Hi!

A situation came up in a game where the second agenda in the agenda phase was the Miscount disclosed agenda. The card says: " Elect Law : Vote on the elected law as if it were just revealed from the top of the deck." .

There was one law in play and one player decided to play a rider and predict that law to be elected. That player is then not allowed to vote during the election of the law since he played a rider. But does the player get to vote on the law that were to be voted on "as if it were just revealed from the top of the deck"? Is this to be treated as an entirely new, 3rd agenda card or is it just voted on as normally, but the riders played are still in effect and no new ones can be played?

Hmmm. That’s a tricky one. My first inclination is that it’s essentially a 3rd agenda and so he would get to vote on the older law, but I could certainly see an argument for it being a subset of the miscount voting.

There is also a question of whether anyone can play riders on the new vote. If they can, then the one player should also be able to vote on it (and potentially play a rider on that one as well), but if the new vote is considered a subset of the miscount agenda, then I would say no one can play riders on it.

ok, talking it through like that, I definitely come down on the side of it being a whole new vote. We’ve had other situations where a rider was basically a free benefit, so that doesn’t worry me, and keeping it as a 3rd vote is simpler.

I would also say that playing a rider on the Miscount would only exclude you from the actual election of which law should be re-voted. So with only one possible law, any riders would be freebies. The other players COULD all abstain to try and stop the riders taking effect but then the Speaker would have a wierd sort of tie to break and would have to simply choose the only possible law, making the riders come through anyway.

The re-vote of the old law I would see as a new vote allowing all players to vote unless they play new riders on THAT law.