Paying the Cost of Villein

Smaul wrote:

Using logic of cards type 1
I play a pentex announce the target, Santaleous cancels as played, I really have a big trouble understanding why you keep paying the cost, really. I've read LSJs thread, but a simple no answer is not what I really like to see. Is this what you wrote incorrect or somehow different for Santaleous?

With the expression "effect" I wanted to mean, another thing, I just couldn't find a propper world. "Effect" was refered to things like: referendum, strike, blood hunt... I don't know if it´s seen what I mean.

It might help to know the following.... (No guarantees.)

Historically, card cancellation (of cards that weren't actions) came after the cost was paid. Taking the Jyhad text from the scan at www.vtes.pl:

Burn a a master card played by another Methuselah. That
card has no effect, but any blood [sic] spent on the master
card is retrieved by the Methuselah who paid it.

This later changed:

Rules wrote:

Canceling cards and retrieving costs: Cards that cancel other cards as they are played and retrieve the cost (resulting in a loss as the cost is paid and then a gain as the cost is retrieved) instead cancel the card and nullify the cost (no cost is paid for the canceled card). The Anarchs version of Sudden Reversal has the new "(no cost is paid)" wording, and other cancel cards are to be handled similarly. Those other cards are Contingency Planning, Denial of Aphrodite's Favor, Direct Intervention, Iron Heart, The Jones, and Rewind Time.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Historically, card cancellation (of cards that weren't actions) came after the cost was paid. Taking the Jyhad text from the scan at www.vtes.pl:

Burn a a master card played by another Methuselah. That
card has no effect, but any blood [sic] spent on the master
card is retrieved by the Methuselah who paid it.

This later changed:

Yes, in the old days, that actually made a difference with Realm of the Black Sun. "Lose a pool due to cost, gain a pool back because it was canceled" triggered the Realm, whereas the current model "Pool doesn't change at all" doesn't.

@Pascal:

Can you please explain how Complete Rules Reference Part II C ('CCR.II.C') says that there is simultaneous resolution and payment?

From what I can see written there, there 'immediate resolution' appears to be a reminder that VTES does not contain the old "MtG Stack of Effects" and instead once cards are paid for they resolve.

From CCR.II.C there seems to be a discrete moment where you must pay, and then later another point where you resolve the effects. In particular CCR.II.C.3a "Pay cost" and CCR.II.C.3b "Resolve effect" are separated (again the only reference to anything that suggest simultaneity is the "immediate resolution").
CCR.II.C.2 (which is for strikes) again has a gap between payment and resolution.

It is only in CCR.II.C.1 where payment and resolution appear in the same subpoint (CCR.II.C.1a) with all of the rest of the subpoints explaining the various ways an action can fail while costs are still being paid.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

Can you please explain how Complete Rules Reference Part II C ('CCR.II.C') says that there is simultaneous resolution and payment?

The published Reference wasn't updated by LSJ for several years. (As was the case for a number of items on the White Wolf website, it appeared that LSJ didn't have direct access to them himself when WW moved from simple HTML files in their own directory to a PHP-driven website.)

As a result, there are various rulings that it isn't accurate for.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

The published Reference wasn't updated by LSJ for several years. (As was the case for a number of items on the White Wolf website, it appeared that LSJ didn't have direct access to them himself when WW moved from simple HTML files in their own directory to a PHP-driven website.)

As a result, there are various rulings that it isn't accurate for.

So in other words, the VEKN has incorrect rules published on its site? This should at least be one of the earliest things that should be done.