Camarilla Iron First and Reckless Agitation

It's clear that both cards requires at least 3 matuselah on table to be played

For Reckless you need 3 because the card text says "two others matuselah" excluding you as clarified by the rulling 1.

Reckless Agitation
Requires an Independent or Anarch vampire with capacity 5 or more.

Allocate 6 points among two or more other Methuselahs. Successful referendum means each Methuselah burns 1 pool for each point allocated.


Rulings
Cannot allocate 6 points to a single Methuselah, nor any point to yourself. Cannot be played if there is only one opponent left. [LSJ 20000622] [LSJ 20100129] 
Can allocate more points than a Methuselah has pool. [LSJ 20020819] 
If multiple ousts happen, players whose prey gets ousted get a victory point, even if they are being ousted themselves. Only the surviving ones get 6 pool from the oust of their prey (not of their grand-prey). [LSJ 20000309] 

Camarilla Iron First its clear to me, you choose a matuselah (any matuselah) and two or more others matuselahs (other than the choosen matuselah)

Camarilla's Iron Fist
Requires a titled Camarilla vampire.

Choose a Methuselah and allocate 5 points among two or more other Methuselahs. Successful referendum means the chosen Methuselah gains 1 pool and each Methuselah burns 1 pool for each point allocated.


Rulings
No ruling registered.

So, i can choose any matuselah to gain pool (muself or any other still alive) and any other two ou more matuselahs different of the choosen one

On reckless i cant allocate points to me, rulling 1 clarify this, on CIF i can allocate points to me since i'm not the choosen matuselah correct? And i can't allocate points and choose the same matuselah, correct?

Yes, this is a bit unclear, we had the same dilemma the first time the card was placed on the table.

Comparing RA and CIF we asked ourselves what exactly the "other Methuselahs" refers to in CIF. Is it "not you", or "not the chosen one".

I'm following to see what the answer is...

The different is in the context, Reckless Agitation states directly to chose two other Methuselah, as there is no previous sentence in the card to set up the context, then it means two other different than you. So you cannot allocate dmg on yourself.

Now let's make it simpler to read the Iron fist to understand that the card is already setting a context.

Chose Methuselah A to gain one pool, then choose two other Methuselah different than A to allocate the 5 point dmg

The key part on both cards is the context of "two other Methuselah", in Reckless, there is no context specified in the card, so other means different than you.

In Iron Fist, there is already a context (choose Methuselah to gain one pool), then the two other methuselah are in relation to the first one chosen

This is how i understand the card too

acbishop wrote:

The different is in the context, Reckless Agitation states directly to chose two other Methuselah, as there is no previous sentence in the card to set up the context, then it means two other different than you. So you cannot allocate dmg on yourself.

Now let's make it simpler to read the Iron fist to understand that the card is already setting a context.

Chose Methuselah A to gain one pool, then choose two other Methuselah different than A to allocate the 5 point dmg

The key part on both cards is the context of "two other Methuselah", in Reckless, there is no context specified in the card, so other means different than you.

In Iron Fist, there is already a context (choose Methuselah to gain one pool), then the two other methuselah are in relation to the first one chosen

The two sentences separated by the logical AND operator are independent of each other. There is no creation of context between them. They are resolved separately and the card will be used if both sentences can be resolved.

chackero wrote:

The two sentences separated by the logical AND operator are independent of each other. There is no creation of context between them. They are resolved separately and the card will be used if both sentences can be resolved.

The first sentence create a context, a chosen matuselah and the second setence refer to that matuselah when say that you have to allocate points in two or more other matuselah than that one, i agree with you that both sentences need to be fullfiled to the card can be played, and this occur when you choose one matuselah (A) and can allocate points on two or more other matuselah (B, C, D or E) in desired combination