Hay Ride with Odd Discipline

If Blood Brother A plays, let's say Govern the Unaligned, followed by Hay Ride targeting Blood Brother B who does not have Dominate, can B take the Govern action?

I'm guessing maybe not due to the "as if from your hand" text, but it seemed worth asking.

Thanks!
-Bill Troxel

Name: Hay Ride
[HttB:R/A2]
Cardtype: Action Modifier
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Sanguinus
Only usable after action resolution (successful or not).
[san] Choose a Blood Brother of the same circle as this Blood Brother. As your next action, the chosen Blood Brother can play the action card used for this action from your ash heap as if from your hand.
[SAN] As above, but this card costs 1 fewer blood.
Artist: Jeremy McHugh

Killiam wrote:

If Blood Brother A plays, let's say Govern the Unaligned, followed by Hay Ride targeting Blood Brother B who does not have Dominate, can B take the Govern action?

I'm guessing maybe not due to the "as if from your hand" text, but it seemed worth asking.

Thanks!
-Bill Troxel

Name: Hay Ride
[HttB:R/A2]
Cardtype: Action Modifier
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Sanguinus
Only usable after action resolution (successful or not).
[san] Choose a Blood Brother of the same circle as this Blood Brother. As your next action, the chosen Blood Brother can play the action card used for this action from your ash heap as if from your hand.
[SAN] As above, but this card costs 1 fewer blood.
Artist: Jeremy McHugh

Short answer; No they cannot.

Long: Rulebook in the 1.6.1 goes over the General overview of Library cards.

Requirements for Playing Cards. Each library card has symbols on the attribute bar (the marble stripe on the left side) for the card type (except for master cards), the clan or Discipline (if any) required to play the card and the cost (if any) of playing that card. Some cards will have other requirements (such as capacity or title) stated in the card text. Only a minion who meets the requirements given on a minion card can play it, while only a Methuselah who controls a ready minion who meets the requirements of a master card can play it.

Ability to ignore requirements is not in the text of Hay Ride, only "effect" is that the modified action card can be played for next action by certain minion from the ash heap as if it was played from the hand. If the minion does not fulfill the requirements to play the card, even if you have the card in hand and are able to play it from there (no effects that prevent it, say, "play only one per game etc.", that particular minion still cannot do it as they do not tick all the boxes required. Cycling Hay Ride by giving option to play cards that minion does not fulfill requirements for is perfectly fine still.

I'm aware of 1.6.1, thanks.

Yes, the "play..as if from your hand" clause is what makes me think that the vampire would have to meet the requirements. I do think that the answer to my question will be no. I said as much in my original post.

That said, general rules can be overruled by card text, and there is precedent for vampires being able to disregard requirements WITHOUT the enabling effect having to state explicitly that they can ignore requirements. So to cite 1.6.1 as an answer is to ignore my question --- unless you are a member of the rules team, in which case, please say so and I will treat your interpretation as a ruling.

One precedent that comes to mind is Alastor. It is a case of ignoring requirements due to the term "place" rather than "play", which I get is not the case for Hay Ride, but was still an ex post facto ruling at the time that required clarification not appearing in card text. It was lumped into the General Rulings vis retainers/Darius Styx (who now has clarifying text), and onto which Summon History has piggy-backed (without clarifying text). So Alastor for Tinglestripe to a vampire with no Mytherceria results in an inferior version of the equipment, no boxes needing to be checked.

Hay Ride does not read "may play”; it reads "can play”, which for some players implies a definite ability granted beyond merely the novelty of playing a card from the ash heap. Similarly, superior Lunatic Eruption does not work merely on minions who already have the ability to rush; they get that ability implicitly from the card, even though it says that they "must" rush without ever saying that they "can".

I need to make sure that if a player brings this up with me again (yes, it has happened), that I can shut down the conversation with a link to a ruling from the rules team. That’s why I am asking the question.

Killiam wrote:

I need to make sure that if a player brings this up with me again (yes, it has happened), that I can shut down the conversation with a link to a ruling from the rules team. That’s why I am asking the question.

I understand perfectly well and I personally feel rules team should weigh in on "answered" topics even with quote & "correct" reply.

This link does not lead to ruling of a current rules team (that I'm sure will weigh in here if there is need even with people answering) but it's one where Hay Ride, Govern and requirements came up.

groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/FEp2j56CupE/eg7g5FdOucEJ

I'm cutting down parts but;

Does the effect of having played a Hay Ride mean that you can ignore
requirements?

Example, lets say "Terry" playes "Govern the unaligned" at minor
(since she has dominate), action is successful and "Barry" plays "Hay
Ride", can "Barry" then play "Govern the unaligned" also? "Hay Ride"
states that the second blood brother can play the action card and
requirements are not mentioned in the card text.

Barry does not have dominate.

Requirements are stated, albeit by allusion. You may play the card as
if from your hand. Could Barry play GtU? No. Can he then use it due to
Hay Ride? No.

Above quoted answer made by someone else then LSJ.

In this case, Blooded Sand had already given a sufficient response by
the time I read it that there was no need for me to reply (until you
changed the subject, that is .

LSJ commenting about the earlier quote. Granted, it does lack the traditional "correct" so in theory some people might argue with it.

Also as a caveat, those are from 2010.

Thanks much! That link should do the trick.