LSJ: Drawing out the Beast and Equipment.

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

I feel that this question may not be needed, but I still would like a
clarification.

1. Drawing out the Beast prohibits the opposing vampire from using
equipment.

2. Some "effects" of equipment can be described as an actual "event",
"action" or "individual use" (such as using a flamethrower as a strike
to deal aggravated damage). Other times, equipment might give a minion
a certain "passive" or "aura" effect (borrowing terminology from WC3)
that is considered always effective without an actual declaration of
use (such as the Eye of Hazimel's granting of extra disciplines).

3. The text of Drawing Out the Beast relating to equipment states:
"During this combat, the opposing vampire . . . cannot use equipment".

4. My question is this: Does the the text of Drawing Out the Beast
only prohibit a vampire from using equipment as an actual "use" such as
the "use" of specifically striking with a flame thrower. Or does it
also prohibit a vampire from generally utilizing the aspects of a piece
of equipment that would grant a "passive" or "continuous effect" such
as the ability to use disciplines (note that such a "continous effect"
pertains to situations outside of combat).

This questions specifically relates to a combat situation where Drawing
Out the Beast might prohibit an opposing vampire from utilizing the
"passive" effect of the Eye of Hazimel granting a vampire Potence and
Chimerstry during combat.

I apologize if this question has been already answered. But I simply
wanted a clarification based on the definitions of "use" and "passive"
as defined above.

Eldacar

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

> > > Of these abilities all are suspended if the minion cannot use
> > > equipment, except the "cannot be transferred, stolen or moved"
> > > clause. The reason is that everything else allows you to do
> > > something (even if it sometimes also forces you to do them), but the
> > > prohibition on being transferred, stolen or moved prevents you from
> > > doing what you normally would be able to (instead of giving you an
> > > ability). It is a prohibition, not an ability, and therefor
> > > unaffected by DotB.
> >
> > But it also protects the Eye from being stolen, which sounds like an
> > ability to me. Would a piece of equipment that prevents blood from being
> > moved or stolen still work under DotB then?
> >
>

That's why "use" is rigourously defined. It is something you COULD do
only because you have the equipment. If the equipment weren't there, you
couldn't move it, so since you still can't move it, it's not "use".
Remember, you also can't Heidelberg or Nod or Rave or reEquip it, that's
quite a disadvantage.

>
> If an equipment prevents blood from being moved or stollen, it will not work
> under DotB.
>

I disagree. Without the equipment, blood can be moved or stolen.
Therefore, such an effect would not be considered "using" the equipment,
as defined above and by LSJ.

Remember that such an effect also prevents you from using Blood Doll and
Minion Tap. Sure, in Combat, it looks beneficial, but in your Master
Phase, it looks pretty detrimental. It is NOT whether something is
beneficial or detrimental that makes it "use".

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On 3 Feb 2005 23:02:42 -0800, Eldacar351 <eldacar351@aol.com> wrote:

> 4. My question is this: Does the the text of Drawing Out the Beast
> only prohibit a vampire from using equipment as an actual "use" such as
> the "use" of specifically striking with a flame thrower. Or does it
> also prohibit a vampire from generally utilizing the aspects of a piece
> of equipment that would grant a "passive" or "continuous effect" such
> as the ability to use disciplines (note that such a "continous effect"
> pertains to situations outside of combat).

Mostly everything that is written on an equipment will fall under "use".
In fact, to borrow a phrase from someone, "use" covers everything the
vampire would not be able to do (witness, experience) without the
equipment. What it does not cover are its prohibitons.

> This questions specifically relates to a combat situation where Drawing
> Out the Beast might prohibit an opposing vampire from utilizing the
> "passive" effect of the Eye of Hazimel granting a vampire Potence and
> Chimerstry during combat.

Eye gives you:

+1 Bleed and +1 Strength
Enter combat ability
POT and CHI and a reduction on combat card cost
Cannot be transfered, stolen or moved clause
Do 5 damage to minion if burned
Upkeep pool cost in untap

Of these abilities all are suspended if the minion cannot use equipment,
except the "cannot be transferred, stolen or moved" clause. The reason
is that everything else allows you to do something (even if it sometimes
also forces you to do them), but the prohibition on being transferred,
stolen or moved prevents you from doing what you normally would be able
to (instead of giving you an ability). It is a prohibition, not an
ability, and therefor unaffected by DotB.

--
Bye,

Daneel

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Daneel <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote:
> Of these abilities all are suspended if the minion cannot use equipment,
> except the "cannot be transferred, stolen or moved" clause. The reason
> is that everything else allows you to do something (even if it sometimes
> also forces you to do them), but the prohibition on being transferred,
> stolen or moved prevents you from doing what you normally would be able
> to (instead of giving you an ability). It is a prohibition, not an
> ability, and therefor unaffected by DotB.

But it also protects the Eye from being stolen, which sounds like an
ability to me. Would a piece of equipment that prevents blood from being
moved or stolen still work under DotB then?

Tricky issue...

Rogar

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Eldacar351 wrote:
> I feel that this question may not be needed, but I still would like a
> clarification.
>
> 1. Drawing out the Beast prohibits the opposing vampire from using
> equipment.
>
> 2. Some "effects" of equipment can be described as an actual "event",
> "action" or "individual use" (such as using a flamethrower as a strike
> to deal aggravated damage). Other times, equipment might give a minion
> a certain "passive" or "aura" effect (borrowing terminology from WC3)
> that is considered always effective without an actual declaration of
> use (such as the Eye of Hazimel's granting of extra disciplines).

If it applies to the minion, and is not a restriction (cannot
hunt), then it is "using" it.

