Mata Hari and Treaty of Laibach

[Emiliano Imeroni]

Hello,

Treaty of Laibach:
"Requires both Follower of Set and Tremere."

Mata Hari:
"You and she may play cards that require a sect
and/or clan as if she were of that required sect and/or clan."

My impression is that Mata Hari can play the role of
a vampire of either of the required clans, so that
in order to play the Treaty you need Mata AND a Tremere,
or Mata AND a Follower of Set. Is that correct?

Emiliano

[Salem]

Ian Forestal and dual-discipline cards as a precedent would suggest
'correct'.

--
salem
(replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)

[LSJ]

Correct.

[Maegnar]

But can Mata Hari _alone_ be enough to play Treaty?

[Emiliano Imeroni]

That was the exact point of my question.
The answer, as pointed out, is NO: you need either
a Tremere or a FoS *in addition to* Mata.

Ciao ciao,
Emiliano

[James Coupe]

In message <0c1175da-c036-4b35...@e60g2000hsh.googlegroup

s.com>, Maegnar <Mae...@gmail.com> writes:
>> >> Mata Hari:
>> >> "You and she may play cards that require a sect
>> >> and/or clan as if she were of that required sect and/or clan."
>

>But can Mata Hari _alone_ be enough to play Treaty?

No. When you play Treaty of Laibach, it's a card that requires a clan
(in fact, two clans). So you can play it as if Mata was a member of one
of the clans. So you pick Tremere, say. Okay. Treaty of Laibach sees
Mata as a Tremere - "that required... clan" - for the purposes of
playing the card. It doesn't see her as a Setite, because she's a
Tremere.

Note: this happens even if you have Clan Impersonated Mata to the other
clan. When you play the card, it sees Mata as whatever clan you pretend
she is.

--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

[Sorrow]

>>> My impression is that Mata Hari can play the role of
>>> a vampire of either of the required clans, so that
>>> in order to play the Treaty you need Mata AND a Tremere,
>>> or Mata AND a Follower of Set. Is that correct?
>> Ian Forestal and dual-discipline cards as a precedent would suggest
>> 'correct'.
> Correct.

Huh? So you need to control both a Tremere *and* a !Tremere to play
Indoctrination? What's the point of the card, then?

Sorrow

[LSJ]

Sorrow wrote:
> Huh? So you need to control both a Tremere *and* a !Tremere to play
> Indoctrination?

No. Besides, it's an action card, so it only checks the acting minion, not other
random minions.

See also Skullduggery or Domain of Evernight.

> What's the point of the card, then?

Card text. Contrast text (not attribute bar) on Treaty (or Soul Painting, for a
parallel).

[Thrall of Arika]

The symbols on the side are pretty much just reminder flags. It's the
text on the card that counts. Reindoctrination and Derange require
only one of the two clans represented by the clan symbols, Treaty of
Laibach specially states both clans are needed. Parallels to this
exist with various Anarch and Bloodline Discipline cards versus Dual
Discipline cards. You don't need all three disciplines to play
Diversion, but you do need both disciplines to play Forced March.

Chris, Thrall of Arika