Delaying tactics timing

Hello all! Here's another one for Scott: There's a political action being called. There's a lot of discussion prior to the decision to not to block (as usual in my playgroup, as I believe it's in all playgroups), but since the acting player has bribes, no-one blocks. He plays bribes. Everyone with votes already said they'd vote in favor, but the weenie player who had no votes to cast plays Delaying Tactics. Question is: who gains pool? Everyone who had stated their intentions to cast votes? No-one, for it could be argued that the weenie played the DT before the acting minion played bribes (thus making the problem a fast-talk ability)? Or only the acting player for the pool gain for him is immediate, and there is a "before votes are cast" phase that enables the player of the DT to play it before any votes are cast (and therefore only the acting meth gained a pool)? I'd be very thankful if you could send any answers directly to me also, for the news server is kinda screwy around here lately. David Pontes P.S.-> Any news on the perkygoth (the enigmatic character on the VtES index)? I'd really like to know where did that come from... 8[

On Wed, 9 Apr 1997, L. Scott Johnson wrote: > David Pontes wrote: > > > There's a political action being called. There's a lot of > > discussion prior to the decision to not to block (as usual in my > > playgroup, as I believe it's in all playgroups), but since the acting > > player has bribes, no-one blocks. He plays bribes. Everyone with votes > > already said they'd vote in favor, but the weenie player who had no votes > > to cast plays Delaying Tactics. > > > > Question is: who gains pool? > > Only the acting Methuselah, by VtES card text. > > It is not clear until the voting is over that the other players > have met the requirements for bribes, and Delaying Tactics > ends the process before that point. > So there is a "before votes are cast" subphase, when the political action will no longer be intercepted and no votes will be cast just yet, right? > > P.S.-> Any news on the perkygoth (the enigmatic character on the VtES > > index)? I'd really like to know where did that come from... > > Sorry, I thought that that was some inside joke. > I don't have a physical copy of the VtES rulebook, so have no > reference for your question. > > I personally have no knowledge of the perkygoth. > Yes, most probably it's an inside joke from the makers of the rulebook. I was just curious about it. The rulebook has only that mention to the "Jillian Sutter, the perkygoth" character, and does not appear anywhere else in the credits. Probably isn't even an interesting story :) David Pontes 8[

David Pontes wrote: > > Hello all! Here's another one for Scott: > > There's a political action being called. There's a lot of > discussion prior to the decision to not to block (as usual in my > playgroup, as I believe it's in all playgroups), but since the acting > player has bribes, no-one blocks. He plays bribes. Everyone with votes > already said they'd vote in favor, but the weenie player who had no votes > to cast plays Delaying Tactics. > > Question is: who gains pool? Everyone who had stated their > intentions to cast votes? No-one, for it could be argued that the weenie > played the DT before the acting minion played bribes (thus making the > problem a fast-talk ability)? Or only the acting player for the pool gain > for him is immediate, and there is a "before votes are cast" phase that > enables the player of the DT to play it before any votes are cast (and > therefore only the acting meth gained a pool)? Only the acting Methuselah, by VtES card text. It is not clear until the voting is over that the other players have met the requirements for bribes, and Delaying Tactics ends the process before that point. > > I'd be very thankful if you could send any answers directly to me also, > for the news server is kinda screwy around here lately. > > David Pontes > > P.S.-> Any news on the perkygoth (the enigmatic character on the VtES > index)? I'd really like to know where did that come from... Sorry, I thought that that was some inside joke. I don't have a physical copy of the VtES rulebook, so have no reference for your question. I personally have no knowledge of the perkygoth. -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@regency.wizards.com) Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team

