Equipping question

If one of my minions has a piece of equipment that requires an anarch and another minion tries to equip the item from them, does that action count as one that "requires an anarch?" Thanks, Brandon

[ quoted text not captured ] No. Transferring equipment ignores requirements. i.e. Jake Washington can take an action to transfer the Femur of Toomler off of Dragos, and that sure isn't an action that requires a Tzimisce.

On Oct 19, 10:10 pm, Jozxyqk <jfeue...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I'm sure this has been discussed before, and I'm sure nothing's going to change, but... isn't this a silly rule? Doesn't it seem more consistent if minions always need to meet requirements for equipping? It's already strong enough to be able to equip multiple equipment off the same minion (preferrably including a Leather Jacket and followed by Guruhi are the Land)... I guess I just don't understand why requirements weren't always checked when equipping... Not really asking for clarification from LSJ here, just a minor, pointless, complaint...

Chris Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > > No. Transferring equipment ignores requirements. i.e. Jake Washington > > can take an action to transfer the Femur of Toomler off of Dragos, and > > that sure isn't an action that requires a Tzimisce. > I'm sure this has been discussed before, and I'm sure nothing's going > to change, but... isn't this a silly rule? Doesn't it seem more > consistent if minions always need to meet requirements for equipping? Why should it change? If my friend has a Costco card and I don't, and I send him down to Costco to buy me a year's supply of toilet paper, why should I need a Costco membership to get it from him?

Chris Berger wrote: > On Oct 19, 10:10 pm, Jozxyqk <jfeue...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote: >> brandonsantac...@yahoo.com wrote: >>> If one of my minions has a piece of equipment that requires an anarch >>> and another minion tries to equip the item from them, does that action >>> count as one that "requires an anarch?" >> No. Transferring equipment ignores requirements. i.e. Jake Washington >> can take an action to transfer the Femur of Toomler off of Dragos, and >> that sure isn't an action that requires a Tzimisce. > > I'm sure this has been discussed before, and I'm sure nothing's going > to change, but... isn't this a silly rule? No. > Doesn't it seem more > consistent if minions always need to meet requirements for equipping? No. It's more consistent if minions need to meet requirements to play cards only when playing the cards. > It's already strong enough to be able to equip multiple equipment off > the same minion (preferrably including a Leather Jacket and followed > by Guruhi are the Land)... I guess I just don't understand why > requirements weren't always checked when equipping... Because the requirements to play the card aren't checked when the card isn't being played. See also Far Mastery. > Not really asking for clarification from LSJ here, just a minor, > pointless, complaint... Clarified anyhow. So there. :-)

On Oct 20, 9:47 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Chris Berger wrote: > > > It's already strong enough to be able to equip multiple equipment off > > the same minion (preferrably including a Leather Jacket and followed > > by Guruhi are the Land)... I guess I just don't understand why > > requirements weren't always checked when equipping... > > Because the requirements to play the card aren't checked when the card isn't > being played. > Oh, man... I really don't want to start up this discussion again, but... well, that statement isn't true. I remembered this other thread (below) and googled it... I know that you basically ruled the same thing (that requirements are checked via Concealed/Disguised Weapon even though the card isn't played, and that requirements are *not* checked for equipping off another minion), I just don't understand why. Rehashing here, just because you said that requirements are never checked when a card is not played... LSJ wrote: > jwjbwhe...@gmail.com wrote: > > I'm uncomfortable with this ruling. On the one hand, there does seem > > to be precedent. DI cannot cancel the weapon played with Disguised > > Weapon, but can only burn cards "played in the normal fashion". But > > even this ruling seems to acknowledge that the card is indeed "played" > > -- just not in a "normal fashion". > > Quite the opposite. It isn't "played". Instead, CW is played. And that effect > causes the minion playing it to equip with a ... weapon from your hand. > > > On the other hand, if these cards are not "played" -- then what > > prevents my Nossie from getting a Femur of Toomler with disguised > > weapon? Or any vampire from getting a Kerrie with concealed weapon? > > Failure to meet the requirements (which are still checked, since CW uses the > "equip" phrasing rather than the "move" phrasing).

