Timeline and Prisci sub-referendum

Hello together, a short question about the "vote timeline" by using priscis.

I learned, that if a vote occurs, the prisci sub-referendum is the FIRST vote step by gaining votes .

Like

1. Vote action
... (anything to bring it thrue.... ^^)
2. Terms
3. polling
3.1. Prisci sub-referendum to set the 3 votes (for or against)
3.2. Voting by all other titled minions
4. Playing reaction Cards
5. do so

My question is now. It is equal when the prisci(s) call their votes (like all other titled minion) or should they call their decision first. (Because its a subreferendum an no votes by himself?) And because of that, they have to decide first, so all others can react?

Thanks a lot.

blackkn8 wrote:

I learned, that if a vote occurs, the prisci sub-referendum is the FIRST vote step by gaining votes .

This isn't true. Vampires are not under any obligation to cast their votes and ballots in any particular order. If a vampire has a Priscus ballot and a non-Priscus vote (e.g. Genevieve, any Priscus with a Bewitching Oration etc.), they can cast their votes whenever they like in the polling step - and votes and ballots have to be cast in the same way. A vampire can be forced to abstain later, and this can affect both their votes and ballots.

The rulebook is quite explicit that the for or against status of the Priscus sub-referendum can change along the way - it's not 'set' in one way, then left:

Rulebook, wrote:

As vampires cast their ballots in the subreferendum, the prisci block of 3 votes might shift between "for", "against", and "abstain" (as the majority in the subreferendum changes).

The Complete Rules Reference also shows no sign of the Priscus sub-referendum going first: vekn.net/complete-rules-reference (see section V).


Note that a number of play-groups attempt to put a defined structure on top of the polling step, which aren't supported by the rules. For example, I've encountered people who want to do something like have each Methuselah cast all their votes in one go, going clockwise. But that's not what the rules specify:

Rulebook, wrote:

They call out their votes and ballots freely,

blackkn8 wrote:

My question is now. It is equal when the prisci(s) call their votes (like all other titled minion) or should they call their decision first. (Because its a subreferendum an no votes by himself?) And because of that, they have to decide first, so all others can react?

Those casting Priscus ballots just cast them at any point during the polling step, as and when they choose to, along with any normal votes they might have. When you tally votes and ballots at the end of polling (or do a count for information part-way through), the winning side in the sub-referendum gets 3 votes.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Note that a number of play-groups attempt to put a defined structure on top of the polling step, which aren't supported by the rules. For example, I've encountered people who want to do something like have each Methuselah cast all their votes in one go, going clockwise. But that's not what the rules specify:

that was it may be. thanks. I read the RB but the point

Rulebook, wrote:

They call out their votes and ballots freely,

was missunderstood then.
Because we thought, a sub-referendum should be first, because it is a SUB referendum ^^

Thanks a lot.
That was cleared fast...

IMHO: There must be a rule against this They call out their votes and ballots freely B-)

blackkn8 wrote:

Because we thought, a sub-referendum should be first, because it is a SUB referendum ^^

What about SUB implies first? If it was a discrete step (which it isn't), it could go last, too.

blackkn8 wrote:

IMHO: There must be a rule against this They call out their votes and ballots freely B-)

Why? I want to cast my votes with Arika in favour, so I say so. You want to cast your ballots with Gratiano against, so you say so.

Why must there be a rule against this?

Why must there be a rule against this?

i don't get it either. The biggest argument I've ever gotten in about actually casting votes was with someone who thought that abstaining was binding just like casting a vote yes or no.