LSJ: TelVoteCounting?

TVC 'cancels the action and returns the card to your hand'. Yet it doesnt state that the acting and/or blocking minions are untapped, like change of target, red herring does. What gives? If it doesnt untap them why doesnt the card just say 'cancel combat and return card to hand'? If it cancels the action and keeps both tapped, why is the acting minion tapped without an action? I assumed you would untap both without an action in play, but as it was pointed out last night, it doesnt acutally say this. T

Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: > > TVC 'cancels the action and returns the card to your hand'. Yet it > doesnt state that the acting and/or blocking minions are untapped, > like change of target, red herring does. What gives? If it doesnt It doesn't untap anyone. > untap them why doesnt the card just say 'cancel combat and return card > to hand'? Because the action is also canceled. > If it cancels the action and keeps both tapped, why is the acting > minion tapped without an action? He took an action. > I assumed you would untap both without an action in play, but as it > was pointed out last night, it doesnt acutally say this. It doesn't actually do that, either. Canceling an action doesn't make it as if the action never happened. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

<Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c9a329b.441836@news... > > TVC 'cancels the action and returns the card to your hand'. Yet it > doesnt state that the acting and/or blocking minions are untapped, > like change of target, red herring does. What gives? If it doesnt > untap them why doesnt the card just say 'cancel combat and return card > to hand'? > It doesn't say "cancel combat" because it can't, actually, cancel combat. Ever. TVC can only be played during a referendum. If you get blocked, there is no referendum and you can't play TVC.

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 14:05:35 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> untap them why doesnt the card just say 'cancel combat and return card >> to hand'? > >Because the action is also canceled. > So what? So does COT/RedHerring/DirctInt. All untap the minion (or leave the minion tapped in case of DI) and allow him to choose a different action. Why is TVC different? If it is meant to just cancel combat, it shoudl be erratted to say so. If it cancels the action, it should follow the same template as the other cancel action types. >> If it cancels the action and keeps both tapped, why is the acting >> minion tapped without an action? > >He took an action. See above. T

[ quoted text not captured ] !#$%$&&(*( Dammit I was looking at a VTES, not even a jyhad version, and it doesnt say this. That is the most current version of the card in print. Yet I boot up ELDB and lo and behold, there it is. A different version. I am fed up with constantly finding changes like this. For starters, this fundamentally changes how the card works for no good reason. Second, you cannot possibly know this without having read every little ruling on the net and/or reading (and somehow retaining memory of) every cardtext off the html WW page. This particular little nugget was NOT in card text migrations, nor the rulings listing. ALL such cards need to be reprinted in Camarilla, and any further erratta should be avoided at ALL COSTS. Its poor representation and meddling like this that will kill the game, gauranteed. This really pisses me off to no end. T

<Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c9d3ce7.3078368@news... > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 14:05:35 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > wrote: > > So what? So does COT/RedHerring/DirctInt. All untap the minion (or > leave the minion tapped in case of DI) and allow him to choose a > different action. Why is TVC different? > Because it's a different effect. COT/RedHerring are both played when you are blocked and specifically say that you are not tapped. TVC is played during a referendum and, like Delaying Tactics, does not untap the vampire who called the vote. TVC at inf is basically like DT'ing yourself. Only useful if an opponent has transient vote effects that they'll have to use to make your vote fail (Ventrue HQ, Powerbase: Rome, Alamut, the Edge, etc.). Most of the time, the card is only useful for its superior.

<Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c9e3e1d.3388257@news... [snip rant] Telepathic Vote Counting was included, I believe, in the Ventrue Antitribu starter. Xian

Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 14:05:35 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > wrote: > > >> untap them why doesnt the card just say 'cancel combat and return card > >> to hand'? > > > >Because the action is also canceled. > > > > So what? So does COT/RedHerring/DirctInt. All untap the minion (or > leave the minion tapped in case of DI) and allow him to choose a > different action. Why is TVC different? It wants to cancel the action. It doesn't say "cancel combat" because it wants to cancel the action. Hence the answer to your question "why doesn't it just say cancel combat?" > If it is meant to just cancel combat, it shoudl be erratted to say so. ? No idea what you're getting at here. It is not meant to just cancel the combat (what combat?), so will not be errataed to say so. > If it cancels the action, it should follow the same template as the > other cancel action types. Not necessarily true. If you've got a proof or some lucid rationale for the statement, please supply it. > >> If it cancels the action and keeps both tapped, why is the acting > >> minion tapped without an action? > > > >He took an action. > > See above. OK. [ quoted text not captured ]

<Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c9e3e1d.3388257@news... > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 19:27:50 GMT, "Chris Berger" > <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > ><Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c9a329b.441836@news... > >> > >> TVC 'cancels the action and returns the card to your hand'. Yet it > >> doesnt state that the acting and/or blocking minions are untapped, > >> like change of target, red herring does. What gives? If it doesnt > >> untap them why doesnt the card just say 'cancel combat and return card > >> to hand'? > >> > >It doesn't say "cancel combat" because it can't, actually, cancel combat. > >Ever. TVC can only be played during a referendum. If you get blocked, there > >is no referendum and you can't play TVC. > > > Dammit I was looking at a VTES, not even a jyhad version, and it > doesnt say this. That is the most current version of the card in > print. > ... > > I am fed up with constantly finding changes like this. For starters, > this fundamentally changes how the card works for no good reason. > You're awfully upset and whiny today. To my knowledge, the card never worked the way you think it did, although I could be wrong. The card was reprinted in the Ventrue Antitribu starter. According to the WW page, the card has bold text at the top that says "Only usable during a referendum," and then has the same text as part of its superior line. Apparently the superior can *really* only be used during a referendum.

Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 19:27:50 GMT, "Chris Berger" > >It doesn't say "cancel combat" because it can't, actually, cancel combat. > >Ever. TVC can only be played during a referendum. If you get blocked, there > >is no referendum and you can't play TVC. > [...] I was looking at a VTES, not even a jyhad version, and it > doesnt say this. That is the most current version of the card in > print. > > Yet I boot up ELDB and lo and behold, there it is. A different > version. > > I am fed up with constantly finding changes like this. For starters, > this fundamentally changes how the card works for no good reason. No fundamental change to functionality. All Jyhad/V:TES printed cards that say "during a political action" have always meant "during the referendum" (but, of course, back then there was no separate term for the referendum). See 6.3.2 of the rules. > Second, you cannot possibly know this without having read every little > ruling on the net and/or reading (and somehow retaining memory of) > every cardtext off the html WW page. > [etc.] It's in the rulebook. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Talonz51" <Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c9d3ce7.3078368@news... > So what? So does COT/RedHerring/DirctInt. None of those are playable during a referendum (to cancel the vote), ie after all block attempts are failed. > All untap the minion (or > leave the minion tapped in case of DI) and allow him to choose a > different action. Why is TVC different? Because it is designed to allow you recycle the vote card, while drawing out vote defense. > If it is meant to just cancel combat, it shoudl be erratted to say so. It has nothing to do with combat. Never has. > If it cancels the action, it should follow the same template as the > other cancel action types. Maybe so. No pressing reason to change it though. It currently works as designed. > >> If it cancels the action and keeps both tapped, why is the acting > >> minion tapped without an action? You cannot play it if you are blocked. Carpe noctem. Lasombra http://www.TheLasombra.com -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:05:00 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> If it cancels the action, it should follow the same template as the >> other cancel action types. > >Not necessarily true. >If you've got a proof or some lucid rationale for the statement, please >supply it. For the sake of discussion (As the card doesnt even cancel the PA anymore); If the action was canceled, it was never performed. All other forms of cancelling actions allow a different action to be attempted. As a real world example, if I write out a withdrawl slip, hand it to the bank teller, and then cancel the transaction, the withdrawl never happened, despite the attempt. T

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:07:55 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >No fundamental change to functionality. >All Jyhad/V:TES printed cards that say "during a political action" >have always meant "during the referendum" (but, of course, back then >there was no separate term for the referendum). >See 6.3.2 of the rules. Issue 1) The rules have changed to support this, but as you point out this wasn't always the case. TVC could clearly be used to cancel a PA at any time during it, now it cannot, it can only do so during the referendum. > >> Second, you cannot possibly know this without having read every little >> ruling on the net and/or reading (and somehow retaining memory of) >> every cardtext off the html WW page. >> [etc.] > >It's in the rulebook. > The cardtext is not, its in the 250+ page online cardtext listing. Also the golden rule states that the card would overule the rulebook anways. Solution? A) Make sure all cards with changed text are reprinted. B)Put a disclaimer in 6.3.2 that the golden rule will not overule this. T

[ quoted text not captured ] Whats it card text? And even so, how many of us bought those? I can think of one person in 18 here that did. Not sufficient distribution from a single starter. T

