Thanks!
Guys, in Emperor Edition, if a card that includes a reaction as one of its effects is bowed, what happens if that reaction is triggered?
Sun and Moon #rules-questions
Messages from the Sun and Moon #rules-questions 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.
You can't take actions on bowed cards. Reactions are not an exception.
Unless card (ability) says "even if this card is bowed" or has Tireless designator.
Since Shougo was asking about Emperor, it would be the former, so I figured it went without saying. 🙂
The House of Tao vs Otomo Sensei: If you are using the sensei, and another player is using House of Tao, so they can search for a ring at the start, can you immediately use the sensei to remove the ring from the game?
I would argue no, because The House of Tao does it before the game has begun, so before reactions can happen.
Basically it's during the pre-game step of revealing Strongholds.
And attaching Sensei, etc.
from 20fCR - House of Tao's trait happens on step A. Although Otomo Sensei is already in play, the player controlling it doesn't have any fate cards to use its Reaction (both players only draw fate cards on step E).
[attachment: image.png]
Great, thanks!
does masateri sensi force penalty take effect before checking force for its fear effect?
[attachment: image.png]
No.
ahh i see, so if the fear is not enough to bow then the penalty just happens
Indeed. But the F penalty happens whether it bows or not, making straightening it less appealing as an example of further utility.
thank you!
"Daidoji Shimizu- Exp" by trait text cannot attach followers. If he overlays onto a Shimizu that has followers, does he keep the already attached followers?
Answers on: Daidoji Shimizu
as I understand the rules, I'd assume yes because that type of stuff is only checked on attaching, not persistently (see: a few months back I asked and was told, if kensai is copied, the 2 weapons equipped stay on the target after the copied keyword fades end-of-turn)
Correct.
Was Kensai a loaded keyword in Samurai? It's not in the main rulebook, but I thought it was
no
I'm afraid I can't remember when it became Rules-weighted for certain, but it was not rules-weighted at least until the dual SE/CE bugged sets and possible didn't become so until CE proper. You'll note that it didn't even appear until Test of the E&J Championships, and in the final single-bugged set, THW, Mirumoto Akio is a Kensai but also has the trait, "May attach two Weapons", so it didn't mean that then.
Yeah, I thought it was a change late in the edition
EDIT: Only way to be sure is to see if it's on a GotE Rulesheet.
It doesnt prove anything. I don't remember Kensai as mechanical keyword, even in GotE / IG era of Samurai. Unless i will see rules sheet of GotE starter.
Yeah, I concede it's possible we were future-proofing at that point.
Is @Jeff Williamson in this channel? He might have a GotE rulesheet handy. 😛 Or a better memory than me.
[attachment: printing_4877_1_details.png]
the samurai rulebook preview in kempy's rules folder does not mention Kensai as a keyword, so if it is so, it was added late
Touche.
i remember when Kempy sait to me that even in Samurai Kensei wasnt a keyword...
not sure if it was samurai but remember the card Mirumoto Narumi Exp version
Yeah it is odd that Narumi's basic could attach 2 Weapons but her Exp couldn't, but we established via Mirumoto Akio that being a Kensai didn't give you 2 Weapon weilding at least up through THW (which was a couple of sets after Narumi Exp in TotE&JC).
in relation to this: are abilities or traits given by a Strategy card "inherited" during any overlay (for example, Your True Colors gives the target "Battle: Fear 4")
I'm assuming no since it's as though it's added to the "printed" abilities of the card, which are not inherited by the more experienced version during the overlaying process
Permanent and other ongoing effects continue.
so my assumption is wrong? That's interesting
Darn, ya beat me too it. FYI, a player, I concur with Gilador. 😛
Also, adding an ability to a card doesn't change the printed card.
asking those types of questions because I'm trying to build something interesting-but-janky here (comboing the high proclaim values and honor gain abilities of yojimbos with Kagami sensei's "lowest honor means yojimbos ignore restrictions on attacking" and honor-loss cards, and some of the thematic are a certain type of follower, plus, to stay on theme, "Rise of Otosan Uchi" as an event)
Answers on: Rise of Otosan Uchi
"Where is the ink?"
not what I was implying, though I could've worded it better
I meant to say it's added to the card's abilities next to the printed ones, and my assumption was that since the printed ones are no inherited, the added ones would also not be inherited. And I now realize that my assumption is wrong because permanent and other ongoing effects are not added to the card, they are added to the Personality, who becomes more experienced while staying the same Personality by the overlaying procedure
Attachments, tokens and effects are transferred to the overlaying card.
gotcha. Will be an interesting deck to try out
I'm in here, let me see if I've a GotE rulesheet hanging about
If it wasn't added in GotE, then it didn't change until CE. They wouldn't have debuted it in IG1 or Death at Koten.
28 cards in IG1, no Kensai
there were three printed Kensai in DaK
[attachment: IMG_1810.jpg]
Thank you! a player ^
Interesting to know (especially once the poll ends up with an SE retro tournament)
Ah-ha, I knew it!
Samurai edition rules question - Ordered Retreat is not performed, correct?
