Question/June Game

Hi,

When do we usually end games? Midnight?

There's a really decent chance I'm not going to be able to make this month's game, and if I do, I'll be really late (like 11:00). Which is rather unfortunate because we will probably need as much of the council as possible this census.

Corral wrote:Hi,

When do we usually end games? Midnight?

There's a really decent chance I'm not going to be able to make this month's game, and if I do, I'll be really late (like 11:00). Which is rather unfortunate because we will probably need as much of the council as possible this census.

This isn't technically allowed anywhere, but I don't imagine the Fallen of Regina would object if you gave someone your vote by proxy. Or, if they would object to a proxy vote, if you voted in on any important votes via Dove(ie: someone calls you on their cell, if you'll be phone-accessible).

Corral wrote:Hi,

When do we usually end games? Midnight?

There's a really decent chance I'm not going to be able to make this month's game, and if I do, I'll be really late (like 11:00). Which is rather unfortunate because we will probably need as much of the council as possible this census.

what makes you think that the council needs to be present or even that a vote would possibly be required?

do you know something i don't? please share

... Nobody updated you on a certain discussion that happened last game?

Wow, you need a new bishop...

PS. Maaaybe I'll be phone-accessible... either at a cousin's wedding or on the 4-hour drive home.

Haven't heard anything....then again, haven't talked to anyone either.

A mystery clouded in riddles indeed.

I recommend coming up with a good IC reason why you can't be at the game, and passing your vote by proxy to someone in the Infernal you trust.

Jill might want to clarify this or possibly move it to the Rules section of the forums.

Is it written in the setting that the council can vote by proxy? Or is it something that the Council agrees to prior to having the vote if they are willing to take votes that way. Just curious is all. I can't seem to find it in the BRB, but I might have an old version.

I'm still curious what time we're likely to end? I've never really paid attention aside from what time I get home. Do we usually call it at midnight?

I will think about an IC reason, however nothing really seems important enough to make Corral miss this. Anyway, I'll come up with something, I don't want to leave y'all with "she's just busy" if I don't have to.

I think usually the game gets called at between 11:30 and midnight. but don't quote me on that, I never really pay attention either.

1) The game is called by midnight; usually between 11:30 and 12:00, depending on how much people are actually engaged and interacting.

2) The Council can meet whenever and wherever they want (The Council is made up of both Queens/Regents and both Bishops). However, in order for the Council to deliver a mandate in lieu of the Kings, or to dethrone a King, members of the Council must be in attendance so that the opposed King can ensure none of the votes were influenced by Techniques. Every member of the Council must be in agreement to dethrone a King. Proxy voting would be, of course, *highly* suspect in these cases.

EDIT: I guess it would be up to each Council whether they'd accept Proxy voting for making decisions like Mandates or supporting a King.

cenobyte wrote:Every member of the Council must be in agreement to deliver a Mandate or to attempt to dethrone a King.

I thought they merely required a majority?

Nope.
They all have to be in agreement. Which is why using the Council to dethrone the King is such a risky and usually unsuccessful method of getting it done.

Well, it's entirely possible that no council meeting will even be called, however I think that I can get there by 11. Failing that, perhaps I could choose a proxy who was not supposed to just blindly indicate my vote, but whose opinion I trusted.

cenobyte wrote:Nope.
They all have to be in agreement. Which is why using the Council to dethrone the King is such a risky and usually unsuccessful method of getting it done.

Ahhh, alright - that is a change. The old setting stuff says you need a majority of the Council(though the Deistical Prelate can be called in to break a tie, WTFBBQ?), but that to depose a King then the King's own Bishop and Queen must vote against him.

Other interestings things... In order to depose a King(whether via challenge or council vote of no-confidence), it must be done at a Gathering, and a majority of the Civitas' Fallen must be present. The Queen is the only position that can temporarily hand off her authority to another Fallen. When neither King is present, a majority vote of the Council(again, with the Deistical Prelate capable of being invited to break ties) can make Mandates and otherwise do Kingly shit.

At this point the council is particularly ineffective anyways as the White Queen is a bit of a non-entity. Erm. If, that is, anyone was thinking that either of the Kings were to be deposed...

