Mathias wrote:
> Growing from this thread I've got some further questions, situations,
> regarding the 'play card as' ruling.
>
> So since Ananasi Vampirephile can put Animalism requiring retainer into
> play with Pack Alpha, then I'm assuming Ian Forestal could as well
> correct? Just want to make sure because he doesn't actually have
> Animalism, he just 'plays' cards as if he did.
Correct. Just as allies play cards "as if" they had certain
Disciplines.
For the play of such cards, the minion is considered to have the
Discipline in question (but only for the play of the card).
> It just seems a bit confusing since this seems counter to previous
> ruling that abilities allowing minion to 'play' cards only counted when
> cards are played regularly from hand.
Counter in what way? The rest of your post does an adequate job of
explaining the logic (and the lack of "counters", so I'm not sure what
counter you're seeing here.
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/browse_frm/thread/34a5a1067a7bb8fe/2d75fdf32142908b?lnk=st&q=summoning+tatiana&rnum=1#2d75fdf32142908b
That's a thread, not a post, so hard to figure out which post you're
refering to.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/9feb95542e7afeeb
refers to which cards are cancelable "as played" -- cards put into play
by another card (like The Summoning or Pack Alpha) are not "played" in
the normal sense -- they aren't cancelable by Direct Intervention
(although the first card -- Summoning or Pack Alpha -- can be canceled
as normal, since they're played as normal).
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/782f7be69bb661a5
refers to playing the first card (in this case, the Summoning) "as a
Ravnos", since Tatiana is a Ravnos. Summoning doesn't require Gangrel,
so Tatiana cannot play it as if she were a Gangrel. Since she's playing
it as a Ravnos, the ally she recruits cannot be one that requires a
Gangrel.
> This second ruling applies to clan requirements rather than
> disciplines, but since the rule on requirements (sect, clan,
> discipline, etc.) lists them all together in same section of rule book,
> I figured the ruling seems to be applicable.
In as far as the first card is played, yes.
For Pack Alpha, a minion "faking" Animalism in order to play Pack Alpha
will play it "as if" he has Animalism. So he can use that Animalism to
meet the requirements of retainer.
Note that if Tatiana plays Pack Alpha, she cannot employ a Dog Pack
with it, since she didn't play Pack Alpha "as a Gangrel".
> So I'm wondering about the Summoning at superior, with bringing allies
> into play. Ruling on Tatiana Stepanova from the link above is that she
> could not use Summoning to put Brujah or Gangrel Allies into play.
... since she didn't play Summoning as a Brujah or Gangrel.
> Assuming this extends to Mata Hari, and Kementiri [Merged] as well,
> yes?
It applies to all minions, yes.
> So is it correct that Ian Forestal with superior presence could
> not put a Re-animated Corpse or similar discipline-requiring ally into
> play either?
Right. He could employ the Reanimated Corpse directly. But since he
doesn't play Summoning "as if" he has Thanatosis, he cannot use the
Summoning to employ the Corpse.
> Similarly, Ian could not use Vast Wealth to equip with a
> Baleful Doll or Canopic Jar, correct?
Correct.
> Can anyone else think of similar circumstances where a minion might be
> putting a card into play, without actually playing it from hand, and
> where they might otherwise not meet the requirements for that card?
> Did that sentence even make sense?
>
> So I guess the only reason Vampirephile (and probably Ian) could put an
> Animalism retainer into play using Pack Alpha is because both the card
> (Pack Alpha) and the card it puts into play (Ani Retainer) have the
> same requirement?
Yes.
> So theoretically if there were ever a Necromancy
> card similar to the Summoning or Pack Alpha, then Ian, Akhenaton, and
> any other Nec-playing minion who did not actually have Nec would still
> be able to play both the card and any Necromancy Ally or Retainer that
> card would then bring into play, correct?
The card the minion plays "as if" he or she has some trait is played as
if he has that trait. If the play of the card put some other card in
play and looks at the playing minion to verify requirements, then it
sees the minion for what he played tha card as, just like all other
effects of the play of the card see the minion for what he played the
card as.
> Because they are only
> considered to fulfill the necessary requirement for the resolution of
> the card which was played normally from hand, then they are only
> recognized as meeting the requirements for the second card being put
> into play by the first card IF the requirement is the same for both
> cards.
Right.
[ quoted text not captured ]