Messages from the Oracle of the Void #rules Discord channel, copied for Oracle of the Void. Players' names are left out; the rules officials are named. Rulings are as they stood on these dates; later rulings and the rulebooks may differ.
Suppose I need help reading a card. Takeru Sensei : If my opponent uses a holding with a wealth token, I gain an honor and they may discard that single token? If there are multiple tokens on a holding, I still only gain 1 honor?
Yes
Tempting, thanks for the ruling
Um, I can only recruit one personality of each specific card name, unless they're something like Ikoma Akinari, yeah?
You can Recruit up to 3 copies of every non-Unique, non-Singular Personality at same experienced level. So you can have on the table at the same moment 3xMatsu Tayuko and 1xMatsu Ayuko exprienced.
You can Recruit any number of each non-Unique, non-Singular Personality.
However, you can generally only put 3 of each in your deck.
Thank you both 😄
Rules interaction question!
Victory through defense.
Battle/Open: Remove one to three non-Ring cards in discard piles from the game. You may target a Personality and remove one of his abilities or boldface keywords (this turn). Take an additional action.
Does this let me sac the opponent's discard?
Yeah. Doesn't say "your".
Fantastic.
Man thanks for the basically instant response to all our questions.
And that's Victory Through Deference, by the way.
@Brook Cunningham Could the wording on Broad Front be improved? Someone's asked on the Sun and Moon Discord about what happens if the defender has no units there.
CR says:
Army One or more units in a given side at a battlefield. A side with no units is not an army and has no Force total.
"if the attacking army exceeds the defending army's Force by ..."
I think that should be:
"if the attacking side exceeds the defending side's Force by ..."
Given that the CR says:
Battle Resolution In the Resolution Segment, the Attacker and Defender total their armies’ Force at the battlefield. A side with no units has zero Force.
I guess this works too:
"if the attacking Force exceeds the defending Force by ..."
Yeah; in Lotus, there was such a thing as an "empty army", but no longer. I'll adjust it to match the CR wording for Battle Resolution.
Hm. I'm not sure you need "army's".
Well, no, it's not strictly needed, but it doesn't harm anything by being there and might show the distinction by the absence of it when referring to the defence that there needn't be a defending army.
I guess.
How about just adding something like (including armies with no units)? Thereby overriding the rulebook with minimal "subtle" change that might be overlooked by a casual observer?
Anything I missed in the last few weeks? been a run of stuff over holidays, including log4j exploits, holiday itself, son ruptured his appendix, and getting covid myself, I got way behind.
I've been proclaimed King.
Can Luxurious Silk reaction pay for Invest costs?
Invest permanently increase cost of card you Recruit/Equip. Recruit/Equip is an action. So yes, LS Reaction may be used to pay cost of Recruit including Invest.
I'm assuming the Equip thing is a change from Ivory onwards rules
Yes. Thats why LS became a really good card in Legacy formats that use Ivory+ ruleset as core.
Much better than during ex Emperor, where it was reprinted last time
Has anyone tried playtesting with Clan Discount once per turn like Proclaiming? If so, what were the effects? My thoughts were just trying to get the printed gold cost on cards to be the one more often used, to confuse new players less.
Never played such way. Theres this EternaL5R legacy format that uses clan discount only for pre Ivory Personalities.
Hey guys, been a while since I last dropped by here.
Can anyone point out when we started and ended using the Fu Rule?
Been reviewing a couple of cards related to the Ratling Pack keyword and saw that they've been translated in the Oracle as separate instances of Ratling and Pack https://preview.oracleofthevoid.com/#game=l5r,#cardid=6167 - Ratling Bushi https://preview.oracleofthevoid.com/#game=l5r,#cardid=7826 - Tattered Ear Tribe https://preview.oracleofthevoid.com/#game=l5r,#cardid=1374 - Chuk'tek https://preview.oracleofthevoid.com/#game=l5r,#cardid=6174 - Ratling Pack as they only reference Ratling Pack they won't be able to interact intuitively w/ cards that have been Oracle updated to Pack
Them being separate also allows a player running Depths of the Shinomen use 4 copies of each https://preview.oracleofthevoid.com/#game=l5r,cardid=1964 - Depths of the Shinomen
Related to the source of the research above, do you guys think At'tok'tuk Sensei should be templated as Recruit for the second line referencing Ratling Followers? https://preview.oracleofthevoid.com/#game=l5r,#cardid=642 - At'tok'tuk Sensei
Paragraph 1: Keywords stopped being separable in Samurai Edition; not exactly the "Fu" rule, but I know what you meant. However, none of the separations of "Ratling" and "Pack" prevent cards that look for "Ratling Pack" from working properly; consider, if an effect wanted you to look for a "Unique Samurai", those keywords wouldn't have to be together. Paragraph 2: They always could. All the Oracle-separated "Ratling Packs" were separable in under their Rules (all pre-SE). Paragraph 3: Did you mean "Equip"? Only Personalities are Recruited. I personally think it's fine either way, but I'm curious what your reasoning is for wanting a change? Hope these answers help! Thanks!
Hi @Brook Cunningham thanks~ those definitely help! Yup! Equip will be the correct term. Was thinking that since Equip is defined in the latest CR, it being in the Oracle text should help make it less confusing with other actions that make created cards that're followers.
In line to the above w/ the "Fu" rule, since this card was printed before SE, can you shed some light why it doesn't have the Pearl keyword? https://preview.oracleofthevoid.com/#game=l5r,#cardid=2215 - Dragon Pearl
Just an oversight on the part of the Pearl; fixed now. As for allowing or disallowing cost reductions for created Ratling Followers, now that you mention it, I might have to try to look into contemporary rulings on whether the Sensei reduced those or not. 😦
@Brook Cunningham Brook, Unwavering Assault is missing "Absent" - is this because you never got around to it, or is there's a rules reason I'm missing?
Yeah, I've mentioned on occasion to many interested parties that a good deal of the Oracle is still Emperor formatting; I didn't quite finish the full Ivory/20F conversion. You can tell, for example, because Unwavering still had a targeting/constraints block. Fixed that one now since you made a stink, though. 😉 Maybe someday I'll get it all done? Unfortunately, for most of the year I was unemployed, from 2020-2021, the Oracle wasn't editable. 😛
Ugh
I don't like that you've got rid of the constraints block.
It wasn't me. It was Ivory/20F. 😛
It was a mistake.
I see no reason to perpetuate it.
Well, it unfortunately gels with the final CR document. Maybe when Kiyoteru starts hosting the CR/Legacy supplement on the Oracle itself (it's on his long to-do list), we can settle on a "Final/Legacy" templating structure, and edit one or both of those documents accordingly?
Yeah
agreed.