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.
I have a question! The new Naga, Anahita, has a response to give you gold when an action recruits a nonhuman. The way the Kitsune cards are now worded, they use a response to create and recruit their spirit tokens. As you cannot do a response to a response, do these cards not interact? Or does the response on Kitsune personalities add on to the action in question so you could get the gold?
the Response is the action which Recruits the Spirit, so you are correct that it cannot be Responded to
more commonly you would use it when Recruiting a Naga Personality as a Dynasty action
Ya. Still has a place in the deck, just a little less perfect than I thought.
Question. When an action has two clauses in it, seperated by a full stop/period, and the second effect is not reliant on the first clause resolving successfully, can you use the action if the first clause does not have a valid target?
Ex- Asako Kensaku. Can you get the 1 honor for not assigning if you don't have a Temple?
Hm. Not in the Oracle. What's the printed wording?
I cant seem to add a picture
"Air Open, Bow: Give your target Temple Holding +1GP. Before the turn ends, gain 1 Honor if you assigned no Personalities to battlefields during it."
If you have no Temples in play to target, I would argue that you can't take the action because it would be in bad faith.
I dunno how people have wrecked the rules for the more recent arcs, though. That may be perfectly legal.
thats the question at heart. the second effect is in good faith, the first is not.
Well, it is genuinely interesting. Because... what if you reversed the order of the printed sentences? Then I'd argue that it's fine, as there no logical "and" between the two effects/sentences.
It wasn't hyper relevant for the game we just played, but its still something we need to ask because that can really hurt if luck just really screws a deck over
As saaam asserted, the targeting is required, so you can't take the action without a Temple to target.
That's how we played it. But yeah. Rng can really hurt.
Saaam's not correct about reversing the sentence order, though. All targeting of an action is required unless it is explicitly optional or delayed.
Cool, good to know!
couple questions from a big deck game last night: If Otaku is bowed by an action, can she use her react to bow another opposing card?
Similarly: If my opponent destroys an attachment with Otaku, do I have to destroy an attachment? Or can I destroy a card? (it reads like if they destroy any card I can destroy any card? But that seems weirdly powerful.)
No. You can't take actions on bowed cards.
No, you don't have to destroy an attachment; any enemy card.
alright. I played this wrong for sure. We weren't entirely certain, because Otaku was the one being bowed. I guess it makes sense though, because the react is after. At which point she can't perform the action.
did fear always affect personalities without followers? or was that later?
Later, IIRC.
Fear was pretty useless for a while.
Old Fear used to bow every Follower equal to its power or under in the unit, but never affected Personalities (unless combo'd with another card like "The Face of Fear"). Also, all Undead were immune to Fear per the Rulebook, and all Naga were immune from each of their Strongholds.
"Behold, I have Fear everywhere!" "And I only have Personalities." "...oh."
YJA ran Followers and were immune to Fear. Naga ran Followers... and were also immune to Fear.
I rather liked Fear's old "flavor", that it was essentially the Fear of death, and so it only affected little guys (Followers), not big strong Personalties (and, as I edited in above, it didn't affect you if you were already dead or had a rebirth thing built into your very snakey existence).
I fully agree, as a flavour thing... it was good, and situationally useful.
Or you didn't think anything of it and via another card effect it all of a sudden bowed your Personality(ies), and swung the battle, in a very "real life" kind of thing where a leader would turn into a coward in a battle.
Haha. Yeah, "The Face of Fear"; it's one thing to not fear those Skeletal Archers way over there, it's another thing to have it RIGHT IN YO FACE! 😄
I find that the OG game had a lot of... storytelling in the game play, in that so many behaviours and effects made sense mapping to real world behaviours. Even if you count some Shugenja shenaningans. But more like the phases of the game representing the seasons, so Events Phase -> Spring, Limited -> Summer, Battle -> Autumn, Dynasty -> Winter.