Talonz51 wrote: > I am fed up with constantly finding changes like this. For starters, > this fundamentally changes how the card works for no good reason. > > Second, you cannot possibly know this without having read every little > ruling on the net and/or reading (and somehow retaining memory of) > every cardtext off the html WW page. > > This particular little nugget was NOT in card text migrations, nor the > rulings listing. > > ALL such cards need to be reprinted in Camarilla, and any further > erratta should be avoided at ALL COSTS. White Wolf wasn't the company that fucked up the cards the first time. Or the second time, for that matter. At any rate, White Wolf very much understands these issues, and I'm certain that the Camarilla set will be held to a very high standard of quality control, especially with regards to making sure that cards with correct text are reprinted with current text. Mistakes have happened (a few cards from each of the new expansions have slipped through the cracks), but the state of the development and production of the game is vastly better than it was under Wizards. White Wolf still has to catch up to all of the mistakes made by Wizards, but that should finally be addressed with the new Camarilla set. > Its poor representation and meddling like this that will kill the > game, gauranteed. If anything was going to kill the game, it was the poor development and production of the cards in the first place by Wizards of the Coast. - Ben Peal, Prince of Boston fu...@mindstorm.com

Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:05:00 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > wrote: > > >> If it cancels the action, it should follow the same template as the > >> other cancel action types. > > > >Not necessarily true. > >If you've got a proof or some lucid rationale for the statement, please > >supply it. > > For the sake of discussion (As the card doesnt even cancel the PA > anymore); > > If the action was canceled, it was never performed. All other forms Not true. > of cancelling actions allow a different action to be attempted. You can attempt a Force of Will. Or many other actions if you Freak Drive. At any rate, the fact that other things do such-and-such is not a proof that all such things need to. See Watenda and cost-recoupment. > As a real world example, if I write out a withdrawl slip, hand it to > the bank teller, and then cancel the transaction, the withdrawl never > happened, despite the attempt. See also: stamps, checks, bank accounts, unix accounts, etc. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 20:05:06 GMT, "Chris Berger" <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >... >> >> I am fed up with constantly finding changes like this. For starters, >> this fundamentally changes how the card works for no good reason. >> >You're awfully upset and whiny today. > Upset, yes. I'm much calmer now. The issue still stands that its very frustrating to support and promote the game when the cardtexts and ability to correctly back up rulings at local games are impeded by poor presentation of cardtext changes etc. >To my knowledge, the card never worked the way you think it did, although I >could be wrong. > It did in Jyhad and VTES. Im not sure when the 'clarification' of 'referring to PA really means referendum' changed, but that mightve been SW at best. >The card was reprinted in the Ventrue Antitribu starter. According to the WW >page, the card has bold text at the top that says "Only usable during a >referendum," and then has the same text as part of its superior line. >Apparently the superior can *really* only be used during a referendum. > Insufficient distribution to reach the general player population. A general Camarilla reprint is needed. And it was obvious that the superior was used in a referendum, as it forces a vampire to abstain from voting temporairly, and they can only do so in a referendum. T

Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:07:55 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > >No fundamental change to functionality. > >All Jyhad/V:TES printed cards that say "during a political action" > >have always meant "during the referendum" (but, of course, back then > >there was no separate term for the referendum). > >See 6.3.2 of the rules. > > Issue 1) The rules have changed to support this, but as you point out > this wasn't always the case. TVC could clearly be used to cancel a PA > at any time during it, now it cannot, it can only do so during the > referendum. No. It was always only able to do so during the referendum (which was sometimes referred to as the "vote process" by the online authorities before the term referendum began to be used). This fact is referenced in [TOM 08-DEC-1995] > >> Second, you cannot possibly know this without having read every little > >> ruling on the net and/or reading (and somehow retaining memory of) > >> every cardtext off the html WW page. > >> [etc.] > > > >It's in the rulebook. > > The cardtext is not, its in the 250+ page online cardtext listing. The card text of every card doesn't need to be in the rulebook. The card text you're looking at "during a political action" means during the referendum portion, by the rule cited. > Also the golden rule states that the card would overule the rulebook > anways. > > Solution? > A) Make sure all cards with changed text are reprinted. As has already been pointed out to you, TVC has been reprinted. > B)Put a disclaimer in 6.3.2 that the golden rule will not overule > this. It would. Any card that wishes to override 5.3.2 is free to do so with explicit card text. TVC lacks such card text. [ quoted text not captured ]

Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: > A general Camarilla reprint is needed. That's a great idea! I'll pass that along to see if WW wants to do something along those lines. [ quoted text not captured ]

<Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c9d5e29.11593835@news... > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:05:00 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > wrote: > > >> If it cancels the action, it should follow the same template as the > >> other cancel action types. > > > >Not necessarily true. > >If you've got a proof or some lucid rationale for the statement, please > >supply it. > > > For the sake of discussion (As the card doesnt even cancel the PA > anymore); > > If the action was canceled, it was never performed. All other forms > of cancelling actions allow a different action to be attempted. I think there needs to be more clarification here about the purpose of the card. Note that the inferior requires that it can "only be used during a referendum" just as the superior. During the referendum implies that the action to call the vote was succesful. Inf. TVC only cancels the referendum, not the entire action. So in this case, the action was successful (you took a successful action to call the vote) but the referendum for whatever reason is failing. Useful to get around Presence vote reactions as well as the various locations previously listed in another post.

Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote in message news:<3c9e3e1d.3388257@news>... > Its poor representation and meddling like this that will kill the > game, gauranteed. > > This really pisses me off to no end. You get points for quoting "Big Trouble in Little China", but I still feel you should just deal with it.

LSJ wrote: > Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: > >>A general Camarilla reprint is needed. >> > > That's a great idea! > > I'll pass that along to see if WW wants to do something along those lines. *snickers* I think LSJ needs coffee. Regards, Noal

emmits...@hotmail.com (Emmit Svenson) wrote in message news:<75bdf7ed.02032...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] I too appreciated the BTLC quote. What I would think is REALLY swell is if White Wolf, at their booth at big cons like Origins and Gencon, would have stacks of the reprinted cards with corrected text (Enchant Kindred, Mind Rape, etc) and you could give them bad versions of the cards and get new replacements. Matt

LSJ wrote: > > Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: > > A general Camarilla reprint is needed. > > That's a great idea! > > I'll pass that along to see if WW wants to do something along those lines. > Did I miss the <sarcasim> quote here? Raille

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 22:25:02 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: >> >> On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:05:00 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> If it cancels the action, it should follow the same template as the >> >> other cancel action types. >> > >> >Not necessarily true. >> >If you've got a proof or some lucid rationale for the statement, please >> >supply it. >> >> For the sake of discussion (As the card doesnt even cancel the PA >> anymore); >> >> If the action was canceled, it was never performed. All other forms > >Not true. > I advertize a theatrical production. At the last minute, the star is sick and the show is cancelled. You are now telling me the show was nevertheless performed? >> of cancelling actions allow a different action to be attempted. > >You can attempt a Force of Will. >Or many other actions if you Freak Drive. Given, but irrelevant. You know what I mean; untap the acting minion, allowing for normal actions. >At any rate, the fact that other things do such-and-such is not a proof >that all such things need to. See Watenda and cost-recoupment. > Granted, but a canceled action is a rather uniuque event that should follow the same template, and actually does now that TVC has been thoroughly changed. >> As a real world example, if I write out a withdrawl slip, hand it to >> the bank teller, and then cancel the transaction, the withdrawl never >> happened, despite the attempt. > >See also: stamps, checks, bank accounts, unix accounts, etc. > Your point? T

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 22:44:07 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: >> A general Camarilla reprint is needed. > >That's a great idea! > >I'll pass that along to see if WW wants to do something along those lines. > Yes by all means take portions of my text and quote them all out of context. T

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 22:40:03 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> >> Issue 1) The rules have changed to support this, but as you point out >> this wasn't always the case. TVC could clearly be used to cancel a PA >> at any time during it, now it cannot, it can only do so during the >> referendum. > >No. It was always only able to do so during the referendum (which was >sometimes referred to as the "vote process" by the online authorities >before the term referendum began to be used). > >This fact is referenced in [TOM 08-DEC-1995] An interesting historical sidenote, but; 1-completely useless to most of the general VTES poplation at that time, with limited access to VTES rulings at that time. 2-a functional change of the card, as a political action is clearly defined and TVC clearly cancelled the PA, not just a vote. > >The card text of every card doesn't need to be in the rulebook. >The card text you're looking at "during a political action" means >during the referendum portion, by the rule cited. > Actually, to be more exact; "A card that uses the phrase "during a political action" is typically referring to the referendum part of the political action. " Typically...thus not necesarily. A poor bandaid at best. >> >> Solution? >> A) Make sure all cards with changed text are reprinted. > >As has already been pointed out to you, TVC has been reprinted. In very specefic circulation, and thus useless to the general player populace. A more general reprint is needed (the Camarilla one I refer to for example that you misquoted). > >> B)Put a disclaimer in 6.3.2 that the golden rule will not overule >> this. > >It would. Any card that wishes to override 5.3.2 is free to do so >with explicit card text. TVC lacks such card text. > Granted. At the moment I wrote that, I had no idea TVC had changed in the !Ven starter. See above. T

On 21 Mar 2002 15:23:49 -0800, emmits...@hotmail.com (Emmit Svenson) wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] LOL! Thanks man, I needed that. One of my favorite movies. =] T

[ quoted text not captured ] What an awesome idea. I heartily endorse this. It is so frustrating that being 'on top of the game' with all its changes over the years (And still finding hidden ones) is like a full time job. The only problem of course is the Jyhad cards still in the warehouses, but still a great idea. T

Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 22:25:02 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > >Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:05:00 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> >> If it cancels the action, it should follow the same template as the > >> >> other cancel action types. > >> > > >> >Not necessarily true. > >> >If you've got a proof or some lucid rationale for the statement, please > >> >supply it. > >> > >> For the sake of discussion (As the card doesnt even cancel the PA > >> anymore); > >> > >> If the action was canceled, it was never performed. All other forms > > > >Not true. > > > > I advertize a theatrical production. At the last minute, the star is > sick and the show is cancelled. You are now telling me the show was > nevertheless performed? No. There's a difference between canceling something that is scheduled to happen in the future and canceling something that is happening. > >> As a real world example, if I write out a withdrawl slip, hand it to > >> the bank teller, and then cancel the transaction, the withdrawl never > >> happened, despite the attempt. > > > >See also: stamps, checks, bank accounts, unix accounts, etc. > > > > Your point? Exactly. [ quoted text not captured ]

<Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c9f6127.12359505@news... > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 14:02:31 -0600, "Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: > >Telepathic Vote Counting was included, I believe, in the Ventrue Antitribu > >starter. > > > >Xian > > Whats it card text? [aus] Only usable during a referendum. Cancel the referendum. If you played a political card to call this referendum, take the card back into your hand (and discard back down to your hand size). Any votes cast are lost. [AUS] Only usable during a referendum. A vampire of your choice abstains from voting. This can cancel that vampire's votes. > And even so, how many of us bought those? I can think of one person > in 18 here that did. Not sufficient distribution from a single starter. I bought one or two, and I've won one or two in tournaments. I wanted the vampires in there that weren't included in the booster packs, among other things. Personally, I'm glad that it wasn't included as a rare in the boosters...it's a good card certainly, but I would have been upset to get that instead of, say, a Black Metamorphosis. YMMV. Xian > T >

[ quoted text not captured ] And thats different from anyone elses replies to posts how? At least the basic premis of your comment was maintained without a major distortion. Raille

[ quoted text not captured ] I agree with the thought of this, however the cost to get the cards printed might be a little high. Perhaps allow card trades in groups of 4 for a fee of around .25 cents or so to off sent printing costs. Maybe even .50 cents. Some one still have to warehouse the cards and haul them to events. And with the number of cards that need this sort of fix, thats a lot of shelve space. Raille

Dear Stupid Fucker, In message <3ca07984.84142863@news>, Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com mumbled something about: >An interesting historical sidenote, but; It's not a side note, you puling child. It's a RULING. That's what the fucking net.rep is for, to make fucking RULINGS on issues that are in question and are not as clear as, say, "bleed with +2 bleed". The definition of "RULING", cut short and placed into words of one syllable for your convenience (since you are clearly incapable of comprehending otherwise), is: "The card does what I say it does." Why do we have one person that does that? So we don't have to put up with a whole BUNCH of dumbasses like you arguing and pissing and moaning that they think the card should be different. We understand that you think the card should be different. The ruling says otherwise. THIS MEANS YOU ARE WRONG. You, not anyone else, must learn to deal with it. At such time as you become the net.rep, you may make rulings of your own that OTHER people must learn to deal with. Until then, SHUT THE FUCK UP already and DEAL WITH IT. NOT EVERYTHING WILL GO YOUR WAY IN LIFE. >1-completely useless to most of the general VTES poplation at that >time, with limited access to VTES rulings at that time. There was, and remains, no better way to distribute rulings. >2-a functional change of the card, as a political action is clearly >defined and TVC clearly cancelled the PA, not just a vote. The card was unchanged. TVC cancels the PA. So the PA fails to happen, and since TVC doesn't say "untap this vampire", like Change of Target and Delaying Tactics (both printed in the same set as TVC) do, you don't untap the vampire. How fucking difficult is this to grasp? >Actually, to be more exact; > >"A card that uses the phrase "during a political action" is typically >referring to the referendum part of the political action. " > >Typically...thus not necesarily. A poor bandaid at best. Translation: "unless I say otherwise, it's referring to the referendum." How fucking difficult is *THIS* to grasp? >>> Solution? >>> A) Make sure all cards with changed text are reprinted. >> >>As has already been pointed out to you, TVC has been reprinted. > >In very specefic circulation, and thus useless to the general player Yeah, specifically, it was in fucking GENERAL DISTRIBUTION to the WHOLE WIDE FUCKING WORLD in the VENTRUE ANTITRIBU STARTER, meaning that you can be GUARANTEED OF FUCKING GETTING ONE if you want one. This means that it was only useless to the general player populace if that populace DIDN'T FUCKING KNOW THAT A NEW SET WAS PRINTED, which would mean they were living in BUMBLEFUCK, NOWHERE and had no access to any sort of media coverage. >populace. A more general reprint is needed (the Camarilla one I refer >to for example that you misquoted). How much more FUCKING general do you want than in one of the starter decks for the first expansion in three fucking years for the game? Dumbass. And DOUBLE dumbass if it gets reprinted in the upcoming, ALREADY BEEN ANNOUNCED FOR SOME TIME NOW, Camarilla set. >>It would. Any card that wishes to override 5.3.2 is free to do so >>with explicit card text. TVC lacks such card text. > >Granted. At the moment I wrote that, I had no idea TVC had changed in >the !Ven starter. See above. Then you're a stupid fuck who doesn't bother to do basic research on card text prior to opening his fucking mouth. In the future, please learn to fucking THINK before typing. Stupid-ass shit. People like you are the ones the judge tells to "SHUT UP, SIT DOWN, AND PLAY" in Magic tournaments. I fully expect you to piss, moan, and complain that I used a bunch of naughty words in this message, as opposed to actually shutting up or admitting that you're wrong, by the way. Feel free to surprise me. -- "There's no gray. There's just white that's got grubby." -- T.P.

