I have no objection. It’s a game. Let’s say you never took your finger off the piece 😉
From my perspective, if I haven’t acted on the move and nor has anyone else, I’m happy for you to take it back.
I recommend not to rely on this because I may have acted but not typed anything up yet.
Ok then, Manlius defends Papirius.
Okay, as we have made clear, the intention of this con ship is to spread around as much influence as possible.
Given that Virtus Romana is at a disadvantage:
Manlius will advocate.
There will be no popular appeal.
It’s for the accused to decide, I think…
Right. I now have the trial table to hand, so let’s go through the process.
Furius, speaking for the prosecution, has an oratory of 3. Across the room, Manlius advocates for the defence with his oratory of 2.
All agree that Manlius spoke more convincingly on this occasion however. Nonetheless, the votes have already mostly been decided by other means and few are swayed from their plans in favour of either prosecution or defence.
Actual numbers
Advocate’s oratory (2) - Prosecutor’s oratory (3) + 2d6 (9) - Evil Omens (1) = 7 => No effect
Had there been a 12 vote swing to the prosecution or something I would have paused here to allow a reconsideration of the plan to avoid a popular appeal. As it is, straight on with the show.
Next we add the influence of the accused, then it’s down to the senate votes.
So the votes stand at 3-0 in favour of acquittal. @Panzeh, you may call the votes.
I’ve worked out what I’ve done wrong. The trial should be after the voting. Oh well, as the votes are pretty much set in stone here I’m sure it doesn’t matter much.
Do we need to call the votes? Is there something that could change?
Yeah, if the prosecution is voted down, is there actually a trial?
There’s always a trial. Otherwise there’d be no point to the prosecution +x votes results.
The Trial is the voting.
@rho21 is going step-by-step according to Hoyle getting his processes staight for the future.
There’s a trial, but with the current roll and the public deal, the result will be acquittal.
I don’t see anything that can change the result.
There is one point left to calling the votes: “If the censor suffers unanimous defeat, he may either lose one influence or hand control of the meeting back to the normal Presiding Magistrate and end all prosecutions.” But as I messed up the ordering, it’s probably safe to assume that didn’t happen.
The trial is not the same as the voting in this case. The terminology is a bit confused in the rules.
So to clarify for the future, the procedure is:
- Select prosecutor
- Select advocate, if any
- Senators vote
- At the accused’s turn to vote a popular appeal may happen (2d6 + popularity, result from table)
- Accused gets extra votes equal to influence
- The trial occurs (calculation above, result from table)
- Sum everything and convict or acquit
Ok, I just can’t find the trial table or rules anywhere. Only the senate vote. And no, I won’t change my vote.
It’s a combo of pg 12-13 and 23. The Advanced Rule we selected complicates things a little bit.
It’s the public appeal table.
Vote in any order.
We vote for acquittal
Acquittal.