Genevieve vote?

Can she use her 'one additional vote during pol act' during the prisci sub-ref? T

Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com wrote: > Can she use her 'one additional vote during pol act' during the prisci > sub-ref? No. -- 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/

On Mon, 08 Jul 2002 15:36:58 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com wrote: >> Can she use her 'one additional vote during pol act' during the prisci >> sub-ref? > >No. > Why not? Gratian can, and the sub-ref is still part of any pol action. T

<Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com> wrote in message news:3d2b96e9.133553936@news... [ quoted text not captured ] 1- because Grationa's card text actually says "one additional vote in the prisci sub referendum" while Genevieve's text just says "one additional vote". Is it so difficult to understand plain english ?? =D

Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com wrote: > On Mon, 08 Jul 2002 15:36:58 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > >Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com wrote: > >> Can she use her 'one additional vote during pol act' during the prisci > >> sub-ref? > > > >No. > > Why not? Gratian can, and the sub-ref is still part of any pol > action. Card text and [6.3.3] [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 08:23:11 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com wrote: >> On Mon, 08 Jul 2002 15:36:58 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> >> >Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com wrote: >> >> Can she use her 'one additional vote during pol act' during the prisci >> >> sub-ref? >> > >> >No. >> >> Why not? Gratian can, and the sub-ref is still part of any pol >> action. > >Card text and [6.3.3] > "During a referendum, the prisci block of three votes is cast "for" or "against" the referendum according to the prisci sub-referendum. Each ready priscus provides one vote for this sub-referendum, and no other votes may be used in this sub-referendum. Each vote is either "for" or "against" the main referendum." I take it then that you are quoting 633 because of the above text restricting a priscus to one vote in the sub ref? but cards over-rule rules text according to the golden rule, and Genevieve gets an additional vote in any pol action, so therefore she should be able to use that +1 vote in the sub ref. The only argument against this would probably be based in 632, that cards referring to a political act are in fact referring to the referendum. In which case Genevieve would be expressly restricted from getting the additional during the sub-ref. Therefore her text should be erratted. In either case, you need to support your answers more than you did above. T

In message <3d336f03.188884617@news>, Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com writes: >I take it then that you are quoting 633 because of the above text >restricting a priscus to one vote in the sub ref? but cards over-rule >rules text according to the golden rule, and Genevieve gets an >additional vote in any pol action, so therefore she should be able to >use that +1 vote in the sub ref. No. *Only* votes marked as specifically being usable during the Prisci sub- referendum are allowable in the sub-referendum. These, currently, are Prisci titles and Gratiano's text. A Priscus with a Legendary vampire does not get to cast the Legendary Vampire votes during the Prisci sub-referendum. Similarly, Awe, Bewitching Oration, Lyndhurst Estate and so on. Genevieve has one additional vote. This is not marked as being a Prisci sub-referendum vote, so she can only use it in the main referendum, because it does not "break the rules". It functions as a usual vote, cast like the votes found on any other vampire. This is why Gratiano is worded in the way that he is - so that he can cast it during the Prisci sub-referendum. Without that text, he wouldn't be able to. -- James Coupe PGP 0x5D623D5D I am woman. Here, me raw. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 13D7E668C3695D623D5D

Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com wrote: > > On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 08:23:11 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > wrote: > > >Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com wrote: > >> On Mon, 08 Jul 2002 15:36:58 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > >> >Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com wrote: > >> >> Can she use her 'one additional vote during pol act' during the prisci > >> >> sub-ref? > >> > > >> >No. > >> > >> Why not? Gratian can, and the sub-ref is still part of any pol > >> action. > > > >Card text and [6.3.3] > > > > "During a referendum, the prisci block of three votes is cast "for" or > "against" the referendum according to the prisci sub-referendum. Each > ready priscus provides one vote for this sub-referendum, and no other > votes may be used in this sub-referendum. Each vote is either "for" or > "against" the main referendum." > > I take it then that you are quoting 633 because of the above text > restricting a priscus to one vote in the sub ref? but cards over-rule > rules text according to the golden rule, and Genevieve gets an > additional vote in any pol action, so therefore she should be able to > use that +1 vote in the sub ref. Rule (that you quote above): "no other votes may be used in this sub-referendum" Card text on Gen. that overrides this rule: none. Card text on Gen. that allow her to cast 1 vote in the main referendum (whereas he title only grants her a vote in the PSR): clear. > The only argument against this would probably be based in 632, that > cards referring to a political act are in fact referring to the > referendum. In which case Genevieve would be expressly restricted > from getting the additional during the sub-ref. Therefore her text > should be erratted. She gets a vote. Since that vote cannot be cast in the sub-referendum, by the rule cited, there's nothing else to say. > In either case, you need to support your answers more than you did > above. Not true. It is clear, your unrelenting claims of murkiness in all things notwithstanding. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 00:00:06 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: I'm only continuing this as an academic discussion; > >Rule (that you quote above): >"no other votes may be used in this sub-referendum" A sub ref is part of a political action. The golden rule allows cards to overrule rules text. > >Card text on Gen. that overrides this rule: none. > Gen gets 1 additional during a political action. As per above, this overurles the restiction on the sub ref. That's how I see it anyways. Of course if all 'political action' text on a card were erratted to 'main referendum' as the 632 implies, then she can't. But until that happens...this interpretation contrary to what you have told me here will happen. Ultimately, Im just tyring to point out an ambiguous situation here. T

Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 00:00:06 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > I'm only continuing this as an academic discussion; If only that were true. > >Rule (that you quote above): > >"no other votes may be used in this sub-referendum" > > A sub ref is part of a political action. The golden rule allows cards > to overrule rules text. It is part of a political action. And part of the minion phase. And part of the referendum. And part of the player's turn. Of course, all of this has nothing to do with overriding the restriction on which votes can be cast in the sub-referendum. The golden rule does indeed allow card text to override rules text. But, since nothing on Genevieve's card text overrides the rule that only the Prisci gets 1 vote in the sub-referendum and only those votes can be used in the sub-referendum, the vote Genevieve gains in the main referendum from her special ability cannot be cast in the sub-referendum. > >Card text on Gen. that overrides this rule: none. > > Gen gets 1 additional during a political action. As per above, this > overurles the restiction on the sub ref. Not in the slightest. There is no support for that flawed statement. She gets 1 additional vote during a political action (card text). That vote cannot be cast in the sub-referendum (rules, since nothing has overridden them). She can cast it in the main referendum (or not at all). > That's how I see it anyways. Of course if all 'political action' text > on a card were erratted to 'main referendum' as the 632 implies, then > she can't. But until that happens...this interpretation contrary to > what you have told me here will happen. > > Ultimately, Im just tyring to point out an ambiguous situation here. And failing, given the obviousness of the situation. Unless it is your assertion that the votes from Surprise Influence, Power Structure, Regent, Ventrue Directorate Assembly, Stefano Giovanni, Legacy of Pander, and the Mausoleum Venice can be used in the Prisci sub-referendum (despite the rule that clearly states otherwise). [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:59:09 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >The golden rule does indeed allow card text to override rules >text. But, since nothing on Genevieve's card text overrides >the rule that only the Prisci gets 1 vote in the sub-referendum >and only those votes can be used in the sub-referendum, the >vote Genevieve gains in the main referendum from her special >ability cannot be cast in the sub-referendum. > That's the best, most specefic explanation yet. I'm sure you felt that you already explained that, but Gen's text is so unique it caused me to question this area. > >Unless it is your assertion that the votes from Surprise Influence, >Power Structure, Regent, Ventrue Directorate Assembly, Stefano Giovanni, >Legacy of Pander, and the Mausoleum Venice can be used in the Prisci >sub-referendum (despite the rule that clearly states otherwise). I think those are all tap/pay blood/play card effects. Except for the Regents extra vote. So no, you couldnt *play* them for a vote. Gen's vote is automatically in effect during the whole political action, and thus I thought there might be a loophole in the rules. Ok so I pushed the envelope a bit. *shrug* T

In message <3d2f87c3.455613178@news>, Tal...@nodamspamhotmail.com writes: >I'm sure you felt >that you already explained that, but Gen's text is so unique it caused >me to question this area. Her text is only specific to avoid her being (potentially) gifted a second title. (Which isn't possible.) This is why she isn't worded akin to Regina Giovanni. Votes that don't *specifically* say "May be used in the Prisci sub- referendum" cannot be used. [ quoted text not captured ]