> > Because the requirements to play the card aren't checked when the card isn't > > being played. > > Quite the opposite. It isn't "played". Instead, CW is played. And that effect > > causes the minion playing it to equip with a ... weapon from your hand. I think I get it, it's something like... a card is "played" when it is introduced onto the table(usually from your hand) in the normal fashon (i.e. an action/retainer/equipment card would be played as part of an action). This way, the concealed/disguised weapon are the cards which are "played," while the weapon they bring into play is not "played", but still equipped. Also, a piece of equipment transferred from one minion to another by effect(i.e. Heidelberg, Nod) action (i.e. Rave, equipping from someone, diablarie) or combat (i.e. Fast Hands) would not be played, but still equipped. Is that right, or are things not even "equipped" in some of these cases? Does a Summoned ally/retainer (at PRE) count as being played? (Yes because it is "recruited" rather than simply put into play?) Does Magic of the Smith count as equipping/playing? (equipping but not playing because it merely says equip?) This is kind of convoluted, but I can see the distinction. The Summoning [FN:C2, LotN:PS] Cardtype: Action Discipline: Presence +1 stealth action. [pre] Search your library for an ally or retainer. Show it to all players and put it in your hand. Discard down to your hand size and shuffle your library afterward. [PRE] Search your library for an ally. This vampire recruits that ally (requirements and cost apply as normal). Shuffle your library afterward. Magic of the Smith [Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:PTr, Third:R] Cardtype: Action Cost: 1 blood Discipline: Thaumaturgy +1 stealth action. [tha] Search your library for an equipment card and equip this acting vampire with it. (Pay cost to equip as normal.) Shuffle your library afterward. [THA] As above, but this is a +3 stealth action. Artist: Andrew Trabbold; Jeff Menges

In message <1de4496e-e2bd-410b...@w1g2000prk.googlegroups .com>, Chris Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes: >I remembered this other thread (below) and googled it... I know that >you basically ruled the same thing (that requirements are checked via >Concealed/Disguised Weapon even though the card isn't played, and that >requirements are *not* checked for equipping off another minion), I >just don't understand why. AIUI, the card from Disguised Weapon is played, just not "as normal". The distinction largely only matters for Direct Intervention and friends, which want to cancel the not "as normal" card. http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=rulings has multiple rulings which appear to treat the card from Disguised Weapon as being played, but in an abnormal fashion. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

On Oct 20, 7:09 pm, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > In message <1de4496e-e2bd-410b-ac81-8a72b9cdd...@w1g2000prk.googlegroups > .com>, Chris Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes: > > >I remembered this other thread (below) and googled it... I know that > >you basically ruled the same thing (that requirements are checked via > >Concealed/Disguised Weapon even though the card isn't played, and that > >requirements are *not* checked for equipping off another minion), I > >just don't understand why. > > AIUI, the card from Disguised Weapon is played, just not "as normal". > The distinction largely only matters for Direct Intervention and > friends, which want to cancel the not "as normal" card. > > http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=rulingshas multiple > rulings which appear to treat the card from Disguised Weapon as being > played, but in an abnormal fashion. > Not according to: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/c392960bbf71b848 As I quoted earlier and link above, "quite the opposite". The card is not played, as normal or otherwise. As further elaborated in the linked post, requirements are also checked to "equip", "employ" or "recruit." After reading through that thread again, it doesn't appear that LSJ directly addressed the question of why equipping from another minion did not need to meet requirements, but equipping with Disguised/ Concealed Weapon did. He explicitly said that the card is not "played", but that requirements are always checked when equipping. Which makes sense. I know that minions have never had to meet requirements when equipping from another minion, but doesn't this seem like a disconnect? It does not make the rules clearer, simpler, more fair, or more sensical (in a flavor argument, (un)"real world" sense). The rulebook does not say that requirements are checked when equipping, but it also does not say that requirements are *not* checked while equipping (other than "playing" a card, where it's clear that requirements are always checked). Why not decide one way or another (I vote for requirements always being checked, but whatever) and clean up the issue a little?