[attachment: image.png] [attachment: printing_5780_1_details.png]
Answers on: Ordered Retreat
Correct. It has no constraints block.
if I'm playing a stronghold that won't let me gain or lose honor, can I not bow House of Disgrace for 3?
Answers on: House of Disgrace
Correct. The 3G production is conditional upon you losing the Honor because they are linked by the word "to".
same with Slave Pits, I assume?
Answers on: Slave Pits
(it's worded a little differently...)
No, it is not the same. Note the lack of the word "to".
oh, perfect.
does "Death of the Mantis Clan" rehonor dishonored battle participants?
Answers on: Death of the Mantis Clan
i think not, cause its after You crushed province
No, it does not. I'll add that the reason this is the case is also not what Nimuro said; the timing doesn't matter. It simply doesn't qualify as any of the type of effect that would ever rehonor a Personality. The rehonoring for destruction of cards in battle resolution is specifically instead of the rulebook honor gain for winning/tying.
Thought as much myself, but wanted to verify
Q: do you draw a card from an expendable card if it gets banished?
Your question is slightly unclear.
That's a good question. How are you playing it for now? My knee jerk is no you dont.
If the card is destroyed, then immediately banished right after, yes you do. If the card is only banished, not destroyed, then no.
From the CR: "EXPENDABLE # After a card with the Expendable keyword is destroyed, the player who controlled it draws a card. “Expendable” status is checked just before being destroyed."
I hope that covers either way you might have been asking.
Thanks for confirming @Brook Cunningham !
I don't. 😄
Onyx question - does paying for Discipline on a Strategy with no gold cost count for Lost Ports trait?
[attachment: image.png] [attachment: image.png]
Yes, as Discipline adds a Gold Cost to the card’s action
Onyx question - Esoteric Enigma of the Dragon and start of game timing - do you reveal Strongholds, place cards underneath the Enigma, then draw starting hands? Or draw starting hands, then place cards underneath the Enigma?
[attachment: image.png]
Answers on: Enigma
there is a vid
technically You start with full hand so You need to show 3 non uniques to opponent put them under stronghold turned back
then put your hand to the deck shuffle then draw your hand
In case you're confused on the issue by Nimuro's answer above, I think they're speaking specifically about Sun and Moon, how the program starts you with a hand, but you're supposed to put the cards under the box before drawing a hand, so you have to put it back and redraw after putting the cards under. Which, if you were asking generally, still answers your question. 🙂
Got it, so then it's the first one I listed - reveal, place, draw
There was a discussion about this a while ago. I don't remember which channel it was on.
There was a discussion a while back, unrelated to Rawtooth's question, about how the box initially didn't make you show the cards, but it does now. Is that what you're thinking of/referring to? :/ Not really related, and conversely, I don't believe what Rawtooth was asking was ever in question.
have a question.. as I was rummaging through database. sensei cards still have 2FV... so did sensei count for purpose of puting in [Ring of the Void] or not.. ..cause I was kinda shocked to learn that Sensei was an Fate card back then, and what about now?(now meaning Onyx)
Answers on: Ring of the Void
Yeah, @Brook Cunningham is correct - I searched by Engima here and in the Onyx discord, and saw the discussion about the fact that you didn't have to reveal the cards ergo a potential rules-enforcement/cheating issue, but I didn't see anything else
ill show You vid
No, Sensei are not Fate cards in Onyx or Legacy.
I remember in Ivor they got Black backs...
except for the ones that had the draft stronghold on the back 😛
😄
though maybe that was 20f
The back color was just a formatting convenience. Mechanically, Sensei are not Fate or Dynasty cards
Onyx question - Doom of the Dark Lord is fate-side only, correct?
Question 1) Did they get rid of "creating presence" and replaced it wholly with Absent?
2) What exactly is an "unresolved battlefield" if I choose to resolve a battlefield, does that qualify for an ability that would allow them to move into an unresolved battle?
The rules lawyer in me requires that I try to answer. I’m sure one of the official gurus will chime in in later. 1. Yes, creating presence was wholly replaced by Absent. 2. Any battlefield that has not gone through ‘battle resolution’ is unresolved. So yes, if you’re in the combat segment the current battlefield would always qualify as unresolved for abilities.
thank you
Yes, you draw Fate cards into your hand
Absent is a short version of "even if you don't control any unit at current battlefield".
Right, so the "replacement" isn't exactly one for one. It's just that the explicit, on-card exception to Presence got a shortened keyword for it at the same time that the implicit, Rule-based exception to Presence was removed completely.
Thank you all.
Can you use Tchickchuk's reaction on ratling nest? It just says 'a ratling'.
gut feeling says yes, especially since Oracle text on Ratling Nest gives it the Ratling keyword
Ya i knew he did followers and personalities, just didnt know if nest counted 'as a ratling'.
rules guys might say differently, but if my Simple Huts work with Silk Farms because they're farms too, the Tchickchuck should react to Ratling Nest as well
Answers on: Simple Huts, Ratling Nest
Nope, not going to say differently. You were correct. ^ a player
then I've learnt the game well over this past half-year thanks to you all
Also, as explanation, it has Ratling as keyword in Oracle because of old foo-rule, when every word in title was considered as keyword.
