rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Alastor + Helicopter

12 messages from 7 participants · 14 September 2006 – 15 September 2006
original thread on Google Groups

Jozxyqk

(Relevant) text of Helicopter: "When a minion equips with the Helicopter, tap it." (Relevant) text of Alastor: "place...the equipment on the chosen vampire." If I use Alastor, and choose Helicopter as the equipment, does it tap? Since this is not "equipping", card text indicates "no".

antero

[ quoted text not captured ] What about Kiss of Lachesis (sup) then? It says that: Move a non-unique equipment card...to this vampire. It does not say anything about equipping either, as opposed to, say, Magic of the Smith. -Antero

LSJ

[ quoted text not captured ] Right. Move: move a card from hither to thither. No cost is paid, no requirements are checked, no "equipping" takes place, &c. (subject to overriding card text, of course). Equip: equip a card. Cost is paid, requirements are checked, equipping takes place (subject to overriding card text, of course).

antero

LSJ wrote: > > Move: move a card from hither to thither. No cost is paid, no > requirements are checked, no "equipping" takes place, &c. (subject to > overriding card text, of course). > > Equip: equip a card. Cost is paid, requirements are checked, equipping > takes place (subject to overriding card text, of course). Kewl. Thanks. -Antero

Myrdin

LSJ skrev: [ quoted text not captured ] I'm guessing this means that you don't untap then from taking a move equipment action to move a leather jacket from one minion to another? /Ivan

Frederick Scott

"Myrdin" <Smurf...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1158332269.1...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com... > LSJ skrev: >> Move: move a card from hither to thither. No cost is paid, no >> requirements are checked, no "equipping" takes place, &c. (subject to >> overriding card text, of course). >> >> Equip: equip a card. Cost is paid, requirements are checked, equipping >> takes place (subject to overriding card text, of course). > > I'm guessing this means that you don't untap then from taking a move > equipment action to move a leather jacket from one minion to another? Huh? What is a "move equipment action"? An inspection of the actual rules reveals no such option. However, rule 6.1.3, third paragraph, does describe one version of an _equip_ action: "To EQUIP with an equipment card currently possessed by one of your other minions, ..." Was that what you were talking about? Fred, inventor of the totally silly "Hand-Me-Back-That-Jacket" deck, chock full of Leather Jackets, Madness Networks, Perfectionists, and Minion Taps...delightful!

LSJ

Frederick Scott wrote: > "Myrdin" <Smurf...@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:1158332269.1...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com... > > LSJ skrev: > >> Move: move a card from hither to thither. No cost is paid, no > >> requirements are checked, no "equipping" takes place, &c. (subject to > >> overriding card text, of course). > >> > >> Equip: equip a card. Cost is paid, requirements are checked, equipping > >> takes place (subject to overriding card text, of course). > > > > I'm guessing this means that you don't untap then from taking a move > > equipment action to move a leather jacket from one minion to another? > > Huh? What is a "move equipment action"? An inspection of the actual > rules reveals no such option. However, rule 6.1.3, third paragraph, > does describe one version of an _equip_ action: "To EQUIP with an > equipment card currently possessed by one of your other minions, ..." > Was that what you were talking about? And I suppose I should be clearer in the statement above -- "equip" only checks requirements and demands cost payment when the card being equipped is not already in play. When equipping a card already in play (transferring equipment, for example), then neither cost nor requirements are applied.

Omael

[ quoted text not captured ] Does this means that if i equip with a leather jacket in play i don't untap?

LSJ

Omael wrote: > LSJ wrote: > > And I suppose I should be clearer in the statement above -- "equip" > > only checks requirements and demands cost payment when the card being > > equipped is not already in play. When equipping a card already in play > > (transferring equipment, for example), then neither cost nor > > requirements are applied. > > Does this means that if i equip with a leather jacket in play i don't > untap? No. It means you Card text: "If the action to equip with the Leather Jacket is successful, untap the acting minion at the end of the turn." So if you equip with the leather jacket as an action, you untap at the end of the turn.

LSJ

Omael wrote: > LSJ wrote: > > And I suppose I should be clearer in the statement above -- "equip" > > only checks requirements and demands cost payment when the card being > > equipped is not already in play. When equipping a card already in play > > (transferring equipment, for example), then neither cost nor > > requirements are applied. > > Does this means that if i equip with a leather jacket in play i don't > untap? No. It means you don't have to meet the requirements on LJ nor pay the cost of the LJ. [ quoted text not captured ]

bwr...@mail.com

Frederick Scott wrote: > "Myrdin" <Smurf...@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:1158332269.1...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com... > > LSJ skrev: > >> Move: move a card from hither to thither. No cost is paid, no > >> requirements are checked, no "equipping" takes place, &c. (subject to > >> overriding card text, of course). > >> > >> Equip: equip a card. Cost is paid, requirements are checked, equipping > >> takes place (subject to overriding card text, of course). > > > > I'm guessing this means that you don't untap then from taking a move > > equipment action to move a leather jacket from one minion to another? > > Huh? What is a "move equipment action"? An inspection of the actual > rules reveals no such option. I don't think he meant it as official nomenclature since he went on to add enough context to make it fairly clear that he was talking about actions that move equipment between minions (ie Rave, Restructure, the special action in section 6.1.3 you mention, etc)... as opposed to the equipment coming from places like the library, hand, or ashheap. It's certainly not a crime to use a phrase not explicitly defined in the rules if it's meaning is implicit: Anarch Secession uses "city title" without further definition, and it's not defined in the rulebook either (and it's a term that's needed in play). Brent Ross

Frederick Scott

<bwr...@mail.com> wrote in message news:1158338112....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > Frederick Scott wrote: >> "Myrdin" <Smurf...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:1158332269.1...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com... >> > LSJ skrev: >> >> Move: move a card from hither to thither. No cost is paid, no >> >> requirements are checked, no "equipping" takes place, &c. (subject to >> >> overriding card text, of course). >> >> >> >> Equip: equip a card. Cost is paid, requirements are checked, equipping >> >> takes place (subject to overriding card text, of course). >> > >> > I'm guessing this means that you don't untap then from taking a move >> > equipment action to move a leather jacket from one minion to another? >> >> Huh? What is a "move equipment action"? An inspection of the actual >> rules reveals no such option. > > I don't think he meant it as official nomenclature since he went on to > add enough context to make it fairly clear that he was talking about > actions that move equipment between minions (ie Rave, Restructure, the > special action in section 6.1.3 you mention, etc)... as opposed to the > equipment coming from places like the library, hand, or ashheap. The point is the official nomenclature he was ignoring, not the nomenclature he was using. I was pointing out that moving equipment from one minion to another does indeed count as "equipping" (LSJ's self-correction about equipping costs and requirements when equipping in this manner not withstanding). The upshot is that moving a Leather Jacket does count as "equipping" and therefore does untap the minion who takes the action. > It's certainly not a crime to use a phrase not explicitly defined in > the rules if it's meaning is implicit Very little newsgroup discussion actually raises to the level of criminality. However, the failure to classify a form of an equip action properly lead the previous poster to an incorrect conclusion. Fred