> I'm sure this has been discussed before, and I'm sure nothing's going > to change, but... isn't this a silly rule? Doesn't it seem more > consistent if minions always need to meet requirements for equipping? > It's already strong enough to be able to equip multiple equipment off > the same minion (preferrably including a Leather Jacket and followed > by Guruhi are the Land)... I guess I just don't understand why > requirements weren't always checked when equipping... Equipment action always need to meet requirements, if any. ie. normal equip action, Disguised Weapon "*Equip* this vampire with that weapon (and pay cost to equip as normal).", Magic of the Smith. But if you move, transfer or rearrange equipment, requirements are not checked. Rules 6.1 "Equipment (but not retainers) can also be *moved* from one minion to another by taking an action." Nod Type(s): Master Card Text: Trifle Beginning with you and going clockwise once around the table, each Methuselah can *rearrange* the equipment on his or her ready minions. Heidelberg Castle, Germany Type(s): Master Pool Cost: 2 Card Text: Unique location. Tap to *transfer* equipment cards, move blood and transfer retainers between any two ready vampires you control. (You may choose the amount of blood you move and which cards you transfer.) Cannot be used during an action. That is the easiest way to think about it. Tought rules say thing in very confusing way. 6.1.3. Equip (+1 stealth) Equipment cards are action cards that give minions special abilities. The equip action has a default +1 stealth. To equip with an equipment card from your hand, play the card and tap the acting minion. If the action is successful, the equipment card is placed on the minion (and the cost, if any, is paid). If the action is unsuccessful, the card is burned (see Resolve the Action, sec. 6.2.3). Only one equipment card can be played per action, but there is no limit to the number of equipment cards a minion can have. To *equip* with an equipment card currently possessed by one of your other minions, tap the acting minion (the minion who is attempting to get the equipment) and announce the equipment card he is getting. More than one equipment card can be taken from a minion in a single action. If the action is unsuccessful, the equipment remains where it is. ... I think that should be "To tranfer equipment card currently possessed between minions you control,", makes it a little bit less confusing. But that is just my opinion.

On Oct 21, 5:13 am, Kalle Cederström <kalle.cederst...@should.be.gmail.com> wrote: > > To *equip* with an equipment card currently possessed by one of your > other minions, tap the acting minion (the minion who is attempting to > get the equipment) and announce the equipment card he is getting. More > than one equipment card can be taken from a minion in a single action. > If the action is unsuccessful, the equipment remains where it is. > > ... I think that should be "To tranfer equipment card currently > possessed between minions you control,", makes it a little bit less > confusing. > Sure, but it isn't. It's an equip action. This is according to the rulebook, and it has always been an equip action. Cards that are only playable on an equip action (such as Hag's Wrinkles and Guruhi are the Land) are playable on that action. If you take a Leather Jacket, the action to equip it is successful and you untap at the end of the turn. I originally said that I didn't need a clarification from LSJ... well, LSJ, you gave one that IMHO totally muddies the waters. Can we get a clarification now? 3 months ago, you said that requirements are always checked when "equipping", even when the equipment card is not "played". Yesterday, you said that requirements are never checked, except when a card is played. Which is it? (It is understood that certain cards could contain explicit wording to check requirements or not check requirements.) If it is as you said yesterday, does this constitute errata for Disguised Weapon and Concealed Weapon, or can Watenda Disguise out a Sword of Troile?