[attachment: image.png]
This rule was removed in Samurai Edition, when all keywords were separated, explicit, and exclusively on the keyword line (no longer derived from titles). This became partially undone with Siege: Clan War, when rules-relevant keywords were used as subtitles on the Seven Thunders, and later when the "Soul of" keyword was moved to the subtitle line in Onyx.
Titles themselves still don't count for keywords since Lotus, but some subtitles may.
Sweet, thanks
I'm guessing this is why Oracle errata exists for cards that did not get a post-SE MRP update
Oracle errata contains more stuff like this - like Repeatable for pre Lotus cards, or ROL/ROP stuff
In Lotus ability on bowed card could be played if it results in straightening itself - and such digital mrps are in Oracle as well.
The Oracle was always intended to, mostly, present card text as it would appear if printed in the current edition of the game but maintaining as much original functionality as possible. Unfortunately, it's all current only through Emperor. I never quite finished updating all texts to align with the many changes brought about by Ivory/20F.
I should have specified for keywords, but yeah, also for other cards with mechanics that weren't yet codified by keywords
Is there something that forbids Tadaka to destroy Sensei?
[attachment: printing_12646_1_details.png]
Before, no. But @Jeremy Sumerlin added destruction immunity to Sensei and Winds last month
It was part of the errata issued sometime at the beginning of December
To the Onyx datasheet, not the cards themselves
[December Updates: Card Errata, Database, Rules, and File Updates]
Sensei isn't a card at the battlefield, correct?
"0.2. To be legally targeted by an action during battle, any cards in a unit must be at the current battlefield."
So all non fortification holdings, strongholds, sensei and Winds are always at all battlefields?
No. This rule says that cards in units must be at current battlefield if you want to target them. you may target all other cards at any location.
if card allows it
Ah, in a unit. That's what I missed. Ok
So fully legally, Tadaka can blow up normal holdings
under 20f he may also destroy sensei
ah, so thats why he is also banned in obh legacy 😄
Well, and your ruling for this event.
Strikes me as odd that sensei don't have the immunity clause already
as i wrote in other channel, he probably should have "enemy card" in his text.
in onyx senseis, winds are immune
strongholds are also immune
what about cards under strongholds?
Still strikes me as odd that there wasn't an immunity clause already
Just adding "in a unit" to Tadaka fixes this whole issue
[attachment: image.png]
Eh fair
I guess both phrases are comparatively small for "card real-estate" too
it still seemes strange that, even though Tadaka cannot remove strongholds, senseis and winds from the game, he can still bow them. Like, if he defends an empty province, he can still bow the attacker's stronghold before it recruits personalities in the attackers dynasty phase
just looking through cards and all of them uses "enemy" or "opposed"
Tadaka clearly has a typo
and he is missing "enemy"
Just as a point of clarity, the Errata is not in effect during the last match of the event that it was created during (however it is moot because I'm the only one left with Big T in their deck and I disagreed with the ruling to begin with, so I wasn't going to do it)
agreed, it should have been "enemy"
I'd be happy with saying the Errata is in effect, but you said it wasn't earlier. I'm the only one it currently affects
There're no changes and erratas during tournaments.
Exactly. Which means in the next 3 games I'm technically allowed to destroy my opponents sensei, but I won't because that's very clearly a typo/oversight and not in the spirit of the game
TAKE HIS HEAD!!! Hahaha...... jk
We debated issuing a errata specifically to Tadaka when we posted our December update regarding the Sensei, but we did not want to recreate the card and lose the original art, and we believed the December update would curb the most egregious Tadaka issue (being able to destroy Sensei).
Tadaka being able to bow Strongholds is an obviously unintended side effect of the omission of "in a unit" on his card, but that effect in and of itself on an expensive unique was considered something that wasn't necessarily game breaking in and of itself. We debated issuing a 'technical errata' to Tadaka, but once it was clear our erratas and rules updates would not affect the current tournament, we deferred. It mat still happen, if his SH bowing proves too disruptive.
He can still bows and destroys rings, katas and cards under dragon stronghold. all he need is "enemy card" in his text
Regardless, even if we has issued that change in our December update, it had been stated it would not affect this event.
A Tadaka technical update is still possible, watching this event was one of the things we were using to decide that, and that remains true
He can still make such things in current Onyx env. So if you were aware of his wording you could issue errata earlier as you made for action and holdings (both were also ignored for tournament).
as people started to play their rou decks with another tournament in mind
he could also just be put on a ban list for the next Onyx tournament... alongside any other card suggestions, perhaps?
You can make a "rulebook" Errata without changing the actual asset. In person card games do that a lot
Yes, that's the current plan
They're not in play, so they can't be targeted.
I'd rather the rulebook "just remember" Errata than bans. I'd prefer to avoid bans when possible
It is was an errata, would it also affect 20F legality decks?
Rather not. But i will have in mind him and in case of another 20F tourney he will got ban or something like this. As there's not Sensei immunity in 20F.
well, he might be errata'd for the ROU tournament, but after that? depending on how long Shattered Empires will take to start, his blue bug means he's rotated out of legality anyway
On the one hand, the idea of errata going overboard means it's almost worthless to read the cards anymore, and trying to teach a new player becomes a much bigger struggle.