> 3. The text of Drawing Out the Beast relating to equipment states:
> "During this combat, the opposing vampire . . . cannot use equipment".
>
> 4. My question is this: Does the the text of Drawing Out the Beast
> only prohibit a vampire from using equipment as an actual "use" such as
> the "use" of specifically striking with a flame thrower. Or does it
> also prohibit a vampire from generally utilizing the aspects of a piece
> of equipment that would grant a "passive" or "continuous effect" such
> as the ability to use disciplines (note that such a "continous effect"
> pertains to situations outside of combat).

It restricts the Beastie from doing anything that he would not be
able to do if the equipment were not in play.

> This questions specifically relates to a combat situation where Drawing
> Out the Beast might prohibit an opposing vampire from utilizing the
> "passive" effect of the Eye of Hazimel granting a vampire Potence and
> Chimerstry during combat.

He cannot, true.

> I apologize if this question has been already answered. But I simply
> wanted a clarification based on the definitions of "use" and "passive"
> as defined above.
>
> Eldacar
>


--
LSJ (vtesrep@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Rogar wrote:

> Daneel <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote:
>
>> Of these abilities all are suspended if the minion cannot use equipment,
>> except the "cannot be transferred, stolen or moved" clause. The reason
>> is that everything else allows you to do something (even if it sometimes
>> also forces you to do them), but the prohibition on being transferred,
>> stolen or moved prevents you from doing what you normally would be able
>> to (instead of giving you an ability). It is a prohibition, not an
>> ability, and therefor unaffected by DotB.
>
>
> But it also protects the Eye from being stolen, which sounds like an
> ability to me. Would a piece of equipment that prevents blood from being
> moved or stolen still work under DotB then?

The Eye cannot be stolen. This is not something the bearer is
doing. If his Beast is drawn, his opponent can still not steal
the Eye.

--
LSJ (vtesrep@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Rogar" <MYNICKNAMEHERE@phreaker.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd06bkg.oc.MYNICKNAMEHERE@toad.stack.nl...
> Daneel <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote:
> > Of these abilities all are suspended if the minion cannot use
equipment,
> > except the "cannot be transferred, stolen or moved" clause. The
reason
> > is that everything else allows you to do something (even if it
sometimes
> > also forces you to do them), but the prohibition on being
transferred,
> > stolen or moved prevents you from doing what you normally would be
able
> > to (instead of giving you an ability). It is a prohibition, not an
> > ability, and therefor unaffected by DotB.
>
> But it also protects the Eye from being stolen, which sounds like an
> ability to me. Would a piece of equipment that prevents blood from being
> moved or stolen still work under DotB then?
>
> Tricky issue...
>

If an equipment prevents blood from being moved or stollen, it will not work
under DotB.

However, Daneel imo is correct at what his saying. Meaning that the "cannot
be moved,
transfered or stolen" clause is not an ability granted by the Eye to the
minion, it is a
characteristic of the Eye. DotB is played on the opposing minion and
prevents him from
using equipment, DotB does not make the equipment inactive. So, while the
minion cannot
use the Eye, the Eye remains unaffected by the DotB, so it cannot be
transfered, moved or
stolen.

Bottom line, imo, this clause is a characteristic of the Eye, it refers to
the Eye and has nothing
to do with the minion using the Eye... It just checks if the minion is
ready...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Just curious...

How does Shackles of Enkidu versus Drawing out the Beast work? Since
Shackles is done in pre-range. Which goes first? Does it matter?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

<adam.hulse@ngc.com> wrote in message news:1107783380.533266.324390@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Just curious...
>
> How does Shackles of Enkidu versus Drawing out the Beast work? Since
> Shackles is done in pre-range. Which goes first? Does it matter?


Both are before range (card text), so fall to 1.6.1.6 to determine
which goes first.

--
LSJ (vtesrep@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

LSJ wrote:
> Eldacar351 wrote:
> > I feel that this question may not be needed, but I still would like
a
> > clarification.
> >
> > 1. Drawing out the Beast prohibits the opposing vampire from using
> > equipment.
> >
> > 2. Some "effects" of equipment can be described as an actual
"event",
> > "action" or "individual use" (such as using a flamethrower as a
strike
> > to deal aggravated damage). Other times, equipment might give a
minion
> > a certain "passive" or "aura" effect (borrowing terminology from
WC3)
> > that is considered always effective without an actual declaration
of
> > use (such as the Eye of Hazimel's granting of extra disciplines).
>
> If it applies to the minion, and is not a restriction (cannot
> hunt), then it is "using" it.
>
> > 3. The text of Drawing Out the Beast relating to equipment states:
> > "During this combat, the opposing vampire . . . cannot use
equipment".
> >
> > 4. My question is this: Does the the text of Drawing Out the Beast
> > only prohibit a vampire from using equipment as an actual "use"
such as
> > the "use" of specifically striking with a flame thrower. Or does
it
> > also prohibit a vampire from generally utilizing the aspects of a
piece
> > of equipment that would grant a "passive" or "continuous effect"
such
> > as the ability to use disciplines (note that such a "continous
effect"
> > pertains to situations outside of combat).
>
> It restricts the Beastie from doing anything that he would not be
> able to do if the equipment were not in play.
>
> > This questions specifically relates to a combat situation where
Drawing
> > Out the Beast might prohibit an opposing vampire from utilizing the
> > "passive" effect of the Eye of Hazimel granting a vampire Potence
and
> > Chimerstry during combat.
>
> He cannot, true.
>
> > I apologize if this question has been already answered. But I
simply
> > wanted a clarification based on the definitions of "use" and
"passive"
> > as defined above.
> >
> > Eldacar
> >
>
>
> --
> LSJ (vtesrep@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
> Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament
calendar:
> http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

LSJ: Thanks for taking your time to clarify my question. I'm also
glad that the other posters found an interesting discussion in regards
to my question.

Eldacar