rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Monocle of Clarity

11 messages from 10 participants · 11 February 1995 – 20 February 1995
original thread on Google Groups

Martin Filion

Hi! My friends and I banned Monocle of Clarity in our games. Why? Because of that 2 combined questions... - First Question: Will you answer yes at the question I'll ask you in my next Uptap phase... If he says no, which means he'll answer no at my next question... - Second Question: Will your vampires try to block my vampires when they'll attempt to bleed you, and that, for the remainder of the game and each games we'll do together forever? If he says yes, which means he'll answer yes at my next question... - Second Question: Will your vampires will not try to block my vampires when they'll attempt to bleed you, and that, for the remainder of the game and each games we'll do together forever? That's it... And after that, you can bleed this player as long as you want at each game you play with him... Martin Filion Montreal, Qb (Canada) mordillo@gmgate@gamemaster.qc.ca

Josh Hsu

In article <D3urC...@rco.qc.ca>, Martin Filion <mord...@vircom.com> wrote: >Hi! > My friends and I banned Monocle of Clarity in our games. Why? Because >of that 2 combined questions... > >- First Question: Will you answer yes at the question I'll ask you in my > next Uptap phase... > >If he says no, which means he'll answer no at my next question... > >- Second Question: Will your vampires try to block my vampires when > they'll attempt to bleed you, and that, for the > remainder of the game and each games we'll do > together forever? > >If he says yes, which means he'll answer yes at my next question... > >- Second Question: Will your vampires will not try to block my vampires > when they'll attempt to bleed you, and that, for the > remainder of the game and each games we'll do together > forever? This is counterable by semantics just say no to the first question and "yeah" to the second. Note yes <> yeah therefore it is a legal answer and it doesn't conflict with your answer. Note also that the monocle does not say you have to answer yes, just that a yes/no question must be asked

Ted Cabeen

Martin Filion (mord...@vircom.com) wrote: : Hi! [ quoted text not captured ] There is a solution to this, just tell your "friend", that if he ever does this again, you'll never play Jyhad with him again. If that dosen't work try threating physical violence. I know it sounds extreme, but it's not fun to play that way after a while and usually pisses people off. I don't play with people who try that on me, and if they try to , I just pick up my ante card and leave the game. I don't have to play with that kind of crap and neither do you. -- _____________________________________________________________________________ Ted Cabeen cab...@netcom.com Finger for PGP Public Key 7312...@compuserve.com "Be Yourself" cococ...@aol.com

Marko Puumalainen

pap...@fc.hp.com (Bob Ellison) writes: >> My friends and I banned Monocle of Clarity in our games. Why? Because >> of that 2 combined questions... >This one just won't die. :-) With application of proper logic - plus the There was also an article by Tom that said that the only thing you cannot ask is "will you answer yes or no to my next question". The meaning of that is that MofC does not bind your opponent to any future questions. You could ask "Dou you block if I bleed you?", and make your prey either block every time the remainder of the game or let the bleed go through every time. And all that just because you "forgot" to say "next time". This could be handy if you end up with a huge weapon and know for sure that your prey must block. :) ))marko -- Never try to be amusing and order something like a "pint of dishwater". Judging by the state of some of our larger brewers' beers, you just might get it. The Surrey Pub Guide

K R Maxson

In article <marko.7...@snakemail.hut.fi>, Marko Puumalainen <ma...@beta.hut.fi> wrote: >There was also an article by Tom that said that the only thing you >cannot ask is "will you answer yes or no to my next question". The >meaning of that is that MofC does not bind your opponent to any future >questions. >You could ask "Dou you block if I bleed you?", and make your prey >either block every time the remainder of the game or let the bleed go >through every time. And all that just because you "forgot" to say >"next time". This could be handy if you end up with a huge weapon and >know for sure that your prey must block. :) All this fuss over the Monocle of Clarity is kind of stupid. It should be obvious that just because an answer of "yes" or "no" is possible does NOT make a question a "yes or no" question. For example: Monocle Asshole: Will you have 11 pool for the remainder of the game? Answer yes or no, please. What can the poor target say? A yes or no question is one with ONLY two possible answers: yes, you got it -- "yes" or "no." Monocle Asshole: For the remainder of the game, when I bleed you, will you block? Innocent Target: That is not a "yes or no" question. Fuck off. Don't munchkinize a game that is, by some miracle, moderately well balanced! They are too few and far between.

L. Scott Johnson

k...@cerl.uiuc.edu (K R Maxson) writes: >In article <marko.7...@snakemail.hut.fi>, >All this fuss over the Monocle of Clarity is kind of stupid. It should be >obvious that just because an answer of "yes" or "no" is possible does NOT make >a question a "yes or no" question. For example: All questions worded as "Will you X" are yes/no questions. > Monocle /Explicative: Will you have 11 pool for the remainder of the game? > Answer yes or no, please. >What can the poor target say? A yes or no question is one with ONLY two >possible answers: yes, you got it -- "yes" or "no." What other answer is there to this question? The only valid answer is "no", as the game cannot end with the target never having changed from 11 pool. This is a yes/no question. I defy anyone to present an answer that is not affiramtive nor negative ("maybe" is obviously not allowed) which is a valid answer to this question. > Monocle /Explicative: For the remainder of the game, when I bleed you, will > you block? > Innocent Target: That is not a "yes or no" question. /Explicative off. Innocent target is mistaken. It is a yes/no question. "Fruit", "Two" and "Yesterday" simply don't cut it as answers to this question. Only "Yes" or "No" will do (or other forms of "Affirmative" and "Negative" :-). The best reply is "no." You then only have to not block once, and will have fulfilled your obligation to NOT(block whenever bled). >Don't munchkinize a game that is, by some miracle, moderately well balanced! >They are too few and far between. If one can't grasp a concept as simple as a yes/no question, one shouldn't play Jyhad.

