When does the polling step starts?

• HOW TO RESOLVE A REFERENDUM [6.3]
  NOTE: The terms are not set until the action is successful (remains unblocked) [6.3.1]
  Referendum.
  • Set the terms of the Referendum. [6.3.2.1]
  • Polling. [6.3.2.2]

When does the polling step really starts?

Player A plays a political action
Action is successful
Player A says, "The terms are X"
Player B says, "Wait. I want to negotiate your terms"
No vote/ballot are cast before player B ask for a negotiation.

Can player A still change the terms or after saying "The terms are..." we are already in the poll step and there is no way back?

Thanks

I think it's similar to "I bleed you for...", "I enter combat with..." and then the target tries to negotiate changing the acting player's mind - common sense says it should be allowed, as negotiations are core part of this game, but an official statement would be great. IMO these declarations should be read as "I would like to..." and then, if there are no remarks, move forward with resolving them.

Coyote wrote:

• HOW TO RESOLVE A REFERENDUM [6.3]
  NOTE: The terms are not set until the action is successful (remains unblocked) [6.3.1]
  Referendum.
  • Set the terms of the Referendum. [6.3.2.1]
  • Polling. [6.3.2.2]

When does the polling step really starts?

Player A plays a political action
Action is successful
Player A says, "The terms are X"
Player B says, "Wait. I want to negotiate your terms"
No vote/ballot are cast before player B ask for a negotiation.

Can player A still change the terms or after saying "The terms are..." we are already in the poll step and there is no way back?

Thanks

Rulebook is quite clear, once acting player has declared/set the terms, aka "Arika chooses/banishes Theo Bell" in Banishment or whatever the vote is for, it's on to polling. No take backs, no second quesses, if they declared wrong they can vote against their own suggestion after all.

The Political Action

Important: The specific terms of the referendum (the choices to be made, if any, by the Methuselah who calls the referendum) are not chosen until the action itself is successful.

The Referendum

If a political action is successful, its cost is paid, and the referendum is called. The referendum consists of three steps:

1. Choose the terms, if any, of the referendum.

2. Polling: ...

As for politics, even if someone screams bloody murder that they wish to negotiate the moment the acting player has said their terms, they cannot "take it back." They've declared the terms. It's same as playing and declaring the bleed with Govern, then declaring Seduction on preys only non-torpored vampire. Prey then saying let's talk politics on not choosing that vampire and acting methuselah trying to take back the action modifier by targeting cross table. Once player declares on game state, it's in. Referendums are no different, despite their free form.

For additional examples how declaration works the way it does and why it's important, see "blocking" and how "I might not block, are you playing bleed modifiers?" vs "No block, are you playing bleed modifiers?" differ. Or declaring vote for, abstain or against if it needs to be "in referendum" to somehow matter more then generic game example. Once player has declared Arika votes yes to Theo's Banishment, can they take it back after some table politics talk?

Ok. Thanks. Anyway, it is a bit funny.

Case A.
Player A plays a political action
Action is successful
Player A says, "The terms are X"
Player B says, "Wait. I want to negotiate your terms"
Judge intervene: Terms are set. Player A can no longer change them. Please proceed to the polling step.

Case B.
Player A plays a political action
Action is successful
Player A says, "The terms are..."
Player B Interrupts, "Wait. I want to negotiate your terms"
Player A. "Ok. We are on time. What do you offer me?"

About this you said:
Keep in mind that once terms have been fully announced, other players may already be discarding a political action card to gain a vote (or doing something that spoils their hand or plan) and it would gaining an unfair advantage to move back to the previous step.

As I said, I understand that as soon as someone cast a vote (either by title, by card on play, by card on hand, discarding a political card...) the polling step is already running and here It was clear for me that player couldn't go back to the setting terms step.

My doubt was if, while no vote was cast and no card played, could be considered that we are still in the setting terms step? I feel that using a card or a title is more clear in game terms to set the beginning of the next step. In a game where we talk so much, I feel that something like "3 to my prey and one to my predator" could be a bit ambiguous. Is he thinking out loud? It is checking the opinion of the table? Is he setting the terms? I feel that using a game element as voting or playing cards is much clearer.

I guess that when I play tournaments, I will have to enforce this. But I don't feel I would enforce this in my casual games.

Coyote wrote:

...I guess that when I play tournaments, I will have to enforce this. But I don't feel I would enforce this in my casual games.

Oh I'm with you 100% on this. But there's a difference between bunch of people having fun with a hobby and trying to quantify and qualify that hobby to be a "sports" what tournaments try to be. Or are depending who you ask are. Rules answer can only be made to fit the tournament situations, after all for casual play only rules that truly matter are the social norms people follow.

Personally I feel this matter falls to being just a skill that's created to navigate inside the rules and various terms. Basically how the game allows and acknowledges that there will be table talk+deals, yet on the other hand has clearly defined limits what is and is not included. When announcing political actions, if one wishes to talk politics, it's usually before all the blocks are declined, then there's just matter of confirming if the acting methuselah is going to keep the terms when the action is succesful and the terms come in as there might be wiggle room to bargain for them if they wish. Then the actual terms come in.

Useful word to use to ensure you're not declaring unintentionally and everyone is clear whether or not something is being said out loud or actually being declared. "if", "perhaps", "perchance" and so forth. Native language most likely has many more to facilate the vagueness more eloquently but in the possibility of a game environment where people are not talking their native languages, are strangers and so forth, declaring needs to be clear so all can understand and agree to it. Hence it's good conduct to make it clear when you're *not* declaring and just pondering or wish to talk politics. Helps everyone and over time people *will* get better at it.