I'd prefer a ban to that. But if it's kept small and doesn't scale out of proportion, having a couple cards that function differently is okay.
That said, I'd almost rather see the MLPCCG approach, where cards are retrained. Which is to say, the original is banned, but a new version is made in a supplimental set.
it does depend on how much it needs to change though.
It's up to kempy how he wants to run his events. We can make a post issuing an immediate technical errata to Tadaka to add the missing "in a unit" from his effect, but of course who decides to pay attention to what we say on Onyx Lives is out of our purview 😉
Tadaka was planned to be included in a January update package as it is
But only technically adding "in a unit" that was clearly missing from his card.
not "in unit" - just "enemy"
[attachment: image.png]
I didn't quite keep up with the conversation... just saw people were talking about bans, and I had a speil about that so I figured I'd just say it.
I probably should have read a little more thoroughly.
so it should be "Negate an action from an enemy Spell or Shugenja" ?
"Bow a target enemy card."
so... without "enemy", does that imply you can bow your own cards? Or is it implying that you could bow a stronghold, or a holding or something?
scroll up
oh, weird.
I do recall Strongholds aren't considered cards. I figure that would extend to Sensei as they're like, the same kind of out-of-game kind of card as a Stronghold.
Or a "house rule"?
I need to rethink it. Ban or errata. I am more about banning than changing. I should give answer tomorrow as there are only few days left. ;/
I mean... Tadaka does seem like the kind of person who would go destroying things you're not otherwise allowed to destroy.
for this kind of effect, I think it's entirely reasonable either that Tadaka gets a minor errata that's included in a potential reprint, thus being an MRP. Or, that the targeting rules are updated such that cards can't affect cards not in the battle unless explicitly warranted.
Well, since most of the games are currently online, you could use de Yu-Gi-Oh! approach: Announce the errata and then update the picture in the set and the text in the database and launch an update of the client afterwards. That way when we check the card, it would have the new text which would keep things simple for teaching new players
It doesn't change what I would consider the obvious interpretation of its ability.
Strongholds not being cards has not been a thing for a while. They are cards but have immunity. Immunity was not extended to Sensei or Winds way back when that rules change was made, and that was the crux of the issue our update sought to deal with
I mean... not that my opinion matters at all. I
(Of course, Konami also creates a new set and reprint the card, but again, most of l5r games are online so that shouldn't be an issue, or at least not a big one)
I just don't want to modify cards that exist physically like Tadaka.
It's closed chapter.
Once again, if people choose to ban cards for their events, it's not our call. Its a tough situation, as Tadaka is not a card created by Onyx Lives, and the designer that made Tadaka originally is not part of this project, so it's a grey area for us
Oh, I see, didn't know that...
He is banned in Legacy, so he will also be probably banned in online 20F and Onyx.
That would also solve the issue as relates to events. We will still issue our planned technical errata for casual play, but like we said, who decides to listen to Onyx Lives about cards not made by our project, who can say. 🙂
the problem with bans is that they cause holes in the set that were initially supposed to have spots filled. So, losing those slots means it shifts the balance of what's possible for deck building. In some cases it might not matter, but when we're talking about a very prominent character who's supposed to be important and powerful, it can leave a hole in the roster that can be harder to fill. But... that's less of a concern with a larger card pool.
it's not a problem in this case. he is unique guy.
I mean... I might not be the person you're thinking of, but as far as I'm concerned, the people in charge of Oracle and Onyx Lives are as close as we can get to an official L5R authority.
And anyone who doesn't listen to that authority is gonna play by their own rules anyway.
At the same time, he used to be important and powerful. By this point in the storyline, he's been long dead. Same goes for the rest of the people printed in Siege: Clan War. They're just legal cards because they were printed during the Twenty Festivals portion of the Ivory arc, and with the 20f bugs
I mean, aren't they just the extension of what happened during the Coils of Madness?
Unrelated: Seppun Nakao would be an Imperial card by the Foo Rule in Ext. Jade?
Yep
Seppun Toshiken clearly is, but Nakao is an "of the Imperial".
No. He received a specific, contemporary ruling that he is not.
No, Siege: Clan War was a card-based retelling of the Second Day of Thunder
Sweet, thanks!
Which took place in 1127, iirc
I think it’s healthier in this case to errata him. He’s still stronk OP but not environmentally warping. And we have the means to communicate said change to everyone involved
That note is in the Oracle, btw. 😛
Weird, I know he was imperial at Gencon 1999
I can't tell you where I sourced that, but at the time, years ago, when I put it in the Oracle, I verified it.
Ooh. Swanky.
The War of the Sacred Seals, which is what Onyx currently is story-wise, takes place during and after 1200
Your ruling is probably right as he was nasty as a 3/4 with 3ph for 3 gold cost
Best 3/4 for a Small Farm ever!
Thanks, it is important to have technical errata for casual play as that is what people play most of the time
We have made a post issuing our suggested technical errata to Tadaka. This errata has also been added to his Oracle entry
Do you shuffle after using Temples of Gisei Toshi?
nope; not searching, just looking
in onyx, do the lion ancestor spirits count as human?
What does the card say?
all the ancestor spirit tokens say this.