Guys, let's say I declare a Range 2 Attack and target a personality with force of 4. My opponent doesn't do anything, then I interrupt the range attack with a strategy to increase its force by 2. The opponent can now interrupt again to decrease the force or to use something to negate the action? If he can, let's say he decreases the force by 2. Can I interrupt again to increase the force again?
Yes and yes. Any amount of interrupts can be taken to an action, as long as you alternate, during the interrupt window
Got it, thanks!
are PS modifiers from fortifications bonuses? and what about PS modifiers from terains? Thanks for your help.
You mean passive traits like "This Province has +X strength?". So yes, it's a bonus.
Also as example this Terrain also provides bonus.
so modifiers only come from Items, yes?
No. Senseis also have modifiers to Province Strength.
-/+ PS on Sensei is a Modifier, not bonus or penalty
got it, thanks!
Question. Does the "Your stronghold has no abilities" text from Senseis remove stuff like "Your Lion Clan personalities have +1F while attacking"? Or only the actions?
Only the actions, passive effects on cards are generally called "traits" and are not affected by things that consider "abilities"
So, the +1F to Lion Clan personalities stays. Same goes for traits on other card types (Clash of Blades for example would remove an ability on a personality, but not their traits)
Cool, thanks
How does Kachiko thunder, who lets you win via honor victory, interact with cards that force you to give up the ability to win via honor
If I recall correctly, and I don't have the CR handy, it's like a switch turning on and off. The last change to can/can't takes precedence. Like "who goes first" in Battles.
so if kachiko comes out second, she takes precedence
I'm fairly certain that's correct, both contemporary to her and under current Rules. If two continuous effects contradict, the most recent one applied is the one in effect.
well then look out for my no-one-can-win kachiko honor deck with all the events that turn off victory conditions
"Looking forward to it." -- Dashmar
omg, i've got it
kachiko, dashmar, asako sagoten off The Yoritomo Alliance box
I'm a little surprised there isn't a "can't " clause. Most non-l5r modern rulesets have a rule where "can't " takes superior rules positioning over "can"
Hi. Can I target myself so I can search my own fate deck for a follower?
Yep. You can cut it either way.
Awesome! Thanks!!
Question: Equipping a spell would be considerer an "action" capable of triggering the reaction of this holding?
Another question: Is there a way in Sun and Moon to set the attack phase like it was back in Emperor? I mean: assigning infantry then cavalry, instead of assigning attackers and defenders
If I recall correctly, in Emperor, Equipping was not yet considered an action by itself, so no. It is however an action in Legacy and would apply there
As for your second question, no, although you could simply use the Assign Attackers phase for Infantry and the Assign Defenders phase for Cavalry (the application doesn't actively monitor that anyway, you could even theoretically never click the Sun icon to pass the turn and play a full game)
In Emperor while attaching you was paying for attachment not for action. Starting with Ivory Equip's costs is a cost of attachment. Thats why LS was mediocre Holding in Emperor while in Legacy that is based on Ivory (Modern or Obsidian Hand) its really powerful card.
Thanks!!!
Yup, LS in Emperor is a bad choice
Now, two scenarios for this one: 1) I am paying for a spells that costs 4 gold... i use that holding and it produce 4 gold, right? 2) I am paying for a spell that costs 7 gold, can I use that holding (assuming it would produce 4 gold) along with silver mine for the remaining 3 gold?
Not bad, per se, if you have actions that cost Gold themselves. Just not an auto-include. 😛
Yes? Why wouldn't you be able to? :/
Whoa, wait wait.
Deliberations, could be a nice option for a combo, but most of my strategies in emperor don't require gold...
It produces 4 for attachments, not 5.
Yup. 4, not 5, my mistake
So, in your examples, if the Spells cost 4 and 7, yes. I don't see why you'd doubt.
