Hi,
I'm guessing this has come up before, but what happens to the Wooden Stake when Beast the Leatherface gets stabbed with it (for more then 1 point of course)?
He goes to torpor for sure, stake doesn't transfer so he pulls it out and throws it away I would imagine?
Does that mean he can untap as normal in torpor?
Thank you kindly
> Wooden Stake
> Type: Equipment
> Melee weapon.
> Strike: strength damage. If more than 1 damage is inflicted on an opposing vampire by this weapon in a given combat, that vampire is sent to torpor. In that case, this card is transferred to that vampire, and he or she doesn't untap as normal during the untap phase as long as he or she remains in torpor.
>
> Beast, The Leatherface of Detroit
> Clan: Nosferatu antitribu (group 2)
> Capacity: 7
> Disciplines: OBF POT ani cel
> Sabbat: Beast cannot play action cards. He cannot have or use equipment or retainers. Beast may enter combat with any ready minion controlled by another Methuselah as a action. +1 strength.
>
The Wooden Stake must attempt to move, Beast can't have it, so it would go to the ash heap would be my suggestion.
Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418
The "and he or she doesn't untap as normal during the untap phase as long as he or she remains in torpor." part of the text is regardless of whether the stake is on the minion or not.
Similarly, if Frederick the Weak gets staked, and then Lupo takes a "transfer equipment" action to take the stake from Frederick, Frederick still does not untap as normal in torpor.
> jozxyqk wrote:
> The "and he or she doesn't untap as normal during the untap phase as long as he or she remains in torpor." part of the text is regardless of whether the stake is on the minion or not.
>
> Similarly, if Frederick the Weak gets staked, and then Lupo takes a "transfer equipment" action to take the stake from Frederick, Frederick still does not untap as normal in torpor.
>
The interesting question is if separate clauses in a compound sentence are reliant on each other. I'm not up on this question, but according to Jozxyqk they are independent. I'm sure that this has been covered ad nauseum, but I would love to see some google fu from Jameszephyr or someone.
The example with Frederick the Weak is illustrative, but not comparable with that of Beast. The question here is "If the "transfer this equipment" effect cannot take place, does the other effect of the "in that case" phrase take place"? With Frederick, both can take place. I guess the "does not untap" is a "remembered" effect from the strike.
Well logic (and I guess vampire lore) would dictate that he can't untap because he has a stake stuck in him. I suppose this is the intent... I prefer to imagine Beast yanking it out and tossing it then pouting all the way back to his GIMP box. Now since he is the GIMP it would make sense he couldn't let himself outta the box, but that is a whole nother story... there is a nice little minor curse for any of you who design crypt cards... you can even call him the GIMP.
Correct answers.
Beast goes to torpor, will suffer the "do not untap as normal" effect, and the Wooden Stake burns, and Beast is affected by the "do not untap" effect.
[This ruling is on my list of things to watch. I'm unhappy with it, but it is what it is]
> Pascal wrote:
> Correct answers.
> Beast goes to torpor, will suffer the "do not untap as normal" effect, and the Wooden Stake burns, and Beast is affected by the "do not untap" effect.
>
> [This ruling is on my list of things to watch. I'm unhappy with it, but it is what it is]
>
I don't really like it either, it would be lot more logical to me if the 'do not untap' part would be linked to the stake equipment card, and if you don't have it anymore then it doesn't apply.
> Klaital wrote:
>
> > Pascal wrote:
> > Correct answers.
> > Beast goes to torpor, will suffer the "do not untap as normal" effect, and the Wooden Stake burns, and Beast is affected by the "do not untap" effect.
> >
> > [This ruling is on my list of things to watch. I'm unhappy with it, but it is what it is]
> >
> I don't really like it either, it would be lot more logical to me if the 'do not untap' part would be linked to the stake equipment card, and if you don't have it anymore then it doesn't apply.
>
That would better fit the Frederick the Weak case, perhaps, but not the Beast case. Beast cannot have equipment because he's all rage thumbs. And rage thumbs won't poit a stake out of your chest.
The "logic" of the ruling is that the not leaving torpor part is a consequence of getting staked. But having the stake in your chest is not the same as being equipped with a stake. (cf. "The Shackled minion vs. the Gangrel who equips it. Although stake's text does a fine job distinguishing when it means the staked vampire and when it means the bearer).
Errata could bring better logic to bear in the first case (removing the onus of being "the staked vampire" if the equipment is transferred while the staked vampire remains in torpor, perhaps also restoring the reduction in rescue cost as well, depending on the nature of the rewritten terminology). Whether that nicety rises to the errata threshold is a question for the Team.
> LSJ wrote:
>
> > Klaital wrote:
> >
> > > Pascal wrote:
> > > Correct answers.
> > > Beast goes to torpor, will suffer the "do not untap as normal" effect, and the Wooden Stake burns, and Beast is affected by the "do not untap" effect.
> > >
> > >
> > > [This ruling is on my list of things to watch. I'm unhappy with it, but it is what it is]
> > >
> > >
> > I don't really like it either, it would be lot more logical to me if the 'do not untap' part would be linked to the stake equipment card, and if you don't have it anymore then it doesn't apply.
> >
> That would better fit the Frederick the Weak case, perhaps, but not the Beast case. Beast cannot have equipment because he's all rage thumbs. And rage thumbs won't poit a stake out of your chest.
>
> The "logic" of the ruling is that the not leaving torpor part is a consequence of getting staked. But having the stake in your chest is not the same as being equipped with a stake. (cf. "The Shackled minion vs. the Gangrel who equips it. Although stake's text does a fine job distinguishing when it means the staked vampire and when it means the bearer).
>
> Errata could bring better logic to bear in the first case (removing the onus of being "the staked vampire" if the equipment is transferred while the staked vampire remains in torpor, perhaps also restoring the reduction in rescue cost as well, depending on the nature of the rewritten terminology). Whether that nicety rises to the errata threshold is a question for the Team.
>
Wow, this must be signigicant, since both cards are old and all, for Scott to take notice is pretty huge. Good to see you on here, LSJ.
> ReverendRevolver wrote:
> Wow, this must be signigicant, since both cards are old and all, for Scott to take notice is pretty huge. Good to see you on here, LSJ.
>
Announce your presence!
vekn.net/forum/10-news-and-announcements/595-announce-your-presence