Animal allies: Are they mortal or monster?

If this question has been answered, apologies in advance. I was just wondering about the "monster" status of animal allies brought into play with the card text demdemeh. Card text: Demdemeh Clan: Tzimisce (group 4) Capacity: 10 Disciplines: ANI CEL FOR VIC aus pre Laibon: If any Gehenna cards are in play during your untap phase, you may move an animal retainer on Demdemeh to your ready region as an animal ally with 1 strength and 1 bleed. While that animal has more than 2 life, he or she gets +1 strength. All it says is that they are "animal allies" so for the purpose of dealing with the imbued what are they considered? Previous rulings make me tend to think that they are "monsters" as it does not specificly state they are mortal, yet logic would dictate that they are mortal? Anyone got a answer? LSJ?, the regular answer crew? Thanks in advance Sutekh_23

sutekh_23 <bec...@aapt.net.au> wrote: > All it says is that they are "animal allies" so for the purpose of > dealing with the imbued what are they considered? Previous rulings make > me tend to think that they are "monsters" as it does not specificly > state they are mortal, yet logic would dictate that they are mortal? > Anyone got a answer? LSJ?, the regular answer crew? Monster: any vampire or non-mortal, non-animal ally or retainer.

[ quoted text not captured ] Hmm, actually now you have written that I would now say mortal (animal ally) Thanks though Sutekh_23

[ quoted text not captured ] Josh is correct -- monster is defined as any vampire or any non-mortal, non-animal ally or retainer. The animal allies are not monsters. Nor are they mortal allies.

[ quoted text not captured ] So, in effect they are neither, correct? Thank you gentlemen Sutekh_23

sutekh_23 <bec...@aapt.net.au> wrote: > > > > Monster: any vampire or non-mortal, non-animal ally or retainer. > > > > > > Hmm, actually now you have written that I would now say mortal (animal > > > ally) > > > > Josh is correct -- monster is defined as any vampire or any non-mortal, > > non-animal ally or retainer. > > The animal allies are not monsters. Nor are they mortal allies. > So, in effect they are neither, correct? That's what "Nor" means. Not just "in effect"; LSJ has *specifically stated* the answer. Each ally has one keyword defining its "type". If that type is "mortal", or "animal", then that ally is not a monster. Otherwise, it is.