[attachment: Onyx126.jpg]
i think i got my answer though
If card doesn't have Nonhuman keyword is considered Human as default
ah... i thought that spirit would give it "non human" because technically it isnt.. haha
thanks
Yes, Human is the default
can you combine Call of the Inferno's Ranged 4 Attack targeting a Personality with another Ranged attack? I think this question's been asked before, and I'm leaning towards no (something about a combined attack having to satisfy targeting conditions for each separate attack), but I wanted to check again
[attachment: RtR_104.png]
Your recollection is correct; "No" is the definite answer, for the reason you stated.
good to know. Didn't happen because Hirakou sensei made the target legal without and I didn't have anything else to stop it, so combining wasn't needed, but I figured it's better to ask since it might come up again in the tournament
but other things that raise it like steal the candles flame and unholy strike still work
Of course. But when I can potentially swing with a big base personality alongside followers, that's less of an issue
True
Or combine it with another copy of the same spell
Does he have to be in the same location than the other personality?
[attachment: Sin_titulo.jpg]
Yes.
(It took a lot of thinking to come to this conclusion, because I had to think of all the possible scenarios where both taking his action and targeting the other Personality would satisfy the Rule of Location, but I couldn't come up with any where they weren't at the same location.)
Thanks a lot!
Another question: Can I use this spell if I don't have a Samurai?
[attachment: Sin_titulo.jpg]
Yes. Targeting prefaced by "You may" is not required targeting for legally announcing/taking the action.
👍 🥳
Thanks again!
if you are building a Phoenix fire shugenja deck, send me a pm. I can share some stuff and answer any questions about propane or propane accessories. Haha
Hi. Sure, I am open to suggestions! Thanks in advance
does anyone have a digital copy of a the spanish-language version of the rules? any edition,
Hmmm I don't know if there was an official release of the rules in Spanish. Here in Venezuela the official l5r stuff was in English (I still have my Emperor and my Ivory physical decks) Perhaps in Spain they got an official Spanish-language version of the sets?
I feel like at some point, they stopped doing multiple language editions? Like around Lotus era or so, possibly? But I could be wrong.
That could be the case because if I recall it correctly, in Venezuela l5r official sets arrived when the Celestial Edition was launched
Can I get some clarification how this event plays out in the current environment? Do you play it from the province? Do you put this event into play as an open and activate its effects immediately? Does it get discarded after use?
[attachment: image.png]
You effectively play it as a Strategy, but instead of being in your hand, it's in your province.
It gets discarded after you play it.
Other than that, it's a face-up Dynasty card, which means you can discard it during your Dynasty Phase, etc.
Thanks!
Having a little trouble downloading Sun and Moon 😦
Try tech questions channel?
I ran into this and I think I had to open it in a separate window in order to start the download
Sorry, haha I didn't realize what channel I was in.
did the trick, thanks!!
Question on the Reserve personal cards. Can they come into play (battle) from any Province or just the that is being attack at the time?
any province
Btw, if you speak Spanish and have some doubts regarding the rules, pm me and I will help you
From any Province to the current battlefield. Also Reserve is Absent ability but you may Recruit only while you will be opposed.
Im actually trying to work on my spanish, and i figured it would be fun to learn the specialized vocab used for l5r
i appreciate the offer though, and am accepting recommendations for books/tv/music in spanish
Hi Chip, try to read the books of El Capitán Alatriste by Arturo Pérez- Reverte
thx!
About movies/tv and music, what genres do you like?
I just sent you a pm with my recommendations
ten4
At resolution, if a personality isn't destoryed but his unit is, do his attachments get destroyed?
yes, is there a specific interaction you're looking for clarity on?
not really, "to the bitter end" says the personality isn't destroyed at resolution
Answers on: To the Bitter End
combat resolution indicates the unit is destroyed
didnt know if his stuff was not destroyed if he wasnt
Only attachments are destroyed. Same work for Resilient guys, they survive Battle Resolutions, their attachments don't.
thats what I was asking
thanks
With Iweko's shadow, if it gets negated, does it still renew?
I believe Renew only triggers when the card enters play from a province, so if you negate the enter play effect then there’s no Renew to trigger
I recall I think a month of two back either here or in the Onyx server a discussion about whether an action is considered Favor action if it discards the favor as a cost or if it has to be keyworded Favor, meaning cards like Otomo Suikihime - exp2 's Open/Engage or the "Pay 4 Gold or discard the favor to straighten" Response granted by Imperial Assessor are not Favor actions. Does someone have a link to the discussion, or can one of the rules folk elucidate on what the thing is?
(Also, relating to this: if it's not a favor action but has a cost of discarding the Favor, such as the two mentioned cards, can I use the Crane SH Response to lobby?)
Card need to have IF as a cost to be considered as Favor. So after designator but before colon. Suikihime has discarding IF as an conditional effect. So IMHO you can't use Crane Stronghold Response as it requires discardin IF as a cost.