David Pontes wrote: > On Wed, 9 Apr 1997, L. Scott Johnson wrote: > > David Pontes wrote: > > > There's a political action being called. There's a lot of > > > discussion prior to the decision to not to block (as usual in my > > > playgroup, as I believe it's in all playgroups), but since the acting > > > player has bribes, no-one blocks. He plays bribes. Everyone with votes > > > already said they'd vote in favor, but the weenie player who had no votes > > > to cast plays Delaying Tactics. > > > Question is: who gains pool? > > > > Only the acting Methuselah, by VtES card text. > > > > It is not clear until the voting is over that the other players > > have met the requirements for bribes, and Delaying Tactics > > ends the process before that point. > > So there is a "before votes are cast" subphase, when the > political action will no longer be intercepted and no votes will be cast > just yet, right? Yes, and that's the only point at which Bribes can be played. It is possible to play DT in this same phase, but the acting Methuselah would have first shot at playing effects, as usual. DT has the added ability to be played after this phase, which Bribes does not. [ quoted text not captured ]

Hi LSJ, L. Scott Johnson <vte...@regency.wizards.com> wrote in article <334B87...@regency.wizards.com>... > David Pontes wrote: Everything reasonable and relevant deleted. > > > > P.S.-> Any news on the perkygoth (the enigmatic character on the VtES > > index)? I'd really like to know where did that come from... > > Sorry, I thought that that was some inside joke. > I don't have a physical copy of the VtES rulebook, so have no > reference for your question. > > I personally have no knowledge of the perkygoth. > Didn't Tom once comment that there was someone who worked at wizards they referred to as "The Perkygoth"? Seems like it was around the time you (LSJ) were away from us to get married and the Corrupter was filling those large shows. Still, it might have just been a running joke at Wizards, the person may not even exist... Algustas -- I don't have time for a sig.file, I have to play Diablo

Algustas wrote: > Didn't Tom once comment that there was someone who worked at wizards they > referred to as "The Perkygoth"? On your subliminal suggestion, Al, I went to dejanews and searched: "Perkygoth & (~g rec.games.*)" came up with 7 matches, one of which was from Wizards.com (The URL listed is still online): Subject: Re: Perkygoth/Jillian Sutter From: lia...@wizards.com (Charles Keith-Stanley) Date: 1996/02/02 Message-Id: <liaison-0202...@w09-153.wizards.com> Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad [More Headers] In article <NLEE.2....@ELECOM2.watstar.uwaterloo.ca>, NL...@ELECOM2.watstar.uwaterloo.ca (N Lee) wrote: > I don't know if anyone's ever brought it up here, but try looking up > "Perkygoth" in the index of the V:TES rulebook.... Who is Jillian Sutter? Jilli, our resident perkygoth, is a member of our Merchant Relations team (part of the Customer Services Group). She's a constant reminder that goths don't *have* to be dreary, melancholy, wilting puddles of angst. For more than you ever wanted to know about "perkygoths", see the Perkygoth Manifesto at "http://dax.cs.wisc.edu/~lunatic/perkygoth.html". -- Charles Keith-Stanley were...@wizards.com Cyberspace Liaison lia...@wizards.com Wizards of the Coast http://www.wizards.com [ quoted text not captured ]

By the way. Delaying tactics says the controller of the acting minion takes the card back into his or her hand but the vote card was replaced when the vote was called so now he/she has 8 cards in his/her hand. Does the controller of the acting minion have to discard a card? Plus since the vote is cancelled, does that mean the vampire can't call a different vote due to NRA even though he didn't actually complete the action and he wasn't blocked? Deej "Did you paint pubic hair on my garden gnomes?" -Drew Carey Show

Bill Jackson wrote: > > By the way. Delaying tactics says the controller of the acting minion > takes the card back into his or her hand but the vote card was > replaced when the vote was called so now he/she has 8 cards in his/her > hand. Does the controller of the acting minion have to discard a card? We have played that the Meth just returns the last card they drew to the top of their library, but that seems somewhat bogus, since there really is no official mechanism for that. So if the Meth has to discard, is it random or do they discard what they decide on? And one more DT question - can you play it during the referendum, but before the referendum has closed? The card text just states "during a political action", which I remember includes the referendum (or am I wrong there?). -- Chris Shorb ino...@ix.netcom.com "How can I describe it?...It's a nightmare land, a place of death, horrifying in its desolation...Not a tree, not a flower, not a blade of grass..." - Herge

