating that it applies to the Prisci sub-referendum, then by default the additional votes apply only to the main referendum. For example: Gratiano gets one vote in the Prisci sub-referendum because he is a Priscus. He gets an additional vote in the Prisci sub-referendum because of explicit card text. If he were to become a Legendary Vampire then he would have 1+1 votes in the Prisci sub-referendum, plus 2 votes in the main referendum. The votes granted by the Legendary Vampire only apply to the main referendum because there is no explicit text stating otherwise. If he then becomes a Cardinal somehow, he then has 5 votes in the main referendum (3 for cardinal +2 for Legendary status), loses his Priscus title because he is now a Cardinal, but still gets 1 vote in the Prisci sub-referendum due to his card text. This convoluted example was supposed to illustrate situations where you have modifications to the votes in the sub-referendum as well as the main referendum. Without explicit text stating that the modification affects the Prisci sub-referendum, any affect only applies to votes in the main referendum. Hope this was helpful, Doug

[ quoted text not captured ] Yes, and if Gratiano in the above example had a Rastacourere on him, he would have 4 votes in the main referendum (only +2 for Cardinal due to Rasta, +2 for Legendary) and 1 in the Prisci sub-referendum due to his card text (which is unaffected by Rasta). Jeff

jeff...@pacbell.net wrote: > > Yes, and if Gratiano in the above example had a Rastacourere on him, he > would have 4 votes in the main referendum (only +2 for Cardinal due to > Rasta, +2 for Legendary) and 1 in the Prisci sub-referendum due to his > card text (which is unaffected by Rasta). > > Jeff And (just to be clear) a vanilla Gratiano with a Rastacourere would have 2 votes in the Prisci sub-referendum. Doug