Note that all of these rules are only as effective as a city's Fallen give them power to be. It was stated at the last game that in a situation such as what we have, with a Queen who hasn't been around for ages, it should be possible to have someone stand in for her for any council votes. Nobody argued then. I think that certainly if both kings agree (heh) - and maybe even in the case of deposing a king, that most of the Fallen and the opposite king could agree - then it might still be possible to have somebody else, such as the Prelate, take a spot on the Council to get something drastic done.

As with any political system, it only really exists to the extend those governed allow it - and, of course, by OOC convention in a game. I've always figured when the Fallen run into a problem that can't be solved by the standard "When the two Kings rule on something, they can override anything" fix, it probably rolls one of three ways... a) overwhelming group consensus forges a new reality, b) they ask the Deistical Prelate, "As the expert on the Codex, what is procedure here?" and he makes something up, or c) a group says "This is how it is going to be. If you don't like it, feel free to be slaughtered by us. We good?"

Since it came up in this thread, i thought maybe i would clarify on the matter of the White Queen. Since the player hasn't come and the character is an NPC, then the position of Queen is not currently occupado. I have expressed this IC in a confusing Shamus sort of way by repeatedly saying that; "I'll be dealin' with the Queen's duties" during the accouncements at Court. Some of you might recall something to that effect. Since the position isn't clearly stated in an OOC way, here it is.

There is not currently a White Queen.

This is why Shamus is the one on all the hunts, patrols, charges, etc. Because he has no Queen, and the Civitas *requires* a King.

He has not filled the position since Love became an odd recluse.

If Jill wants to intervene in that particular aspect, that's cool with me. But, maybe we can actually see what happens at the game? Maybe an IC resolution can come about? Maybe there won't be a need for the Council at all?

Unrelated to the current situation: Things to do seem to be at a loss if a King refuses to appoint a Knight or Queen, and then does things worthy of being ejected from the Throne. Without a Knight he cannot be challenged. Without a Queen, he can't be voted out by the Council.

Now, the question for Trent is...is this a situation the setting/Codex should address? Or is this purposefully left unaddressed because, lets face it, which is more exciting - referencing Robert's Rules of Order to dethrone a King in a bureaucratic proceeding, or having situations not covered by the rules and instead having a prominent member of the Infernal staredown the Black King, weapon in hand and a hungry Murder behind him, saying "Rules be damned - I'm taking the throne. The only thing you get to decide is what else of yours I take in the process."

Good point, Bal, about the Queen/Knight. Weird how things work out sometimes.

<shrug>

And I also like your second point. I think it might be intentionally left open but i am not reeally privvy to much of that info.

I think we can continue to handle that IC, Joey. Personally, I'm surprised how long Shamus has gotten away without having a Queen (although in my memory, you were insisting Love was still Queen... maybe that was misinterpretation of what you said, or maybe it changed since I asked). But all the players are aware of the situation, and there's little reason for the characters not to have figured it out yet. In my opinion, if the characters are OK with it, let it be... And as soon as they're not, we get some interesting interaction.

In my opinion, the same goes for Wade's query. If a King tries to have no Knight and no Queen, then he should be able to get away with that for exactly as long as the rest of the Fallen let him.

I think, honestly, for a lot of this stuff the important part is that Trent is aware of these openings, so if they are left there, they are left so on purpose. I'd even also recommend purposefully calling them out - Houses of the Blooded, for instance, has a beautiful little sidebar that says "So, you've realized the laws of the Ven are contradictory and full of loopholes? Good. They're that way on purpose, to give a place to create drama."

Mm, yeah. 100% in agreement with that sentiment.

Speaking of reasons to miss or be late (we were sort of speaking of that at one point) do Fallen get sick? As in, colds/flu/food poisoning/etc? Because I've been assuming all along that they don't (due to their mutant healing factor) but maybe that's wrong. Maybe it can be as easy as "I'm not feeling so well"...?

Sorry: there was a sentence that was unclear in an earlier post of mine.

The Council can decide by majority vote on issues like issuing mandates in the absence of one King, or in things like that, but to dethrone a King, they must all be in agreement.