Does a monk attachment such as Tattooed Wanderer impart the monk trait to non-monk characters, thus enabling High Kick?

even as an attachment I would still say it is a character card.

for ex, tattooed monk reads:

"you may play this character as an attachment with the text "attached character gains covert

to me this means it maintains being a character even though it is treated as an attachment. aka bow the attachment and make highkick awesome.

When a card is played as a different card type it loses all previous card types as per the rules reference.

So a monk character played as an attachment is no longer a character, thus, no high kick.

Edit: On a side note, this is also the reason that a character played as an attachment does not add its skill to the count during conflicts.

26 minutes ago, CenterPoint said:

even as an attachment I would still say it is a character card.

for ex, tattooed monk reads:

"you may play this character as an attachment with the text "attached character gains covert

to me this means it maintains being a character even though it is treated as an attachment. aka bow the attachment and make highkick awesome.

Edit: Shinobi'd.

(I was quoting to disagree but Toxium beat me to it).

Cheers all...at least the Dragon seal will add the Monk trait to characters, enabling High Kick activation.

3 hours ago, Toxium said:

Edit: On a side note, this is also the reason that a character played as an attachment does not add its skill to the count during conflicts.

Actually, it's not. Attachments add to the character they are attached to by virtue of having stat bonuses : +1, +2, -1 etc. Tattooed Wanderer still has 2 military skill, but because it does not have a military skill bonus , it has nothing to add to the character to which it is attached.

9 hours ago, InquisitorM said:

Actually, it's not. Attachments add to the character they are attached to by virtue of having stat bonuses : +1, +2, -1 etc. Tattooed Wanderer still has 2 military skill, but because it does not have a military skill bonus , it has nothing to add to the character to which it is attached.

Did not read my post.

If characters played as attachments still counted as chatacters, they would add their skill to the count. Conflict skill count is taken from all ready characters in that conflict. This is why attachments must (from a design perspective) add skill bonuses to thier attached chatacters as they cannot add to the count directly.

1 hour ago, Toxium said:

Did not read my post.

I did. My point stands and you said nothing to refute it.

2 hours ago, InquisitorM said:

I did. My point stands and you said nothing to refute it.

Might want to take a second before you push those glasses up and go all "Um, actually..."

This thread is about characters as attachments, not about attchment bonuses. The first reply to the OP made the incorrect statement that when played as an attachment, characters were still considered characters.

The additional point I made was that IF that were true, attachment characters would add to the skill count regardless of having a + in thier MIL or POL skill, as per the rules reference.

I've said my piece and I no longer care to explain it any more clearly. If you want to always be trollin', which seems to be the case in most of your posts, go ahead without me.

Fight, fight, fight.............

1 hour ago, Ishi Tonu said:

Fight, fight, fight.............

No fight. I wish IM all the best.

1 minute ago, Toxium said:

No fight. I wish IM all the best.

Booooo! Stupid hobbits ruins it.

That's a civilized cop out. I want a 20 page epic where two people (who essentially agree) argue until the internets weep.

No retreat, no quarter.

This the internets........land of shade and flame. If thou cannot castith either, then thou is surely doomed!

No point. When all someone wants is to point and say 'troll' it's usually projection. Not worth discussing things with those who do nothing but throw names and baseless accusations. These days it's a bit like Godwin's Law: you call troll, you lose by default.

1 hour ago, Ishi Tonu said:

Booooo! Stupid hobbits ruins it.

That's a civilized cop out. I want a 20 page epic where two people (who essentially agree) argue until the internets weep.

No retreat, no quarter.

This the internets........land of shade and flame. If thou cannot castith either, then thou is surely doomed!

I believe that your desire to see people argue is fundamentally flawed and we shall now spend 20 pages arguing if conflict on the internet can ever truly be won or if it is in fact just a futile effort to prove your own relevance in a world that cares little about your own self imposed belief in your self worth.

Also we shall duel with swords that are curved.

9 minutes ago, Klawtu said:

I believe that your desire to see people argue is fundamentally flawed and we shall now spend 20 pages arguing if conflict on the internet can ever truly be won or if it is in fact just a futile effort to prove your own relevance in a world that cares little about your own self imposed belief in your self worth.

Also we shall duel with swords that are curved.

ooo, now we can argue about curved swords vs straight swords.

6 hours ago, Waywardpaladin said:

ooo, now we can argue about curved swords vs straight swords.

See, I don't especially care about the whole curved vs straight thing, a curved blade has merits, as does a straight blade. The one thing that I've always wanted to see, however, and that history has seen fit to deny me, is a curved, double-edged blade. As far as I am aware, there are no instances of a curved blade being double-edged, as curved blades are curved for one of two reasons, and depending on which reason you are designing for you either have the edge on the inside of the curve (like the khopesh, kukri, and kopis designs that focus on choping, grabbing, trapping, and pushing) or you have the edge on the outside of the curve (like the scimitar and the curved katana designs that focus on slashing, slicing, and cutting), but you don't see any instances of a curved blade that has two edges, one on the inside and one on the outside (like the [example not found] that gets the best of both worlds!) and I find that highly disappointing!