Chris Berger wrote: > I originally said that I didn't need a clarification from LSJ... > well, LSJ, you gave one that IMHO totally muddies the waters. Can we > get a clarification now? 3 months ago, you said that requirements are > always checked when "equipping", even when the equipment card is not > "played". Yesterday, you said that requirements are never checked, > except when a card is played. Which is it? Everyone else seems to understand it and you said you didn't really want to get into it, so I figured it could just be left to lie. Card text can indeed override any general rule as to when cost is paid. For the case of Disguised Weapon, the long-standing ruling is that the text "equip from hand" does exactly that -- it invokes the cost and requirements (intuitively, some would say, as equipping from hand is much like playing the card). For the case of transferring equipment already in play, no cost is paid and no requirements are checked, since the card is not being played from hand (or being somehow retrieved from hand in a manner similar to being played).

[ quoted text not captured ] So when you said in the thread from July that I linked above that requirements *are* checked for equipping, that was incorrect? Is this a reversal of that ruling?

Chris Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > Sure, but it isn't. It's an equip action. This is according to the > rulebook, and it has always been an equip action. Cards that are only > playable on an equip action (such as Hag's Wrinkles and Guruhi are the > Land) are playable on that action. If you take a Leather Jacket, the > action to equip it is successful and you untap at the end of the turn. By your logic, Chris, you'd also have to re-pay the cost to equip. Do you really want that?

[ quoted text not captured ] No. As I said then and above: requirements and cost apply for equipping. For regular equipping, this comes from rules text. For Disguised Weapon, it comes from card text, specifically the "equip from hand" part, which has been ruled to mean that it invokes cost and requirements.

[ quoted text not captured ] Equip from hand, library, or ash heap => cost is paid, requirements are checked Equip from another minion in play => no cost is paid, no requirements are checked Move from anywhere => no cost is paid, no requirements are checked (All of the above subject to modification by explicit card text) -witness1

[ quoted text not captured ] No, you only pay costs when you play a card. Disguised Weapon and Concealed Weapon both specifically tell you to pay the cost, equipping from another minion does not. Neither DW nor CW tells you to check requirements, but you do, because, as LSJ has explicitly said, you always check requirements when you equip. And in this thread, it has been established that you don't check requirements for equipping off another minion because you only ever check requirements when you play a card. All I was asking for is that words have some meaning. When you say that you always check requirements when you equip, and then you also say, less than 3 months later, that you never check requirements except when "playing a card", regardless of whether or not you are equipping - well, those two statements can only be true for particularly weak interpretations of the words always and never. Finally, LSJ has said that it "has been ruled" to mean that "equip from hand" checks cost and requirements. Nevermind that the only place it "has been ruled" is in this specific post where he says that it has been ruled (I'll ignore the part of the same exact post when he said "requirements and cost apply for equipping" (with a silent "except when they don't"). I can accept that as a rule. But at least there *is* one now, instead of things just happening one way or another completely separate from a rule or absence of rule that always applies except when it doesn't.

Chris Berger wrote: > Finally, LSJ has said that it "has been ruled" to mean that "equip > from hand" checks cost and requirements. Nevermind that the only > place it "has been ruled" is in this specific post where he says that > it has been ruled And in the post you googled and quoted. And many other times. The earliest reference I can find is: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/c7184d0ad0936399

[ quoted text not captured ] > And many other times. The earliest reference I can find is:http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/c718... "Since the card says nothing about overcoming restrictions of equipping, so the restrictions still apply. " Thus leading one to believe that equipping checks requirements. Before you insist that I "don't understand". I fully understand how the situations work. What I don't understand is how "you never check requirements of a card unless it is played" and "you always check the requirements of a card that you equip, even if it is not played" can possibly both be true, especially when the first statement is specifically made about equipping. Since you (finally) clarified that equipping from hand without playing is different from equipping from another minion (which is in turn different from equipping from hand by playing the card, and from placing on a minion from your hand, as well as different from moving while in play, and presumably different from equipping from ash-heap... all with their own specific rules that are not stated in the rulebook), then I can go back to where the thread started... I understand that equipping from another minion doesn't check requirements, I just don't think it makes sense and wish it were changed. Minor, pointless complaint. No (further) clarification required. Feel free to clarify anyway if you think it's productive at this point... ;)