In article <334B87...@regency.wizards.com>, "L. Scott Johnson" <vte...@regency.wizards.com> writes: >> Question is: who gains pool? Everyone who had stated their >> intentions to cast votes? No-one, for it could be argued that the weenie >> played the DT before the acting minion played bribes (thus making the >> problem a fast-talk ability)? Or only the acting player for the pool gain >> for him is immediate, and there is a "before votes are cast" phase that >> enables the player of the DT to play it before any votes are cast (and >> therefore only the acting meth gained a pool)? > >Only the acting Methuselah, by VtES card text. > >It is not clear until the voting is over that the other players >have met the requirements for bribes, and Delaying Tactics >ends the process before that point. > > Along these same lines. Can a player call a vote, play bribes to gain a pool and then play Telepathic Vote Counting, thereby gaining one pool? Seems like it can. Finally, a way to take an action to gain a pool! [Great, if it works I have to build a deck just to try this little trick out.] Thank you, Chance Chance "If you think you can, you're right. If you think you can't, you're right!" -- Henry Ford

Chris Shorb wrote: > [Re: Delaying tactics timing] > So if the Meth has to discard, is it > random or do they discard what they decide on? The Meth discards a card of her chosing, like any other discard. > And one more DT question > - can you play it during the referendum, but before the referendum has > closed? The card text just states "during a political action", which I > remember includes the referendum (or am I wrong there?). Correct. Any time before the action is completed is fine. [ quoted text not captured ]

Bill Jackson wrote: > > By the way. Delaying tactics says the controller of the acting minion > takes the card back into his or her hand but the vote card was > replaced when the vote was called so now he/she has 8 cards in his/her > hand. Does the controller of the acting minion have to discard a card? Yes. > Plus since the vote is cancelled, does that mean the vampire can't > call a different vote due to NRA even though he didn't actually > complete the action and he wasn't blocked? No, since the action was "cancelled" and not "blocked" or what-not. (*) The vampire is free to call another vote (but not one of the same name, by the restrictive text on DT). [ quoted text not captured ]

xcdc...@aol.com wrote: > Along these same lines. Can a player call a vote, play bribes to gain a pool and then play Telepathic Vote Counting, thereby gaining one pool? Seems like it can. Yes. [ quoted text not captured ]

L. Scott Johnson wrote: > > Chris Shorb wrote: > > [Re: Delaying tactics timing] > > So if the Meth has to discard, is it > > random or do they discard what they decide on? > > The Meth discards a card of her chosing, like any other discard. > > > And one more DT question > > - can you play it during the referendum, but before the referendum has > > closed? The card text just states "during a political action", which I > > remember includes the referendum (or am I wrong there?). > > Correct. Any time before the action is completed is fine. > > -- > L. Scott Johnson (vte...@regency.wizards.com) This does seem to make DT a more powerful card - forcing a discard, and can be played at any time up until the vote closes. What happens if someone has played an Elder Kindred Network before the DT; I assume the EKN takes no effect... Chris [ quoted text not captured ]

L. Scott Johnson wrote: > > No, since the action was "cancelled" and not "blocked" or what-not. (*) > The vampire is free to call another vote (but not one of the same > name, by the restrictive text on DT). I can't say that I agree with this. If this is the correct ruling, then it makes the only effective vote defense card reasonably useless. James -- James E. Hamblin je...@cornell.edu "There is a greater darkness than the one we fight. It is the darkness of the soul that has lost its way. ... Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender." -- G'Kar, Babylon 5: "Z'ha'dum"

James Hamblin wrote: > L. Scott Johnson wrote: > > No, since the action was "cancelled" and not "blocked" or what-not. (*) > > The vampire is free to call another vote (but not one of the same > > name, by the restrictive text on DT). > > I can't say that I agree with this. If this is the correct ruling, then > it makes the only effective vote defense card reasonably useless. How so? The process works the same way it does without the DCI NRA rule, and Repeat Actions is not a problem associated with vote decks. -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@regency.wizards.com) [ quoted text not captured ]