Yup, fixed
I assumed that was the case, but the last part of the text made me think for a brief moment that perhaps that holding should be used alone
At first I couldn't think of a scenario where you could pay for more than one attachment with a single holding in Emperor, but then I realized that that holding is also legal in Onyx... however, in the ened I wanted to double-check
Ah, you showed the Onyx image. It's functionally mostly the same, but the EE version has two separate traits, the second of which reduces the attachment cost by 4, so it functions a little differently. Like, if you have something on it that increases the Holding's overall GP in EE, it won't interact with the 4 GC reduction for attachments.
What happens if you make the personality, then blank the text and unbow it?
The ongoing effect is still present. Removing the text that started it doesn't undo it.
So, blank or not, when the Holding unbows, the Personality is gone.
@Brook Cunningham Can i cancel this action with [Iweko's Shadow]?
or it is not a favor action?
or it is Favor action bbecause it favor cost is in costs?
Actions with a Favor cost are inherently Favor. Printing the keyword would just be redundant.
If it's before the colon (the ":" for the non-native-English speakers), it's a Favor action. If it's after (Such as one of the two options for the action on Otomo Suikihime - exp 2), it's not a Favor action
(Also, if the text before the colon is "X or [Favor]", it's only a Favor action if you pay that cost. If you pay the other alternate cost, it's not.)
Or the Response granted to your opponent by the use of Imperial Assessor's Battle action (Response: Pay 4GC or discard Favor to straigthen the target bowed by this action). This is also not a Favor action even if your opponent discards the Favor for the Response)
My brain isnt working right now... with this card, it has the top, telling you to target an opposing dishonored personality... and then there is the bottom that says choose a player... if there isn't a target that is viable for the top portion, this can't be played, right?
Yeah, just ignore italicized color-text. All targets of an action are required to take it in the first place, unless they say "you may" or are delayed.
I mostly ignore the italicized text...unless I want to learn some more flavory stuff... lol. But yeah, the fact it had a target and a choose made me go... hmmmm
lol
choose =/= target
and you must have legal > target < while announcing action.
random rules question. all cards attached to a personality make up their unit, at resolution all cards in the unit bow unless the personality has conq as i remeber someone somwehere telling me items did not bow from battle resolution? this is for onyx and ShE for clarification in case previous editions had different rulings
Items bow. No change.
cool cool, thought so but wanted to check, might have just been someone lying to me to get one over on me in a casual event
If I destroy Koutetsu as an Open, can I use his Interrupt, or does it have to be as a Battle action (with all the location-based restrictions it implies)?
IMHO you may use Interrupt to Open action that destroys him, but then you can't announce additional granted ability for Melee as Melee itself requires targeting card in army.
"Target a Follower or a Personality without Followers in the current enemy army. If its Force is equal to or less than X, destroy it.”
got it, wasn't entirely sure, but now I see the bit about "army", and you can't have an army without a battle
if you kill the berserker/personality that this targeted to activate it, does the effect still remain in play?
for example, opponent uses shout on Zaiberu and targets tsukimi, i somehow kill zaiberu. does the shout still affect tsukimi
I'm still new so take this with a pinch of salt but my read on this is that the first part is cost to play it, not attaching it to the unit.
So the effect would still be in play.
Someone correct me if I am wrong though!
Yes. Maskerade was mostly right; while not technically a "cost", the targeting of your guy is just a requirement of taking the action. The ongoing effect remaining active is not dependent upon them remaining in play, or it would explicitly say so.
Who loses the honor for the open ability?
the person who plays the card
if it were the target's controller, it would use that phrase
Hello guys, question with Daigotsu Atsushi and the card Hubris. Would Hubris negate the effect of Atsushi of destroying a personality during the duel?
No. Hubris negates effects of winning and Atsushi adds effects of losing.
Does she gain 1F every time an air or fire action resolves at her battlefield? No limits or it happens only once per battle/turn? If the action is from an opponent's card her trait also triggers?
Every time since it's a trait, fading after Dynasty step, and yes, from either the controller or an opponent
👍
Thanks
How exactly how is this trait supposed to work?
