A couple of questions regarding contest

Mael wrote:

And yet I cannot find (and I'm assuming neither can you as you would have quoted it) any ruling which directly addresses how other peoples effects interact with a title which has been temporarily rendered inert in this manner.

The "in any way" ruling addresses this.

The Blood Hunt ruling addresses this - he doesn't count as a Prince when someone else plays a card.

Mael wrote:

Given the lack of a specific ruling,

LSJ's rulings are very specific about this!

Mael wrote:

The phrase "he loses the benefit of the title" is from the most recent version of said book.

The rulings supplement the rulebook. A new version of a rulebook does not repeal all previous rulings!

Note that the same text on this issue has been in the rulebook before and after various of these rulings.

Mael wrote:

I'm going to open a new thread for this

Please don't.

LSJ's statements on the issue are *completely clear*.

The Prince with an inactive Prince title is not a Prince in any way.

Further:

[LSJ 20080702]

LSJ wrote:

> I am pretty sure that, for example Marcel de Breau (Archbishop of
> Paris) with 2 No Confidence cards does not have 2 votes from his title
> and cannot play cards such as Eternal Vigilance.

...

> Does Count Germaine advanced (+2 bleed when bleeding a titled non
> Independent vampire) still gets his bleed bonus when bleeding Marcel's
> controller ?

No, just as if Marcel had changed to a sect inappropriate for his title.

That is, Count Germaine's ability does not see a Camarilla Marcel (inert Archbishop) as having a title and so doesn't give him a bleed bonus.

Further, No Confidence works in the same way. Its (relevant) card text is: "A vampire with two No Confidence cards loses the benefit of his or her title." It works in the same way. But the title can come back if the No Confidences are burned.




Also, the 1998 Derange ruling comes from a time when a similar effect did exist.

[LSJ 19990628]

LSJ wrote:

> Suppose I control Vasantasena, and she Deranges my prey's only titled
> vampire, Anvil. Does she now get +1 stealth when bleeding my prey?

Yes.

Card text: "Vasantasena gets +1 stealth when bleeding a Methuselah who does not control a ready titled vampire."

Deranged. Not seen as being titled.

Sabbat card image: nekhomanta.h2.pl/pics/games/vtes/sabbat/vasantasena.jpg (Linked via www.vtes.pl)


And from that same 1999 ruling:

LSJ wrote:

> "If a vampire with a title changes clans or sects (by means of Clan
> Impersonation, for example) to a clan or sect inappropriate for his title,
> he loses the benefit of the title until his clan or sect changes
> appropriately."

> For clarification, does "benefit of the title" really mean "title?"

It can be treated that way, yes.

Except that - obviously - it can come back when you change back appropriately. And you yield it completely if it would be contested.

That is, you can treat it as being "loses the benefit of the title until his clan or sect changes appropriately".

And that's based on the same rulebook text, and all later rulings follow it.

You know, you and I seem to have completely divergent views on what constitutes a benefit. Immunity to the 'blood hunt' card is a benefit, denying Vasantasena her +1 stealth is a benefit. This on the other hand:

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Further:

[LSJ 20080702]

LSJ wrote:

> I am pretty sure that, for example Marcel de Breau (Archbishop of
> Paris) with 2 No Confidence cards does not have 2 votes from his title
> and cannot play cards such as Eternal Vigilance.

...

> Does Count Germaine advanced (+2 bleed when bleeding a titled non
> Independent vampire) still gets his bleed bonus when bleeding Marcel's
> controller ?

Is actually relevant. So kudos for finding it because I certainly couldn't (didn't think of searching for answers related to 'No Confidence').

I guess this is an example of where the rulings contradict the rulebook.

Mael wrote:

You know, you and I seem to have completely divergent views on what constitutes a benefit. Immunity to the 'blood hunt' card is a benefit, denying Vasantasena her +1 stealth is a benefit.

V:TES historically avoids using subjective interpretation for terms like this, because players often find a way to turn a negative into a positive. (Not a very good positive, but a positive.)

The history of rulings on what constitutes a "special ability" for Seeds of Corruption is littered with fun involving Uriah Winter as a Trojan horse, using his "special ability".

Precisely because people have divergent views - and views which would vary depending on the situation - about what's a good thing or a bad thing, V:TES avoids that pitfall wherever possible.

Thanks jamesatzephyr for gathering all these.

I'm adding this one (just in case some people start searching for it over here):
[LSJ 20081207] wrote:

Malone wrote:
> My question for LSJ: Is a vampire's immunity from being chosen in
> Veles' Hunt a "benefit of his or her title", for the purposes of No
> Confidence?

Yes. The vampire is effectively non-titled.

For all those not convinced, "losing the benefit of a title" makes a vampire non-titled.

Pascal wrote:

For all those not convinced, "losing the benefit of a title" makes a vampire non-titled.

Would it be possible to get this updated in the online rulebook somehow?
I'm in favour of only needing to reference the rulings if something is unclear in the rulebook. In this case a plain English read of the rulebook runs contrary to the ruling.

Thank you.