rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

LSJ: Playing Ishtarri Kholo on an Anarch

21 messages from 10 participants · 26 October 2009 – 28 October 2009
original thread on Google Groups

YY

Can I play Ishtarri Kholo on an Ishtarri vamp that has somehow become an Anarch? Is the answer: 1) Yes, and the Ishtarri becomes a Laibon Kholo, losing her Anarch status 2) Yes, but the card has no effect while on the Ishtarri, except to jump to a legal target at the first opportunity, as per the card text of Ishtarri Kholo, or 3) No, the card cannot be played on the Anarch Ishtarri Regards, YY

Abdul alHazred

[ quoted text not captured ] Since it´s a Laibon title. I would say "no". ___________ Ishtarri Kholo Type: Action Modifier/Reaction Required Clan: Ishtarri Only usable during a referendum. Usable by a tapped vampire. Title. Put this card on this Ishtarri to represent the unique Laibon title of Ishtarri Kholo (worth 2 votes). Not usable if there are any older ready untitled Ishtarri. Whenever this vampire is not a ready Ishtarri or there is an older ready untitled Ishtarri, move this card to (one of) the oldest ready untitled Ishtarri (if any).

LSJ

Abdul alHazred wrote: > On 26 Okt, 07:11, YY <the1andonl...@yahoo.com.sg> wrote: >> Can I play Ishtarri Kholo on an Ishtarri vamp that has somehow become >> an Anarch? >> >> Is the answer: >> 1) Yes, and the Ishtarri becomes a Laibon Kholo, losing her Anarch >> status >> 2) Yes, but the card has no effect while on the Ishtarri, except to >> jump to a legal target at the first opportunity, as per the card text >> of Ishtarri Kholo, or >> 3) No, the card cannot be played on the Anarch Ishtarri > > Since it�s a Laibon title. I would say "no". Correct. (That's option 3 above). "Only Laibon can hold the Laibon titles kholo and magaji." [10.3]

TTC

> > > Since it´s a Laibon title. I would say "no". > > Correct. (That's option 3 above). > "Only Laibon can hold the Laibon titles kholo and magaji." [10.3] I control an Ishtarri who is a Kholo I also control an Ishtarri of the same capacity At my master phase, I play galaric's legacy and then a master: skill potence on this other Ishtarri who becomes the older Ishtarri and who is also an anarch. What happens then?

TTC

[ quoted text not captured ] Ok thx for the insight there is probably a rule point I don't get here but as long as I know the correct ruling, I am fine

LSJ

[ quoted text not captured ] The rule point in question is 10.3, quoted above.

TTC

[ quoted text not captured ] > The rule point in question is 10.3, quoted above.- Masquer le texte des messages précédents - > > - Afficher le texte des messages précédents - so if you have to move a card but the only target cannot receive it, then you don't move the card. Do I understand this correctly?

LSJ

TTC wrote: > On 26 oct, 14:22, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> TTC wrote: >>> On 26 oct, 13:09, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >>>> TTC wrote: >>>>>>> Since it�s a Laibon title. I would say "no". >>>>>> Correct. (That's option 3 above). >>>>>> "Only Laibon can hold the Laibon titles kholo and magaji." [10.3] >>>>> I control an Ishtarri who is a Kholo >>>>> I also control an Ishtarri of the same capacity >>>>> At my master phase, I play galaric's legacy and then a master: skill >>>>> potence on this other Ishtarri who becomes the older Ishtarri and who >>>>> is also an anarch. >>>>> What happens then? >>>> Nothing. >>> Ok thx for the insight >>> there is probably a rule point I don't get here but as long as I know >>> the correct ruling, I am fine >> The rule point in question is 10.3, quoted above.- Masquer le texte des messages pr�c�dents - >> >> - Afficher le texte des messages pr�c�dents - > > so if you have to move a card but the only target cannot receive it, > then you don't move the card. > Do I understand this correctly? The Kholo card is a title card representing a Laibon title. It cannot be given to, played on, or moved to a non-Laibon.

RoddPrime

On Oct 26, 9:44 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > TTC wrote: > > On 26 oct, 14:22, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >> TTC wrote: > >>> On 26 oct, 13:09, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >>>> TTC wrote: > >>>>>>> Since it´s a Laibon title. I would say "no". > >>>>>> Correct. (That's option 3 above). > >>>>>> "Only Laibon can hold the Laibon titles kholo and magaji." [10.3] > >>>>> I control an Ishtarri who is a Kholo > >>>>> I also control an Ishtarri of the same capacity > >>>>> At my master phase, I play galaric's legacy and then a master: skill > >>>>> potence on this other Ishtarri who becomes the older Ishtarri and who > >>>>> is also an anarch. > >>>>> What happens then? > >>>> Nothing. > >>> Ok thx for the insight > >>> there is probably a rule point I don't get here but as long as I know > >>> the correct ruling, I am fine > >> The rule point in question is 10.3, quoted above.- Masquer le texte des messages précédents - > > >> - Afficher le texte des messages précédents - > > > so if you have to move a card but the only target cannot receive it, > > then you don't move the card. > > Do I understand this correctly? > > The Kholo card is a title card representing a Laibon title. It cannot be given > to, played on, or moved to a non-Laibon So if I already have a built in title and become Anarch does one lose the title?