You can't attach it during a combat, and you can't interrupt interrupts right?
golden rule of card games -> cards's text always trumps rulebook
that leaves it to jugde interpretation
you may equip this spell as interrupt to any action. even during battle.
unfortunately
golden rule of card games and actual explicit rule of L5R
Ok, cool. It needs to be reworded.\
But. interrupting a ranged attack, to then interrupt with the ability typically can't be done right? no interrupting interrupts?
Not following the problem you have with it?
Its not worded within the confines of the rules and doesn't use text to indicate that
which forced me to ask for a ruling
That's not what's happening. You Interrupt the RA to Equip, you Interrupt the RA with the ability you now have on your next Interrupt opportunity (after your opponent).
It lets you take the “Equip” action as an Interrupt, as opposed to an Open
and during battle
which is the important part
Interrupts are not exclusive to Battle
nobody said they were
was about to say what Macbeth did, you're not interrupting an interrupt, you're using 2 consecutive interrupts, first to equip the spell, then the spell itself
They ranged attack, you then have to interrupt the ranged attack with the interrupt of attaching, then interrupt the ranged attack with the ability
double interrupts to the same card
effect
Yes. That's totally legal. Interrupts go back and forth until no one has any normally.
you can theoretically play an infinite amount of interrupts, after all
Ok I was told months ago you couldn't interrupt interrupts
you can't
You can’t
Now yall just playin
Im done
interrupts resolve in order
you're not interrupting an interrupt, you're interrupting the RA twice
it's not like the MTG stack
where you counterspell the counterspell and so on
The second Interrupt is not being used on an Interrupt, it’s being used on the original action
Nah I am done, ya'll clowining today.
https://tenor.com/view/bonjour-hello-clowns-party-hi-there-gif-17022974
I'm sorry you feel that way. We're earnestly trying to explain it as best we can.
https://tenor.com/view/muppets-clown-clowns-send-in-the-clowns-wave-gif-23230420
You equip the spell as an interrupt whenever. That's one interrupt. Then you play a second interrupt to use the Earth Interrupt action
- player A announces Battle: Ranged Attack Interrupt window: - player A: pass Interrupt - player B: equips spell as Interrupt (thanks to its trait) - player A: pass Interrupt - player B: interrupt from spell that's in play now
https://tenor.com/view/%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%83%D0%BD-gif-13031758617125701370
There's no Interrupt to Interrupt here 🙂
https://tenor.com/view/mr-rogers-nightmare-clown-gif-5401671
Side note, I get it, just having some fun. The trait does not give me an indication of what it interrupts, and I don't see the "golden rule" in the 20F rulebook. Doesnt an interrupt typically tell you what it's interrupting?
Yes card text trumps rules
always has
but this isn't trumping anything
No, Interrupts don't have "triggers" that tell you what they Interrupt like Reactions did. You can Interrupt anything, generally, unless there's an "If" clause restricting it.
"Cards vs. rules: If the text of any card contradicts these Comprehensive Rules, follow the card text, not the rules."
Spells trait says
"You may Equip this Spell as Interrupt"
i'd also say it's a mild case of "reading the card explains the card". Usually Interrupts have conditions to play them (for instance, reducing an RA by 2 requires an RA), but if they don't, you can play them whenever you want during any Interrupt step
I mean, you could still play an Interrupt that says "Give one of the action's RAs -2 str" to an action without an RA. It just wouldn't do anything.
