So, a friend and I just grabbed a couple of decks, and sat down with the QSR and Full Rules, and played our first game, when we came upon our first "go to the mountaintop" question.

So, I can only interact with cards from a certain house that I've chosen in step 2, fine, but, the question we've found is does an item/equipment/whatever it's called change the house of the creature you put it on? does it become dual housed, or is it only the original house? (for example, if I put Silent Dagger (Shadows) on Lady Maxina (Sanctum) does Lady Maxina become Shadows/Sanctum or stay Sanctum, or what?

Unless the upgrade specifically changes the house of the creature it's played on, the creature remains in the same house. So in your example, Lady Maxena is still only in house Sanctum.

You can play an upgrade on another house. That upgrade modifies the creature in the way the upgrade specifies but does not change the house of the creature. After the upgrade is applied, you continue to use the creature as normal, ignoring the house of the upgrade in all ways but applying it's benefits as dictated by the card.

So if you have Lady Maxena, she is sanctum. On your turn you call house Logos and apply Rocket Boots to her. She is still sanctum, so you cannot use her this turn. Next turn you call Sanctum, and Reap with Lady Maxena. Rocket Boots' benefit triggers and she immediately readies up after reaping.

14 hours ago, trogdorwasaman said:

So, I can only interact with cards from a certain house that I've chosen in step 2,

I think here is the misunderstanding. You can only Play or Use cards from the house you've chosen, where Use means Reap/Fight/Action. Constant effects (as printed on Upgrades) still work, destroyed effects still happen on cards outside of your chosen house, etc.

Nope, it wasn’t confusion on that, it was, in the above example I used, since I’d chosen shadow and played the silent dagger which gives the card a REAP effect of damaging a flank target, the discussion between us was whether or not I’d be able to activate it because the equipment couldn’t directly be reaped, rather the creature it was equipped to had to be. It was making sure we understood it correctly, since this is similar to mtg in many ways yet different in just as many.

thanks for the clarification everyone!

Side note, saying a creature can be Reaped is like saying a creature can be Fighted.

I’ll bite, what would you rather see it stated as grammatically, because the three sources I checked just say “reaped or reapt” is correct...

How about “the upgrade couldn’t use an action to reap on its own”

sounds better, don’t you agree?

2 hours ago, trogdorwasaman said:

I’ll bite, what would you rather see it stated as grammatically, because the three sources I checked just say “reaped or reapt” is correct...

Sorry I wasn't clear. A creature can't "be reaped" but it could have "reaped" earlier. Reaping is something a creature does, not something we do to it... 😲