[LSJ] Echo of Harmonies

Hi, The superior melpominee version of Echo of Harmonies from LoB doesn't say the vampire has to burn the card in order to call the referendum. I assume he still has to, but to me, the card doesn't explicitly says so. So what's the deal? Alexander

On 18 Nov 2005 05:38:05 -0800, Denalex <alexander....@gmail.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] The deal is that the new interpretation of Echo is that you actually play the card from the Echo in the normal fashion. The Legacies page has this info: Echo of Harmonies: The Political Action card is played as if from hand. (Giving a vote in the referendum, able to be canceled as played, and so on.) So it follows the standard procedure - e.g. after the referendum is is placed in the ash heap for most Political Actions. -- Bye, Daneel

[ quoted text not captured ] Correct. -- That is my story, be it bitter or be it sweet. Keep a little and let a little come back to me. LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply) http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

In article <MRuff.1826$wf....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>, LSJ <vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com> wrote: > Daneel wrote: > > The deal is that the new interpretation of Echo is that you actually play > > the card from the Echo in the normal fashion. The Legacies page has this > > info: > > > > Echo of Harmonies: The Political Action card is played as if from hand. > > (Giving a vote in the referendum, able to be canceled as played, and > > so on.) > > > > So it follows the standard procedure - e.g. after the referendum is is > > placed in the ash heap for most Political Actions. > > Correct. <nitpicking> You previously ruled that equipping with Filchware's Pawn Shop was not "playing" the card. This lead to a ruling that said Flaming Candle could be re-equipped via the Pawn Shop: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/b909a8e3 ece85f24?dmode=source But almost immediately, a parallel was drawn with Echo of Harmonies which, at the time, used the term "burn" instead of "play". This lead to a reversal of the Filchware's/Candle ruling: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/f2db39fb 160073a0?dmode=source Now that Echo has changed and is actually playing the card, the parallel no longer works. Is it time to revisit the Candle ruling and allow the Candle to be played again with Filchware's Pawn Shop, or should we always interpret text like Filchware's as needing to meet the requirements, even if it's not "played" per card text? </nitpicking>

Charles Lechasseur wrote: > Now that Echo has changed and is actually playing the card, the parallel > no longer works. Is it time to revisit the Candle ruling and allow the > Candle to be played again with Filchware's Pawn Shop, or should we > always interpret text like Filchware's as needing to meet the > requirements, even if it's not "played" per card text? Filchware uses "equip", which means that the requirements need be met, a fact it re-iterates explicitly in parentheses. [ quoted text not captured ]