Implication of above text is that "inclusion a card in deck" is synonymous to "using a card", or that "inclusion a card in deck" is superset of "using a card".Lidless Eye, Using MELE with METW, The Cards and Decks, Deck Construction wrote:Only Ringwraith players may include minion characters, resources, and sites in their decks, while only Wizard players may include hero characters, resources, and sites in their decks.
However, there is an exception to this: a Ringwraith player may use any hero item resource card as if it were a minion item resource card. Similarly, a Wizard player may use any minion item resource card as if it were a hero item resource card. The following apply:
All normal requirements must be met to play the item.
All restrictions to movement still apply.
All bonuses and special abilities are ignored.
The item is only worth half (round up) of its normal marshalling points.
The hero version of a unique item is a manifestation of the same minion version of the item and vice versa.
I am convinced that there is no dependency between the terms.
I propose the following erratum:
"Only minion players may include minion characters, resources, and sites in their decks, while only hero players may include hero characters, resources, and sites in their decks.
However, there is an exception to this: a minion player may include any hero item resource card as if it were a minion item resource card. Similarly, a hero player may include any minion item resource card as if it were a hero item resource card. The following apply:
All normal requirements must be met to play the item.
All restrictions to movement still apply.
All bonuses and special abilities are ignored.
The item is only worth half (round up) of its normal marshalling points.
The hero version of a unique item is a manifestation of the same minion version of the item and vice versa."
The erratum also replaces occurrences of phrases "Ringwraith" with "minion" and "Wizard" with "hero".