Mata Hari and Hakim's Law: Leadership

So Ankha how would you word the card so that a ruling or interpretation wouldn't be necessary and have it accomplish the intentions of the ruling made by the designer?

"You and Mata Hari may play and use cards requiring any clan and / or sect as though she were that clan and / or sect. (She is counted and considered that clan and / or sect for cards you and her play.)"

AND / OR

"You and Mata Hari may play and use cards requiring any clan and / or sect as though she were that clan and / or sect. (Cards played this way count and consider her as that clan and / or sect when resolving.)"

I'm leaning toward the latter. Does this work? I used to hate reminder text (stuff in parenthesis) on Magic cards because it defeated the purpose of using keywords, and reminder text on MTG cards was only ever used for keywords. FFG demonstrated the flexibility and utility of reminder text to me by using it as... y'know... reminder text and rules clarification in anticipation of player misplays and confusion.

I was hoping to hear from Ankha since he seems to think we are outliers in the interpretation of the card (and has thoroughly mansplained the ruling). I appreciate your attempt LivesByProxy, but I think the phrase "as if" is part of the problem.

"You may play master cards ignoring clan/sect requirements, following legal targeting restrictions. Mata Hari may play cards ignoring clan/sect requirements and meet the requirements of cards she plays until the end of the action."

That may need some work, but I think you'd be hard pressed to not understand how the card works.

Is it lengthy? Sure. Cards should not have been created with short and unclear wording for the sake of length.

Shit I think I borked it because there's another fold: she is considered an Assamite for Hakim's law even though it's not a requirement.

Sometimes I wonder how VTES is supposed to function at all.

DJHedgehog wrote:

Shit I think I borked it because there's another fold: she is considered an Assamite for Hakim's law even though it's not a requirement.

Sometimes I wonder how VTES is supposed to function at all.

I'm not sure what you mean, Haqim's Law: Leadership requires an Assamite

Yomyael wrote:

I'm not sure what you mean, Haqim's Law: Leadership requires an Assamite

Cardtext

Name: Haqim's Law: Leadership
[LotN:C/PA]
Cardtype: Action
Clan: Assamite
+1 stealth action.
Each Methuselah who controls any of the oldest ready Assamites gains 2 pool.
Artist: Eric Lofgren

The effect doesn't require that you are an assamite. It gives pool to the player(s) with the oldest ready assamite. The text I created wouldn't accommodate that card because she is considered an assamite in the ruling but it isn't a requirement.