Double Velvet Tongue - "cannot cast votes or ballots"

Pascal wrote:

I must admit I am open to suggestions regarding this one. I'd rather have "cast votes remain cast".

Hi Pascal,

Does this sentence of yours cast doubts on what you said earlier about the original question, i.e. that "cast votes/ballots remain cast"?

The Unaligned is becoming legal soon and it would be nice to have an official clarification, on the original question, as Velvet Tongue is probably one of the easiest / most obvious cards that will find its way into decks.

In addition, I guess such decks will often star Khay'tall ("Vampires with corruption counters cannot cast votes or ballots against any referendums called by Khay'tall"), so the problem of "what happens to votes already cast when Khay'tall plays Velvet Tongue at inferior" is bound to arise.

My personal view is that James' examples show that the "cast votes/ballots remain cast" option leads inevitably to ambiguities. His examples may be somewhat contrived, but I cannot see much conceptual difference between a vampire going to torpor in a referendum and a vampire acquiring a corruption counter in a context where vampires with corruption counters cannot cast votes. A single, unifying solution would be elegant to have.

Given that usually the "cannot" clauses take precedence over the positive "can" abilities, wouldn't it be easier, more elegant and above all less ambiguous to check for votes at the moment when they are actually tallied?

In this way, you would not have to ask yourself about status changes, but just look at the current situation and draw the appropriate conclusions. A vampire in torpor? He cannot cast votes (and any he had cast are lost). A vampire with a corruption counters in a referendum called by Khay'tall? He cannot cast votes (no matter when he gained such counter).

In my humble opinion, this solution would not lead to the contradictions showed above, would be easier to explain, and facilitate judges' lives as well. Just my 2 cents!

I tend to disagree.

You can "cast Arika votes" and consider they remain cast (except if an effect force you to abstain).

And then, when the result are tallied, we check the number of votes of Arika : in torpor it would be 0 but a ready IC it would be 4 and ready IC having played a sup dread gaze it would be 8

=> casting your votes is an action possible if you have any vote and nothing preventing you and when the results are tallied, you check how many votes each vampire casting votes is worth

Hmm.. Got logged out.

Here's the ruling:

If an effect causes a minion to be unable to cast votes or ballots during a referendum is played/used, that minion is forced to abstain, whether he or she had already cast votes or ballots.

Examples:
- Khay'Tall calls a referendum, Arika casts her votes against. Khay'Tall plays inf' Velvet's Tongue. Arika is now abstaining.

- Alexandra calls a referendum. Cao Nguyen (reacting) plays sup' Velvet's Tongue. Arika casts her votes against. Alexandra plays Scorn of Adonis. Shahara plays inf' Velvet's Tongue on Arika. Arika is now abstaining. Before results are tallied, Arika's controller doesn't burn 1 pool to Scorn because of Arika.

Could you publish this as a General Ruling as not part of the usual RTR process?

Pascal wrote:

Hi
Examples:
- Khay'Tall calls a referendum, Arika casts her votes against. Khay'Tall plays sup' Velvet's Tongue. Arika is now abstaining.

I assume this is supposed to be "Khay'Tall plays inferior Velvet's Tongue" ?