Eagle's Sight Window, and declaration.

Scenario: You are bleeding your prey. You have the ousting modifier in hand. Your prey declines block, and asks "How Much?". Your grand-prey, with superior Auspex, interjects "Hang on." You pause, waiting for him to think, probably about an Eagle's sight, since there's nothing else that can really affect the game state at this moment. After a few moments, he says "Okay, go."

You play your modifier, at which point he says "I block with eagle's sight."

His rationale is that the words "no block" never left his lips, though he did interject for thought. In addition, he insists that the modifier remain played, even though you had taken his "Okay go." as a pass of priority.

So. What's the protocol? Can he play the eagle's block? If he is able to, does the modifier remain played, or do you rewind to the point where you thought he was passing?

2 more hypotheticals: One where your opponent was honestly confused, and one where he makes it clear he was using verbal trickery to fake you out. Does that matter?

Malcolm wrote:

he was using verbal trickery

-tr
+d

My advice is: always wait for the words "no block". And if your playgroup doesn't use this term (although rules are clear on this) and just grunts or nods for no block insist on that term. Every other solution is not clear enough in my eyes. If I were in your shoes I had have the same impression that he did not want to block by saying "okay, go". But otoh he is also right in saying he never declined the block. And yes, the modifier was played.
If you bring your playgroup to announce in the correct way you don't have to think about honesty or trickery.
Another little tip: When I act with a minion I always ask the players playing AUS or SPI if they'd like to block (after prey and pred declined). They have to decline or block at that moment. If they decline I can play my modifiers safely afterwards.

Joscha: I'm well aware that you can safely play action modifiers after they decline. I was asking what the official rules/rulings are regarding ambiguity, either perceived or intentional. I've seen a similar misunderstanding at a tournament, but I wasn't directly involved, and didn't notice what the details of the ruling were.

Declining to block is not an effect that gives the impulse back to the acting player. The impulse is given back only when a player declares a block attempt, or when all players have passed.

Rulebook wrote:

Note that moving past the block attempts (when all Methuselahs have declined to block) is an effect and so allows the acting Methuselah (and others) to play more cards and effects.

Malcolm wrote:

Scenario: You are bleeding your prey. You have the ousting modifier in hand. Your prey declines block, and asks "How Much?". Your grand-prey, with superior Auspex, interjects "Hang on." You pause, waiting for him to think, probably about an Eagle's sight, since there's nothing else that can really affect the game state at this moment. After a few moments, he says "Okay, go."

You play your modifier, at which point he says "I block with eagle's sight."

His rationale is that the words "no block" never left his lips, though he did interject for thought. In addition, he insists that the modifier remain played, even though you had taken his "Okay go." as a pass of priority.

So. What's the protocol?

You must curse yourself for being a bad player and not demanding a "Block or No Block, please". It's primarily your own fault that you are playing in a sloppy manner and aren't aware of the rules which he is taking advantage of.

The protocol is: You say "Sorry, you passed your block attempt" and you proceed to bleed your prey unblocked.

If he argues, and if you felt like he didn't mean to be a rules-lawyer and he was just ignorantly doing what he was taught in some other game, you have a heart-to-heart chat with him. You explain to him about the impulse and about "Block or No Block" being the only possible answers at that point in the declaration sequence (so he is crystal-clear about the rules of the game) and you apologize for playing sloppy yourself and not correcting him.

Also, you could explain to him about how people that play VTES aren't rules lawyers, except with the Edge, and that we don't want people like that in our game or in our lives, because they are bad human beings (so he is crystal-clear about the ethics of VTES) and they are detrimental to life itself.

I make sure to do this, but I do not expect it from everyone. Some people are so desperate for players and so tolerant of jerks that they've become blind to such things. Which is why I say it here, out loud, for you.

Hopefully, that would get him up to the current rules and ethical standards that you expect in a VTES player. If truly not, then ostracision is your best option. Stay away from him and keep him away from VTES.