Chris Shorb wrote: > L. Scott Johnson wrote: > > Chris Shorb wrote: > > > [Re: Delaying tactics timing] > > > So if the Meth has to discard, is it > > > random or do they discard what they decide on? > > The Meth discards a card of her chosing, like any other discard. > > > > > And one more DT question > > > - can you play it during the referendum, but before the referendum has > > > closed? The card text just states "during a political action", which I > > > remember includes the referendum (or am I wrong there?). > > Correct. Any time before the action is completed is fine. > > This does seem to make DT a more powerful card - forcing a discard, and > can be played at any time up until the vote closes. What happens if > someone has played an Elder Kindred Network before the DT; I assume the > EKN takes no effect... Correct. The EKN's effect kicks in after the referndum is closed and votes are tallyed and the results are seen. DT is played before this. [ quoted text not captured ]

Joshua Duffin wrote: > L. Scott Johnson (vte...@regency.wizards.com) wrote: > : James Hamblin wrote: > : > L. Scott Johnson wrote: > : > > No, since the action was "cancelled" and not "blocked" or what-not. (*) > : > > The vampire is free to call another vote (but not one of the same > : > > name, by the restrictive text on DT). > : > > : > I can't say that I agree with this. If this is the correct ruling, then > : > it makes the only effective vote defense card reasonably useless. > > : The process works the same way it does without the DCI NRA rule, and > : Repeat Actions is not a problem associated with vote decks. > > Why not? KRC, Freak Drive, KRC, Freak Drive, KRC, Freak Drive, Fifth > Tradition... well, you get the idea. Admittedly it's no Force of Will, > Movement of the Slow Body, Rapid Healing, Force of Will, but still... As I said, it is not a problem that is associated with vote decks. That one can produce an example is without question. > I seem to recall that there was a ruling that the NRA rule counts actions > successfully completed or blocked, brought up by Mask of a Thousand Faces. > Is that the basis for Delaying Tactics not counting as a vote action taken? No. Card text on Delaying Tactics is the basis of the ruling. Cancelled actions aren't completed; cancelled votes aren't cast; cancelled Blurs don't count against the limit of 1 additl strike effect per minion per round; etc. [ quoted text not captured ]

L. Scott Johnson (vte...@regency.wizards.com) wrote: : James Hamblin wrote: : > L. Scott Johnson wrote: : > > No, since the action was "cancelled" and not "blocked" or what-not. (*) : > > The vampire is free to call another vote (but not one of the same : > > name, by the restrictive text on DT). : > : > I can't say that I agree with this. If this is the correct ruling, then : > it makes the only effective vote defense card reasonably useless. : How so? : The process works the same way it does without the DCI NRA rule, and : Repeat Actions is not a problem associated with vote decks. Why not? KRC, Freak Drive, KRC, Freak Drive, KRC, Freak Drive, Fifth Tradition... well, you get the idea. Admittedly it's no Force of Will, Movement of the Slow Body, Rapid Healing, Force of Will, but still... I seem to recall that there was a ruling that the NRA rule counts actions successfully completed or blocked, brought up by Mask of a Thousand Faces. Is that the basis for Delaying Tactics not counting as a vote action taken? Josh ..now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational immortal grapple...

L. Scott Johnson wrote: > > Cancelled actions aren't completed; cancelled votes aren't cast; > cancelled Blurs don't count against the limit of 1 additl strike > effect per minion per round; etc. To use more preceise terminology: Cancelled actions are not performed. [ quoted text not captured ]

If other Meths decide to play political cards, reactions cards, etc. that can influence the vote, do they pick those cards up as well if Delaying Tactics is played? Or is it just the acting Meth?

In article <33529C...@ix.netcom.com>, Chris Shorb <ino...@ix.netcom.com> writes: > >This does seem to make DT a more powerful card - forcing a discard, and >can be played at any time up until the vote closes. What happens if >someone has played an Elder Kindred Network before the DT; I assume the >EKN takes no effect... > Correct here. That is the basis behind the Telepathic Vote Counting. Vote was cancelled on account of noone wanting it to pass, everyone go home. >Chris [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] Just the acting Methuselah, and just the Political Action card (if any) used to call the vote. (card text). [ quoted text not captured ]