My understanding was that favor actions equalled actions which pitched the imperial favor\
which are now actions with the little favor marker
Both before the colon, and on suikihime's ability are both costs of discarding the favor
[attachment: image.png]
It's clearly stated here. Action is considered Favor if has IF in cost block of action. Cost block of action is after designator (Battle, Open, Engage) but before ":".
this specifically says if it is a cost it is a favor action
pitching the favor is the cost
It's an effect that requires discarding Favor. "do something to do something other" in effects isn't cost. If card says "Battle: Bow your target Personality to draw a card", bowing isnt cost.
[attachment: image.png]
where is this listed?
This is 20F Comprehensive Rules
It used to be a cost.
thanks
Page 18 of the CR for 20F
from Emperor era CR:
[attachment: image.png]
Neat
in Emperor also costs were "in constraints block", so between two colons
Neat
😉
😉
With Shinjo Nobunaga, if he defends at a battlefied with no attackers, and the opponent resolves his battle first, does he go home? or is he still considered NOT at home for his effect?
[attachment: image.png]
Answers on: Shinjo Nobunaga
This makes me think he doesn't return home until the last battle
Defenders do not return home until after the last battle is resolved
if he is straightened can they just go to every battlefield?
as it is resolved?
hypothetical situation: he blocks province 4
and... if he isn't home, and isn't at the battlefiend where the combat is... where is he?
province 1 is resolved he shoots someone and bows
if he was straightened you could have him shoot again provided you had a way to let him use his ability again - it's not repeatable
thats not what I was asking
but yeah
sorry
join me in voice, I'll explain verbally
Remote = "even if this card is not at current battlefield"
So it means he can shoot from other battlefield (at any Province), but you still need to have Presence at current battlefield.
[attachment: image.png]
Remote is here, because without it, you couldn't announce this ability, when he is on other battlefield (even if he has "not at current battlefield" in his ability).
This is a tricky one indeed...
scenario: - Attacker sends everyone to B, Nobunaga defends Province A - Attacker resolves A, Nobunaga chills out, nothing happening, he stays there - Attacker resolves B. Provided you have a defender at B to provide presence, you may use Nobunaga's ability (Remote) to shoot from A into B. Even if A's battle is resolved, Nobunaga is still there until after the final battle resolution of the phase.
If I use Akodo Kano xp3's engage on defense and the opponent sneak attacks who goes first?
In this case the Sneak Attack, as it was the most recent action played
(link)
^Search function for "Kano" in the channel
(Props to a player for being on top of it both times. 🙂 )
Danke
Is the card draw from "Destined" a rulebook effect or a card effect?
I'd say Rulebook Effect, because it's the Rulebook that defines what that keyword does.
Same as with Tactitian and the Tactical Ability.
I thought Tactician is an ability granted by the rulebook to every personality, so it is an ability of the personality and therefore a card effect?
Only to those who have "Tactician" written on them in bold.
[attachment: image.png]
[attachment: image.png]
So does this mean that if destined or tactician is printed on the card then the effects of it come from the card, not the rulebook?
I would argue that it's still a rulebook effect, because if you used an older rulebook, that keyword would be just fluff that does nothing.
Destined is Rulebook. Tactical Advantage falls under exception 2 as a granted ability. So, saam's original answer was correct, but their follow-up "supporting example" wasn't.
Hmm. Okay, fair.
Apologies, just still a little unclear for me. Eg: Kitsune Narako: If I have her in play and my opponent recruits a destined card, does she give a token or not? I am trying to understand the meaning of exception 2 above. It seems to mean that if a trait or ability is somehow copied then it is coming from the card it is copied to, is that correct? I don't understand how this relates to the printed tactician or printed destined keyword though. Do you mean that because tactician ability is NOT printed on the card then it comes from the card? Sorry but I am still quite confused by this?
No token. The draw from Destined is not a card's effect, it's an effect from the Rulebook.
Great, thanks. That is clear
Kisadas Funeral, is it reducing ONLY "non-battle " ACTIONS, or any honor gain that isn't a battle action?
Answers on: Kisada's Funeral
because it says " reduce any honor gains from non-battle actions" which honestly could be ruled either way...
Trusting your transcription of the text because I don't want to look it up separately, yes, it only reduces gains from actions that are non-battle.
so specifically ACTIONS?
or any honor gain period?
because Ive been doing any honor gains at all
Just actions.
hmmmm
and why do you read it that way?
Ok, you made me look it up. 😛 "[Players under blah blah conditions] have their Honor gains from non-Battle actions reduced by 1."
[attachment: 20240120_145410.jpg]
So, if you are asking, "their Honor gains from what?" What is the answer to "what"? "non-Battle actions".