Derek Ray wrote: > > Dear Stupid Fucker, Generally I deplore such crud language as a detriment to better understanding of the game system. Not today However. ;) Raille

[ quoted text not captured ] It's still counter-productive, of course (and over-generalizes many points) - the point is not that the card operates the way it does because the WeSaySo company says so - it operates the way it does because of card text. The current card text is unambiguous. Previous printings have had ambiguity (due to the lack of availability of the "referendum" term) which was initially "resolved" by the Design Team as reported by the net.rep Tom Wylie and later that resolution was incorporated into the "Revised Rulebook" officially issued in 1998 (also included in the rulebooks printed after then - in Sabbat War and Final Nights). [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <3C9DF6C2...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> mumbled something about: >It's still counter-productive, of course (and over-generalizes And having to wade through and respond to 10,000,000 posts arguing a point that was already made, just in case a new point is buried in the midst of the garbage, isn't? >many points) - the point is not that the card operates the way it >does because the WeSaySo company says so - it operates the way it >does because of card text. The current card text is unambiguous. Right. But in cases where the card text is ambiguous, the card operates the way it does ONLY because the WeSaySo company says so, and the WeSaySo company was put in place for just that reason -- to be a single entity that Says So when necessary, in order that things actually get done and not dither around forever. If we were forced to wait for you and Talonz to reach some common ground on TVC prior to a ruling actually being made, I would expect to see a ruling, oh, next time the card got reprinted with un-ambiguous text (which has already happened, therefore no need for a ruling). [ quoted text not captured ]

On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 13:35:47 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> If the action was canceled, it was never performed. All other forms >> > >> >Not true. >> > >> >> I advertize a theatrical production. At the last minute, the star is >> sick and the show is cancelled. You are now telling me the show was >> nevertheless performed? > >No. There's a difference between canceling something that is scheduled >to happen in the future and canceling something that is happening. > I announce to my wife that I'm going to drive down to the cornerstore. I get in the car, drive down the block, realize I forgot my glasses, turn around and come back. Sounds like a canceled trip to me that was happening. >> >> As a real world example, if I write out a withdrawl slip, hand it to >> >> the bank teller, and then cancel the transaction, the withdrawl never >> >> happened, despite the attempt. >> > >> >See also: stamps, checks, bank accounts, unix accounts, etc. >> > >> >> Your point? > >Exactly. > Sure lsj, whatever. T

On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 16:04:26 -0600, "Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: > >> And even so, how many of us bought those? I can think of one person >> in 18 here that did. Not sufficient distribution from a single starter. > >I bought one or two, and I've won one or two in tournaments. I wanted the >vampires in there that weren't included in the booster packs, among other >things. Personally, I'm glad that it wasn't included as a rare in the >boosters...it's a good card certainly, but I would have been upset to get >that instead of, say, a Black Metamorphosis. YMMV. > Granted. I was referring to the upcoming Cam set really. T

On Sun, 24 Mar 2002 02:02:07 GMT, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: You didn't actualy expect me to read this did you? Hope you worked out your boundless rage writing it, but I doubt it. T [ quoted text not captured ]

<Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3ca0cea6.302578488@news... > On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 13:35:47 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > wrote: > > I announce to my wife that I'm going to drive down to the cornerstore. > I get in the car, drive down the block, realize I forgot my glasses, > turn around and come back. Sounds like a canceled trip to me that was > happening. > Exactly. Yet, you have still spent as much time as you would have going all the way down to the store. You are "tapped", your wife is annoyed, and barring some kind of Freak Drive pushing you forward, you are in no shape to make another trip. So thank you for providing a good example for why a cancelled action does *not* mean that nothing ever happened.

Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<9rbq9u4d7ubiia67k...@4ax.com>... It's right at the bottom.... [ quoted text not captured ] AhhaHAHahAhahahahahHAHAHahHAHAhAhAHAHAhA.... Laughing it up loudly and drunkenly -Mudz

"Chris Berger" <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote in message news:<Wuqm8.86061$af7.51633@rwcrnsc53>... > <Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c9a329b.441836@news... > > > > TVC 'cancels the action and returns the card to your hand'. Yet it > > doesnt state that the acting and/or blocking minions are untapped, > > like change of target, red herring does. What gives? If it doesnt > > untap them why doesnt the card just say 'cancel combat and return card > > to hand'? > > > It doesn't say "cancel combat" because it can't, actually, cancel combat. > Ever. TVC can only be played during a referendum. If you get blocked, there > is no referendum and you can't play TVC. Well actually the card doesn't say it can only be played during a referendum so in this case you can actually use it to cancel combat. card text states cancel a referendum it doesn't say that it can only be played during a referendum. Emile

"Emile Bosman" <ebo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:cbf416fb.0203...@posting.google.com... > "Chris Berger" <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote in message news:<Wuqm8.86061$af7.51633@rwcrnsc53>... > > <Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c9a329b.441836@news... > > > > > > > It doesn't say "cancel combat" because it can't, actually, cancel combat. > > Ever. TVC can only be played during a referendum. If you get blocked, there > > is no referendum and you can't play TVC. > > Well actually the card doesn't say it can only be played during a > referendum so in this case you can actually use it to cancel combat. > card text states cancel a referendum it doesn't say that it can only > be played during a referendum. > Haven't you been following along? Card text *does* say only usable during a referendum (at least, according to ELDB and the WW site). The old card text said "only usable during a political action", which actually meant "during a successful political action" or "during a referendum", and did not ever mean "when a minion is attempting a political action", despite the ambiguity of the wording. Current card text says "only usable during a referendum." Even if it didn't, you can't cancel a referendum unless one is going to happen, and if you are blocked, one is not going to happen.

In message <3ca3d1b8.303364698@news>, Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com mumbled something about: >On Sun, 24 Mar 2002 02:02:07 GMT, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >You didn't actualy expect me to read this did you? Actually, I think you did read it, found that you couldn't answer any of the points, then found the paragraph at the bottom where I predicted that you'd do just what you've done. I win. [ quoted text not captured ]

Man...with all the f-ing going on in this post, you'd think it was a brothel... "Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:9rbq9u4d7ubiia67k...@4ax.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 25 Mar 2002 11:25:41 GMT, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: >In message <3ca3d1b8.303364698@news>, >Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com mumbled something about: > >>On Sun, 24 Mar 2002 02:02:07 GMT, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>You didn't actualy expect me to read this did you? > >Actually, I think you did read it, found that you couldn't answer any of >the points, then found the paragraph at the bottom where I predicted >that you'd do just what you've done. > >I win. > Seeing as I have stated before that I don't care to read such ridiculously profane posts by you, it should be relatively easy to 'predict' that I would respond to specefic points within it. And I did not read it. If you want me to respond to specefic points, and engage in discussion with you, YOU have to be willing to do the same, minus the pointless profanity. T

<Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3ca0cea6.302578488@news... > On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 13:35:47 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> > wrote: > >No. There's a difference between canceling something that is scheduled > >to happen in the future and canceling something that is happening. > > > > I announce to my wife that I'm going to drive down to the cornerstore. > I get in the car, drive down the block, realize I forgot my glasses, > turn around and come back. Sounds like a canceled trip to me that was > happening. Did you leave the house? Did the trip no longer exist once it was canceled, or was it just cut short? Isn't it obvious that canceling can mean different things in different contexts? If you cancel your vacation plans, you never go, but if you cancel a stamp, it's been used already. Sheesh. BTW, that you used to play a card differently than what the official text says now doesn't mean that the official rules changed. It just means you were playing it wrong all along. Faceless Night never tapped the blocker immediately, and if you think it did you're misremembering the original rulings on the card. See the June 22 1995 ruling of Tom Wylie's rules team. Josh droppin' science