James Hamblin <je...@cornell.edu> wrote: > L. Scott Johnson wrote: > > > > No, since the action was "cancelled" and not "blocked" or what-not. (*) > > The vampire is free to call another vote (but not one of the same > > name, by the restrictive text on DT). > > I can't say that I agree with this. If this is the correct ruling, then > it makes the only effective vote defense card reasonably useless. I can't say that I agree that this makes Delaying Tactics "reasonably useless". Not only is the acting minion prevented from calling the same vote (as per DT text), but _all_ minions of that meth are prevented from calling the same vote (again, per text). How can you possibly refer to that as "reasonably useless"??? --- Eric Pettersen pe...@diderot.ucsf.edu (NeXTmail capable)

Eric Pettersen wrote: > > I can't say that I agree that this makes Delaying Tactics "reasonably > useless". Not only is the acting minion prevented from calling the same > vote (as per DT text), but _all_ minions of that meth are prevented from > calling the same vote (again, per text). How can you possibly refer to > that as "reasonably useless"??? Well, certainly much less useful than it would be. Sure, they're prohibited from ConAgging you, so they KRC you instead. Big punishment. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Hamblin wrote: > > Eric Pettersen wrote: > > > > I can't say that I agree that this makes Delaying Tactics "reasonably > > useless". Not only is the acting minion prevented from calling the same > > vote (as per DT text), but _all_ minions of that meth are prevented from > > calling the same vote (again, per text). How can you possibly refer to > > that as "reasonably useless"??? > > Well, certainly much less useful than it would be. Sure, they're > prohibited from ConAgging you, so they KRC you instead. Big punishment. "Much"? Any other vampire could call that KRC in any event (whether you play with DT as written and NRA as DCI implemented, or if you add your restriction to either the DT or NRA rule). The ruling merely states that the vampire who had his political action delayed has not completed a political action - which is derivable from the implementation of NRA (by the RT), and from the name of the card (the PA is delayed, so hasn't occured yet). So, it is less useful than it would be if you gave it more power. (i.e., tacked a "this vampire cannot attempt a political action for the remainder of the current turn" restriction onto the card text of Delaying Tactics.) All cards are less useful than they would be if you gave them more power. [ quoted text not captured ]

L. Scott Johnson wrote: > Any other vampire could call that KRC in any event (whether you play > with DT as written and NRA as DCI implemented, or if you add your > restriction to either the DT or NRA rule). > > The ruling merely states that the vampire who had his political > action delayed has not completed a political action - which is > derivable from the implementation of NRA (by the RT), and from the > name of the card (the PA is delayed, so hasn't occured yet). > Heh, I had to chuckle at his one LSJ :) Well, your vampire with Prot. could KRC or ConAgg, if blocked they could EM, then by NRA from the RT under DCI attempt an RTI, not another PA. Life is silly, James B.

"L. Scott Johnson" <vte...@regency.wizards.com> wrote: >Boon Sian Chang wrote: >> >> If other Meths decide to play political cards, reactions cards, etc. that can >> influence the vote, do they pick those cards up as well if Delaying Tactics >> is played? Or is it just the acting Meth? >Just the acting Methuselah, and just the Political Action card (if >any) used to call the vote. (card text). Ahhh...interesting vote defense. I've found vote pitch decks occasionally irritating, even with the delayed replacement of Political Action cards thrown for their votes. This would be a somewhat effective counter to their pitching of six PoA's for six votes. Speaking of vote defense...I've always felt that the entire problem of protecting against vote decks could be at least in part solved by a Reaction equivalent to Disarming Presence. Using the same wording, a seldom-used (in my group) card would become a much more advantageous defensive card, and in good keeping with the nature of the Presence discipline. Any thoughts as to cost...I'd think one blood would be sufficient. Regards, R. David Zopf guenh...@mindspring.com "This argument reeks of Kant, or whiskey, or both...."

> > Any other vampire could call that KRC in any event (whether you play > with DT as written and NRA as DCI implemented, or if you add your > restriction to either the DT or NRA rule). > Yea, but if I block the KRC with CMP, that AV is SOL. But if I EC instead of GTHHA, wouldn't my RV be AWOL at KFC, or should I JSTHWI and PUMC? "Who among you would go your way, that ye march not the length and breadth of the square?"