Alan Kwan

In article <3i0i7d$p...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> k...@cerl.uiuc.edu (K R Maxson) writes: >L. Scott Johnson <sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu> wrote: > > >Personally, I am extremely disappointed with the design team ruling on this >card. In my opinion, the Monocle as currently construed on the net violates >the most important principle of gaming: it is no fun. Other unanswerable >questions that L. Scott Johnson characterizes as perfectly legitimate "yes or >no" questions include: > >> All questions worded as "Will you X" are yes/no questions. > > Will you draw a Frenzy as your next library card? > > Will you have a vampire sent to torpor the next time one of your > bleeds is blocked? > > Will you run out of library cards before the game is over? > > Will the next vote you call be successful? Agreed that the above questions are out of place. However, there are some perfectly legitimate questions that are quite "powerful", if a "yes or no" answer is enforced: Will you throw at least as many "for" votes as "against" votes in the next vote to be called (by anybody)? Answer: yes - he, he, now you can't vote against this one (of mine) no - so you have to vote against the next vote, and I can see that it'll be yours Will you play any Manuevers in the next combat round you fight? (So I choose range, you shut up.) > >>>Don't munchkinize a game that is, by some miracle, moderately well balanced! >>>They are too few and far between. Unfortunately, the game is excessively buggy. (What's happening with Blood Rage?) Alan. -- "Live Life with Heart." Alan Kwan kw...@cs.cornell.edu

Shane Hamish William Travis

Alan Kwan (kw...@cs.cornell.edu) wrote: <bobbitt - other arguments about monocle> : Agreed that the above questions are out of place. However, there : are some perfectly legitimate questions that are quite "powerful", : if a "yes or no" answer is enforced: : Will you throw at least as many "for" votes as "against" : votes in the next vote to be called (by anybody)? : Answer: : yes - he, he, now you can't vote against this one (of mine) : no - so you have to vote against the next vote, and I : can see that it'll be yours So what happens if he is unable to fulfill this obligation? e.g. calls a vote with no Just/Prince/Prim on the table and no other vote cards in his hand. There is automatically one vote for, but he is _unable_ to play a vote against. What happens then? Monocle is one of the cards that nobody in my playgroup has, and I'm glad... -Shane

Jason E. Bishop

Shane Hamish William Travis (sht...@duke.usask.ca) wrote: : So what happens if he is unable to fulfill this obligation? e.g. calls a : vote with no Just/Prince/Prim on the table and no other vote cards in his : hand. There is automatically one vote for, but he is _unable_ to play a : vote against. What happens then? : : Monocle is one of the cards that nobody in my playgroup has, and I'm glad... : : -Shane I'm not sure but I don't think he has to cast the vote recieved from the card in favor of the vote. If I'm not mistaken it acts just like any other votes a methusela may use. And that it can be cast for or against, just because you bring an item to the table doesn't mean you have to support it. Jason Bishop Tremere Primogen

Bob Ellison

> My question still stands though. What happens if/when I am unable to > fulfill the requirements of my answer to the monocle? The card text is clear. You must abide by the answer if possible. If it is not possible, you're off the hook. > Different example: > Question: Will you attempt to block _every_ _single_ _action_ I try for > the entire rest of this game? > Me: (Blood gushing out my nose as I suffer an obvious cerebral > hemorrhage) uhhh... Yes. > Now later in this game the Monocle Weenie attempts to equip one of his > vampires, and I am totally tapped out and unable to block. What happens? > 1) I'm Free!!! Having failed to fulfil the obligations once, I am now free > from the Monocle's influence on all future actions > 2) Curses - Trapped! Just 'cause I couldn't do it once doesn't mean I don't > have to keep trying... (enough negatives there?) > 3) Other. (what?) #2. A better answer to me question is "no". Then you are obliged to not attempt to block *one* action during the rest of the game. Much less condemning. papillo the porphyritic

Shane Hamish William Travis

Jason E. Bishop (jebi...@mtu.edu) wrote: : Shane Hamish William Travis (sht...@duke.usask.ca) wrote: : : So what happens if he is unable to fulfill this obligation? e.g. calls a : : vote with no Just/Prince/Prim on the table and no other vote cards in his : : hand. There is automatically one vote for, but he is _unable_ to play a : : vote against. What happens then? : I'm not sure but I don't think he has to cast the vote recieved from : the card in favor of the vote. Hmmm... Interesting interpretation, and I can find nothing to say that it is wrong! Just never thought of using that auto-vote as anything other than 'one vote for'. My question still stands though. What happens if/when I am unable to fulfill the requirements of my answer to the monocle? Different example: Question: Will you attempt to block _every_ _single_ _action_ I try for the entire rest of this game? Me: (Blood gushing out my nose as I suffer an obvious cerebral hemorrhage) uhhh... Yes. Now later in this game the Monocle Weenie attempts to equip one of his vampires, and I am totally tapped out and unable to block. What happens? 1) I'm Free!!! Having failed to fulfil the obligations once, I am now free from the Monocle's influence on all future actions 2) Curses - Trapped! Just 'cause I couldn't do it once doesn't mean I don't have to keep trying... (enough negatives there?) 3) Other. (what?) -Shane