'Use' question

hi ! here is a short question : Frenzy or Drawing out the beast are played on a minion bearing the "Hand of conrad". can this minion use potence cards during the combat ? do we assume the effect of the Hand is continuous, thus cannot be "interrupted" by the above cards, or do we assume that it triggers when we want to use potence cards -thus being stopped if a cards prevent the use of equipment ? reyda

>===== Original Message From "Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> ===== [ quoted text not captured ] Good question. DotB makes the opposing minion play as if he had no equipment, so he loses the Potence effect of Hand of Conrad. I'll put this on the RT list for review. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ ------------------------------------------------------------ Get your FREE web-based e-mail and newsgroup access at: http://MailAndNews.com

>Good question. >DotB makes the opposing minion play as if he had no equipment, so he >loses the Potence effect of Hand of Conrad. >I'll put this on the RT list for review. Honestly, I don't see why Drawing out the Beast wouldn't work on "continuous" equipment. A similar situation exists with Sport Bike. Drawing Out the Beast against someone with a Sport Bike (just like Stanislava vs. someone with Mr. Winthrop or Raven Spy) can create that interesting situation where you can't Form of Mist at superior. Halcyan 2

[ quoted text not captured ] OK. So we agree. Is there a problem with having the RT review the issue and make a more "considered" decision? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <3AE81D91...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Halcyan 2 wrote: >> >Good question. >> >DotB makes the opposing minion play as if he had no equipment, so he >> >loses the Potence effect of Hand of Conrad. >> >I'll put this on the RT list for review. >> Honestly, I don't see why Drawing out the Beast wouldn't work on "continuous" >> equipment. A similar situation exists with Sport Bike. Drawing Out the Beast >> against someone with a Sport Bike (just like Stanislava vs. someone with Mr. >> Winthrop or Raven Spy) can create that interesting situation where you can't >> Form of Mist at superior. >OK. So we agree. Is there a problem with having the RT review the issue >and make a more "considered" decision? No problems here, but while you're at it: If the acting minion burns Vial of Garou Blood before range, then the non-acting minion uses DotB, does the acting minion still gain benefits from the Vial? That is, the benefits are provided by an equipment card's cardtext, but the equipment was already 'used' (and burned thereby) before DotB was played. Sticky. gomi -- Individually, I love you all with affection unspeakable; but, collectively, I look upon you with a disgust that amounts to absolute detestation. - Gilbert and Sullivan, 'Pirates of Penzance'

Gomi no Sensei wrote: > If the acting minion burns Vial of Garou Blood before range, then > the non-acting minion uses DotB, does the acting minion still gain > benefits from the Vial? That is, the benefits are provided by an > equipment card's cardtext, but the equipment was already 'used' > (and burned thereby) before DotB was played. Sticky. Ah, yes. This one's come up before (and parallels the burning a Camarilla Vitae Slave case). You use the Vial only in the instant you burn it to gain some effect. The effect is available to you later and doesn't count as using equipment later. So if you burn the Vial before the DOtB is played (since you can't after the DOtB is played), you get the benefits described for the duration described even if DOtB is played. [ quoted text not captured ]

>> Honestly, I don't see why Drawing out the Beast wouldn't work on >"continuous" >> equipment. A similar situation exists with Sport Bike. Drawing Out the >Beast >> against someone with a Sport Bike (just like Stanislava vs. someone with >Mr. >> Winthrop or Raven Spy) can create that interesting situation where you >can't >> Form of Mist at superior. > >OK. So we agree. Is there a problem with having the RT review the issue >and make a more "considered" decision? Sorry. I didn't mean to step on any toes or anything. It's just that (at least for me) it seemed like a clear-cut issue so I was a bit surprised when you suggested an RT review of it. I don't mind it though. =) Halcyan 2