I am not asking that
I am asking why it's being read that way and not the other
because any honor gain that isn't a "non-battle action" means all battle actions gain normal amounts of honor
and anything else doesnt
actions or otherwise
but it could just be "non-battle" versions of actions
and I am wondering why its being read one way and not the other
Yeah, I'm not following your "alternate" read of the text. The effect reduces gains. From what? From non-battle actions. I don't see how you're applying that more broadly.
ok, so anything that isn't a battle action
got it
Don't be obtuse.
im not
"non-battle" action =/= anything that isn't a Battle action
it's not
"non-battle" action
it's "non-battle action"
which does = anything that isn't a Battle action
No. There's no object noun in your interpretation.
what the hell are you talking about?
reduce = verb, from = preposition; what do they act upon? noun = action, what kind of action = non-Battle (adjective)
not helping
any honor gains from non-battle actions, it could be read anything that isn't a battle action, where is your confusion? I am asking why it would be ruled your way and not my way.
do we just say "the intent is actions"
and if so... ok I am fine with that I guess
just trying to get an understanding of why things are ruled one way and not another
Ok. So, if something says, "Give -1F to non-Shadowlands Personalities" would you argue that effect could be interpreted give -1F to every card that isn't a Shadowlands Personality, including non-Personalities? Because it seems to me that you're making the same argument for Kisada's Funeral's text. :/
ah, thats a fair comment
I would never read "-1f to non-shadowlands personalities" in that same way
but I see your point
thank you, I will start playing kisadas the right way now lol
https://tenor.com/view/michael-scott-creasing-forehead-the-office-office-absolutely-gif-11888908
The question one should be asking:
Can one use "event negate" on [kisada's funeral]?
😆
I think the card trait itself says no
But that's if its in play, event negate would negate the "dynasty" action, as its not yet in play
does it have to be in play for it's trait to be active?
and if so, that means that the dark rings can be included in decks that have their counterparts lol
Yes.
Deck construction traits are an exception.
are they?
lol
ill take your word for it
Does targeting a unit target a personality? For instance if someone uses meditating mind on the unit to bow 3, can you react with flame's protection?
[attachment: 20240120_155133.jpg]
yeah
I didnt know if targeting the unit was targeting the personality
or not
[attachment: 20240120_155305.jpg]
yes
Yes, targeting a unit is equivalent to targeting the Personality. However, we have endeavored to remove unit targeting entirely and always made such targeting explicitly a Personality. That particular card is a relic that missed clean-up/modernizing, unfortunately. Might just tech-errata it once it gets in the Oracle.
thanks
Can the Iron Empress use her ability if you don't have the favor?
Yes. Like all alternative ways to pay for discarding the Favor historically, it allows you to pay for Favor actions without the Favor, not just allow you to keep it when paying for those actions if you already do have it.
I was just curious if you had to actually have it, but just didn't discard it. Thank you.
If otomo terumoto puts on ritual honor and then you play wheels within wheels, do you get 2 or 3 for that?
Under Pearl Edition rules; can a player Counterattack after being Counterattacked?
Answers on: Counterattack
Yes.
The trait on Ritual Armor could unfortunately be worded better. I would say that it's 2 Honor, being that by the time the gain happens, the armor is gone because Terumoto is dead, and the trait increasing said gain is therefore inactive. @Alex Jones could remind me if I'm forgetting any precendent or Rule contrary to this, however. 🙂
i think you would be better off putting the armor on the spud that terumot makes, and use jimaru's court to straighten it so you get 2 honor a turn
thats the ideal scenario, but I was talking about just his base form lol
the problem is, is that he does nothing much after the spud is made.
yep
In that case, does the same apply to Commanding Favor? I mean, can I discard that event to pay the favor cost even if I don't have the Imperial favor?
Yep.
👍
What's the relevance of Otomo Terumoto?
Red herring. 😉 Just pointless spud to Seppuku for 2 Honor off Wheels.
or an extra courtier to proc off of cards that count courtiers (Draw Strength From Your Oaths, or Daidoji Shimizu's Engage)
If a card has the resilient keyword, goes to a battle, would be killed at resolution... and then somehow loses resilient, if they gained it again, would they get to use it again? or would it still check if it has been used already?
I don't have the CR handy, but I do believe Resilient has special, specific Rules that it does not "reset" if removed and re-granted. I'll edit this when I get the chance to check unless you beat me to it. (Feel free to beat me to it.)
[attachment: Screenshot_20240122-130437_Dropbox.jpg]
Thank you
If you use Ominous Revalations and don't find a card, what happens?
OR goes to the discard and the Province refills face-down normally.
Thats what I assumed, but seeing as how the card says "refill this province with the found card face-up" I was like...if you don't find one does it just... not refill? lol
Does this card recruits your dude in battle, or home?
[attachment: image.png]
I'd assume it's supposed to be into battle, like a interrupt style Reserve
The default Recruit area at any time used to be Home unless explicitly stated. As of Ivory or 20F, if a Battle is occurring, the default changes to the current battlefield.
Thanks!
just a clarification on suikihime wind, when i use her 2nd open ability on province 1 of opponent, then next turn use it on province 2 of opponent without attacking the opponent the previous turn, then i attack does he need to defend province 1 and 2? or just province 2?
[attachment: image.png]
Both.
thank you
Jade Edition Unique rule: as I'm reading it, it seems to imply if my opponent has a Unique copy of a card in play that I have a non-Unique version of in a province, I cannot bring my copy into play. Am I reading this correctly?
No. Uniques shouldn't have any bearing on/interaction with non-Uniques other than when overlaying your own cards.
So, if, such as in this example, my opponent has Doji Reju Exp2, which is unique, I can bring in the basic version of Doji Reju currently in my province. But if I had a Reju Exp2, I would not be able to bring it in?