In message <3ca0e195.438517906@news>, Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com mumbled something about: >Seeing as I have stated before that I don't care to read such >ridiculously profane posts by you, it should be relatively easy to >'predict' that I would respond to specefic points within it. Oh, so you DID read it. That was all I needed to know. Thanks. It wasn't meant to be a lead-in to a discussion; it was intended to let you know just exactly how much of a moron you're being, in no uncertain terms. And you ARE being a moron. >If you want me to respond to specefic points, and engage in discussion >with you, YOU have to be willing to do the same, minus the pointless >profanity. Everyone has already done so, and you just don't listen. You believe that you're always right and that your view is the best, even when you're dead wrong about both. So you got told off, but good. Maybe you'll take a lesson from this; maybe not. No longer my problem. Someone needed to say that to you, someone did, it's over and done with. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 21:28:43 GMT, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >Oh, so you DID read it. That was all I needed to know. Thanks. > No, I didn't. >It wasn't meant to be a lead-in to a discussion; Exactly why I wouldnt bother to respont to specefic points made, if any. >it was intended to let >you know just exactly how much of a moron you're being, in no uncertain >terms. And you ARE being a moron. > Wow I'm convinced. What an amazing conversationalist you are. Not. > >Everyone has already done so, and you just don't listen. You believe >that you're always right and that your view is the best, even when >you're dead wrong about both. So you got told off, but good. > Ah I see now. When I remain unconvinced of someone's logic, and can provide counterpoints to support my reasoning, somehow I must be the moron and therefore I should be told off, because obviouslly I am not listening? Brilliant logic Holmes. >Maybe you'll take a lesson from this; maybe not. No longer my problem. >Someone needed to say that to you, someone did, it's over and done with. > YOU felt the need to say that, and you felt it was your problem, inexplicably. No one is making you read or respond to anything. Based on your pattern of posting expletives without any rational discussion, I would say that makes you the moron. But I doubt you are listening. T

Please take your private messages off this newsgroup. They have nothing to do with the game Jyhad nor with Vampire the Eternal Struggle. Should you feel the need to respond, you are both intelligent enough to find the other's email and respond appropriately. Carpe noctem. Lasombra Archivist to Legbiter http://legbiter.tripod.com "Talonz51" <Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3ca58879.46961953@news... [ quoted text not captured ] -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 00:25:33 +0000 (UTC), "The Lasombra" <thela...@hotmail.com> wrote: >Please take your private messages off this newsgroup. >They have nothing to do with the game Jyhad nor with Vampire >the Eternal Struggle. Should you feel the need to respond, >you are both intelligent enough to find the other's email and >respond appropriately. > > >Carpe noctem. > >Lasombra > >Archivist to Legbiter >http://legbiter.tripod.com Lasombra, Please take your rants off this newsgroup, As it is neither about VTES, or Jyhad. Instead If you are intelligent enough, email the parties /sarcasm off.

In message <3ca58879.46961953@news>, Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com mumbled something about: >On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 21:28:43 GMT, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>Oh, so you DID read it. That was all I needed to know. Thanks. > >No, I didn't. My lack of belief here should be eminently obvious. >>It wasn't meant to be a lead-in to a discussion; > >Exactly why I wouldnt bother to respont to specefic points made, if >any. Literacy. Consider it. >>it was intended to let >>you know just exactly how much of a moron you're being, in no uncertain >>terms. And you ARE being a moron. > >Wow I'm convinced. What an amazing conversationalist you are. Not. Again, it wasn't a lead-in to a discussion, it was someone telling you flat-out that you're being a momo. >>Everyone has already done so, and you just don't listen. You believe >>that you're always right and that your view is the best, even when >>you're dead wrong about both. So you got told off, but good. > >Ah I see now. When I remain unconvinced of someone's logic, and can Which appears to be "if they don't hold a gun to my head and kick me in the nuts 'til I holler uncle, I remain unconvinced". >provide counterpoints to support my reasoning, somehow I must be the If you ever actually do that, let me know. Most of your fictional counterpoints seem to be based around the words "I think" and "but to me this is wrong", which can be restated as "Your Opinion". Your opinion doesn't mean shit. What part of this don't you understand? >moron and therefore I should be told off, because obviouslly I am not >listening? You got it. What part of the above didn't you understand? >Brilliant logic Holmes. You have NEVER read Doyle, and it is CRYSTAL clear. >YOU felt the need to say that, and you felt it was your problem, >inexplicably. No one is making you read or respond to anything. Because frankly, everyone else is just as pissed off as I was, but I have great big brass balls and don't care if people think I said a naughty boo-boo. >Based on your pattern of posting expletives without any rational >discussion, I would say that makes you the moron. But you didn't read the message... you don't know that, right? Ooops! Gosh. THAT'S gonna leave a mark. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <6g08auk8nl0pd03i8...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about: (previous posted prior to Lasombra's msg -- he does have a point. Expect no further commentary to bozo-boy from me.) [ quoted text not captured ]