Quick question regarding voting
Xian
of a *good* reason why my new semi-playgroup shouldn't play this way.
So they have this (house?) rule where they call a vote with a political
action card, and then say something along the lines of "I'm not choosing to
use the vote from this card yet." And then later toss down a different PA
card and 'use the vote' from the second card.
This all seems so wrong to me. I don't think the vote you gain from the
initial card should be optional...I mean, that would presumably mean that I
could toss down a few cards, but decide to only use the vote from one of
them...
Anyhow...clarification would be nice. I'm going to try to be polite when I
bring it up...I mean call me crazy, but has anyone else seen this kind of
thing?
Xian
"they look at you funny when you attack things like a hungry mountain
lion on crack" --greensea
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
William Pyle
>Okay...so I feel I should know why I think this is weird, but I can't think
>of a *good* reason why my new semi-playgroup shouldn't play this way.
>
>So they have this (house?) rule where they call a vote with a political
>action card, and then say something along the lines of "I'm not choosing to
>use the vote from this card yet." And then later toss down a different PA
>card and 'use the vote' from the second card.
>
>This all seems so wrong to me. I don't think the vote you gain from the
>initial card should be optional...I mean, that would presumably mean that I
>could toss down a few cards, but decide to only use the vote from one of
>them...
*laugh* heh... no, can't say as I've ever seen anything like it... I'm not
sure what the official rule that disallows it, but there has to be one....
I mean, really, what's the difference between that and playing a
lost-in-crowds but choosing to not take the stealth from it?? It's
a blatant attempt to get around the new no-vote-pushing
ordinance, and it's gotta be a crock.... was pretty funny to read, tho
Bill Pyle
(wp...@mindspring.com)
James Coupe
writes
>Okay...so I feel I should know why I think this is weird, but I can't think
>of a *good* reason why my new semi-playgroup shouldn't play this way.
>
>So they have this (house?) rule where they call a vote with a political
>action card, and then say something along the lines of "I'm not choosing to
>use the vote from this card yet." And then later toss down a different PA
>card and 'use the vote' from the second card.
>
It's wrong. The vote from the political action card counts, no choice.
You don't get to say with any card that you'll only use part of its
effect (cf using Acrobatics when you're prohibited from doing one part
or the other).
As a house rule, though, it's not so bad. I think most people would
tend to agree that the "old" Golden Tenets rule of on any vote anyone
can throw down one PA from their hand was not a bad one.
--
James Coupe (Prince of Mercia, England)
Vampire: Elder Kindred Network
http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net
LSJ
> Okay...so I feel I should know why I think this is weird, but I can't think
> of a *good* reason why my new semi-playgroup shouldn't play this way.
>
> So they have this (house?) rule where they call a vote with a political
> action card, and then say something along the lines of "I'm not choosing to
> use the vote from this card yet." And then later toss down a different PA
> card and 'use the vote' from the second card.
You can choose not to cast the vote (immediately), but you always gain the
vote [6.3.3.1] (unless your house rules specify otherwise, of course).
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and DCI (tournament) rules:
http://www.wizards.com/VTES/VTES_Rules.html