Answers on: Doji Reju
just makign sure I'm reading this right
Right.
another Jade Edition rules question: I recall seeing it in one of the rulebooks, though I can't find it right now: playing a card such as a Terrain, which there can only be one of during a battle, will replace any previously played Terrain card, no?
nevermind, found it, I am incorrect, another card effect must remove the previous terrain first
Jade Edition only plays attachments as Limited, right?
Yup
In Jade, bringing cards into play is not even technically an action, but yeah, you may only do it normally during your own Action Phase.
Really?
you're still taking an action pass to do so, though, right?
I was just reading a text copy of the Jade Rulebook in Kempy's Dropbox, and it seems so? I could be missing something.
As you know, buying Personalities wasn't technically an action for a lot longer, but there was no action sequence in Dynasty either, until Ivory. This seems to have similar roots.
@Alex Jones Ah, ok. Attaching (and Transferring, remember that?) is an "action" for progressing the round, but it's not technically "Limited". It's just something you can only do during your own Action Phase. So, you couldn't Plans Within Plans an attachment on your opponent's turn.
have the FaS rulebook here, moving requires you to bow all exchanging Personalities as a Limited action. Once the Personalities bow, they can exchange any number of cards, following standard restrictions (spells cannot go on non-shugenja, followers won't attach to lower PH than their HR, etc.)
as I understand it, that means you could bow units Ax, By and Cz and move their attachments clockwise to Az, Bx and Cy
I think so, but honestly, in practice, it's pretty much never worth it to bow even two people to exchange their Attachments, so it was nearly never used and eventually phased out.
It's an action that you can only use during your own Action Phase? If it looks like duck, and quacks like a duck...
This sounds like an introduction to the ‘Foo’ rule 😛
Btw in tourney channel theres link to final (?) Jade rulebook as its online version of spirits war one. I will put it into dropbox later.
No Second Battle rule arrived in Diamond or Lotus?
Lotus, I think.
Early Diamond had issues with the Gunsen of Water out of the Dragon SH.
The solution in Diamond was to make it not free.
I forget exactly what the combo was, but Spearhead would do it.
Hoshi Chuichi + Gunsen of Water + Chasing Osano-Wo + 3x Spearhead = 4 provinces in one turn.
oh shit, i remember that
yes it's in Lotus
i remember playing my crappy water monk until lotus
Just a question about The Hooded Ronin, Descendant of Shinsei xpCW: Does he allow me to ignore the loyal keyword (which all the seven thunders have, except for Toturi)?
Answers on: The Hooded Ronin, Descendant of Shinsei
No.
You’ll need Togashi Yokuni for that
Thanks, much appreciated!
Thanks, I am assuming that Yokuni's trait doesn't work unless he is in play right? My scorpion deck cannot afford his honor req.
Yes, he needs to be in play
So in 20F comprehensive rulebook it says cycle is face-up cards. I know myself and others have done any cards in the starting provs, did this change or are we just lazily retaining cycling from past rules?
[attachment: image.png]
I don't believe it changed. I'd have to look at some old Border Keeps to see if they had the same stipulation, but I think it was the same in Ivory.
Me and others remember cycling any cards that were in your provs face up or down... maybe it was that way in ivory and changed in 20f
and we just... didnt notice/
?
Ok, I just checked the Border Keeps. They let you do any cards, not just face-up. Maybe you're remembering from that? I can try to scare up an Ivory Rulebook, but that may take longer if Kempty only has 20F in his dropbox. 😛
No worries
Actually, as luck would have it, I had a physical Ivory book nearby. It was only face-up then, too. So, "Cycle" as a player ability has never not been face-up only.
interesting
in CE and EE, the cycle ability from Border Keep was always face-down or face-up cards. That's when I played most, so that is in fact what I was remembering. I figured the new cycle ability would just be re-implementing the same thing, because why would it be different?
Turns out, OF COURSE it's different. AEG can't help but make decisions that are extremely unhelpful to the players.
it's so frustrating. It's such a good game for so many reasons, and then just like... so many small problems that wind up amounting to serious issues, and the solutions they come up with to fix it do little to help, and instead just make the whole thing that much more complicated.
There's a reason I wanted to work on the Rebirth Edition project when I found it. I wanted to have a chance to clean everything up, just trim back all the overcomplexities, make a game that was simple and worked. I ran into my own sets of problems because I was harkening back to a time in the game that itself was riddled with problems that I didn't see, because it had been 10 years since I played. Now that I've started playing again, and I'm seeing all those problems bubbling back to the surface.
🤦
sorry. this isn't the place for this.
it didn't need to be a response, I'm sorry about that. I just...
How is it so many other games are able to be complicated, and also be easy to figure out, without having so much nonsense you have to memorize that changes arbitrarily between every arc? How is it that happens, when L5R can't keep the same rules set for more than 2 years at a time?
Quick question: Can I destroy Flame's Protection as part of its own effect or do I need to destroy another fire spell?
[attachment: Flames_Protection.jpg]
Answers on: Flame's Protection
You can destroy itself.
Great! Thanks!
@Brook Cunningham
(link)
oh... sorry, I suppose I should have asked here...
though it's specifically asking about Onyx rules and the timing windows of Response, which I think wasn't really a thing prior to Onyx.
Answered: (link)