LSJ

[ quoted text not captured ] Not sure what you mean by "so", but title handing is done as specified in section 10 of the rules. If you become independent (as is the case when you become anarch), you los the benefit of any Cam-only, Sabbat-only, or Laibon-only title you had.

librarian

[ quoted text not captured ] I think, if you played the Skill card first, then the title would move to the Ishtarri, and then you couldn't Galarics onto it (Galaric's text - the vamp would now be titled). If you played the Galarics first, you couldn't move the Kholo to it (Kholo text, with rule 10.3) Galaric's Legacy Type: Master Master. Trifle. Put this card on a ready non-titled, non-anarch vampire you control. The vampire with this card is considered anarch (and independent). If this vampire changes sects, burn this card. Rarity: Anarchs:C/PAG4 Ishtarri Kholo Type: Action Modifier/Reaction Requires: Ishtarri Only usable during a referendum. Usable by a tapped vampire. Title. Put this card on this Ishtarri to represent the unique Laibon title of Ishtarri Kholo (worth 2 votes). Not usable if there are any older ready untitled Ishtarri. Whenever this vampire is not a ready Ishtarri or there is an older ready untitled Ishtarri, move this card to (one of) the oldest ready untitled Ishtarri (if any). Rarity: LoB:PI

Juggernaut1981

[ quoted text not captured ] LSJ> Why WOULDN'T the Kholo move? The Card Text requires that it moves to the largest capacity untitled CLAN member, not moves to the largest capacity LAIBON CLAN member. Wouldn't the card just migrate around and become inert/active as the situation dictates? Take this example. It seems perfectly logical based on the card text and requires no additional info beyond "If you don't have the sect you don't use the title" which is from the rules. e.g. Vamp A is an 7cap Anarch Akunanse. Vamp B is a 9cap Laibon Akunanse. Vamp C is a Titled 8cap Laibon Akunanse. Vamp B gains Kholo during a referendum. Vamp B goes to torpor. Kholo looks for eligible targets on the table. Can't choose C, because C is titled. Kholo moves to A and becomes inert because A is an Anarch. Vamp B gets rescued. Kholo identifies an older clan member and moves, activating again since B is a Laibon.

Robert Scythe

On Oct 27, 2:40 pm, Juggernaut1981 <brasscompo...@gmail.com> wrote: > LSJ> Why WOULDN'T the Kholo move? The Card Text requires that it moves > to the largest capacity untitled CLAN member, not moves to the largest > capacity LAIBON CLAN member. Because the title Kholo is also sect oriented. Just as a Gangrel Justicar political action cannot be called on Nadima, she is of the proper clan but is independent so cannot gain the title to lie inert until she becomes Cam.

LSJ

Juggernaut1981 wrote: > On Oct 27, 4:39 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> RoddPrime wrote: >>> On Oct 26, 9:44 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >>>> The Kholo card is a title card representing a Laibon title. It cannot be given >>>> to, played on, or moved to a non-Laibon >>> So if I already have a built in title and become Anarch does one lose >>> the title? >> Not sure what you mean by "so", but title handing is done as specified in >> section 10 of the rules. >> >> If you become independent (as is the case when you become anarch), you los the >> benefit of any Cam-only, Sabbat-only, or Laibon-only title you had. > > LSJ> Why WOULDN'T the Kholo move? The Card Text requires that it moves > to the largest capacity untitled CLAN member, not moves to the largest > capacity LAIBON CLAN member. Wouldn't the card just migrate around > and become inert/active as the situation dictates? Because it's a title card.

Juggernaut1981

[ quoted text not captured ] Robb> That prevents the card being played (she is not a Legal Target for the Referendum). This card doesn't have that catch built in. LSJ> Yes it is a title card, but titles when the sect doesn't match the title become inert. You can't play it if you can't GAIN the Laibon Title (i.e. you are a Laibon) but the MOVEMENT of the card shouldn't preclude it going to an anarch and ending up inert... as per the example.

LSJ

"LSJ>" is used to indicate that what follows is a quote from LSJ. To respond to a post by LSJ, hit "reply" on that message.

Robert Scythe

On Oct 27, 6:30 pm, Juggernaut1981 <brasscompo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Robb> That prevents the card being played (she is not a Legal Target > for the Referendum). This card doesn't have that catch built in. And an anarch is not a Legal Target for the Laibon title of Kholo. > LSJ> Yes it is a title card, but titles when the sect doesn't match > the title become inert. You can't play it if you can't GAIN the > Laibon Title (i.e. you are a Laibon) but the MOVEMENT of the card > shouldn't preclude it going to an anarch and ending up inert... as per > the example. It needs a legal target to MOVE to. Why can't you move it to a younger Ishtari? Because it has to move to an older one (card text). Why can't you move it to a non-Laibon Ishtari? Because Kholo is a Laibon title (card text).

Abdul alHazred

[ quoted text not captured ] Gangrel Justicar is to my knowledge the only Justicar vote card that specifies that you have to choose a camarilla vampire. The other justicar votes just demands that you choose a vampire of the corresponding clan. The condition to belong to the appropriate sect is (i would assume) implied since its a camarilla title. Exactly like the kholo cards.

floppyzedolfin

On Oct 26, 2:44 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > The Kholo card is a title card representing a Laibon title. It cannot be given > to, played on, or moved to a non-Laibon. Just checking something here: Suppose I control two 6-cap Laibon Ishtarris, one is Kholo and the other has no title. Someone puts in play a 7-cap Anarch Ishtarri (for instance, Go Anarch + Discipline skillcard on a 6-cap). Does Ishtarri Kholo's cardtext allow me to move the card from my first Ishtarri to the second ? Thanks.

witness1

[ quoted text not captured ] No, that's not the oldest ready untitled Ishtarri. -witness1

LSJ

[ quoted text not captured ] No. It's only looking for the presence of older Laibon Istarri with no titles.