Technically, yes, but since it wouldn't do anything, the action having an RA is an implied condition. You could call it a logical condition instead of a legal condition
this was a question about Interrupt that could be played at any moment, but could make useless result if played as interrupt to Open ability
Yeah, I'd hesitate to call it a condition. That's an actual game term meaning whether you can or can't do something, not just if you "probably shouldn't". 😛
https://tenor.com/view/clown-clown-meme-clown-makeup-tiktok-meme-gif-5027002171813147364
Cardinal Rule... Kempy >>>> Cards/Rulebook: you never win a ruling contest against Kempy...
btw in Ivory (before 20F) identical trait allowed to protect against cards targeting card "without attachments" because in Ivory targeting wasnt required while announcing action.
they changed it in 20F
Now Kempy is really being a clown, you don't have to force yourself in, the horse is already dead.
https://tenor.com/view/the-office-jim-halpert-thats-harsh-harsh-beach-games-gif-13923389
https://tenor.com/view/happy-dance-excited-crazy-tutu-gif-23699471
next time rtfm 😄
m?
whats m?
manual
I did
well
to an extent
I as someone with ADHD have reading issues, so I type "control f" then search for the specific thing I am needing.
I didn't see what I needed so I asked.
no worries, I don't have reading issues and sometimes I completely blank on how a card would work, even (and sometimes especially) when "reading the card explains the card"
Yeah, that to me is why it's so frustrating with these condescending ass remarks, if I am playing a game and someone tells me a ruling, I assume they are right, and then get these snide responses... my bad for trusting that people smarter than me know the rules lol
downside of text, speaking for myself I didn't mean to come off as condescending (although your clownposting didn't help much either, in all due fairness)
I did say I was joking about, so I clarified lol
also, I as a person tend to add "lol" to thinks intended to show light hearted funniness, I know some people take it negatively.
probably best to move this now (link) , but yes, downside of text means sometimes a "lol" comes off as derision instead of light-heartedness
Is there a possibility to write this findings, explanation on how a certain card works or interaction with 2 cards, somewhere down for everyone to look them up, e.g., at oracleofthevoid or in another kind of database where you can look it up by searching the card ? Or is it enough for you to consider this channel the "database" to look it up ? I know from Star Trek CCG 1E where they have a "Rules Resources" attachment called "Dilemma Resolution Guide" where it is explained how every Dilemma card works. That's the idea behind my question. So far, I write everything down for myself that i encounter here but i thing especially for new player having such a summary of FaQ on cards would be very helpful.
In the past we had such files. Some of them are in Dropbox/Various folder. Then they were replaced by AEG forum where Rules Junta guys like @Brook Cunningham or @Alex Jones were answering. Part of this forum is also in DropBox. Then AEG sold game and forum was first blocked then removed. Nowadays nobody is collecting such rulings for Onyx but they are searchable eg in this subchannel.
Also some answer may vary depends on format. Same card may work differently in some old edition environment, current Onyx or in any Legacy format.
I have a doubt... In Onyx you assign attackers and defenders instead of Infantry and Cavalry, right? Now, If I declare and attack and all my units are Cavalry... do I have to assign attackers? Or I can just target one or more provinces without assigning any unit to then use the cavalry engage afterward...
Cavalry is: Absent Engage: Target your unbowed Personality in a Cavalry unit at any location. Move it to the current battlefield.
During Attack Phase battles start at every Province in order made by attacker.
At any battle during Engage Segment you may anounce Cavalry Engage (but only once per turn) and move ONE of your Cavalry unit from anywhere there.
I still don't get it... let's say no attackers were assigned and no defenders were assigned... what happens then? No province has been targeted so there are no battlefields to resolve, right? Or the attacker can still target any battlefield to resolve a battle there?
There's no such thing like "targeting battlefield"
When you announce Attack Phase (that is optional), you must choose a province and battle start there. Then another and another.
Even if you didnt assign anyone.
Declaring an attack creates battlefields at all the Defender's Provinces no matter what.
Ahhh ok, that clarifies my doubt.. so you don't need to assign anybody and then you just have to chose a battlefield to resolve and then use the cavalry engage, right?
Yes
Also you may even assign Cavalry Unit 1 at Province A, but start a battle at Province D first and then move your Unit 1 there during Engage Segment.
As every batle has its own Engage Segment.
Now, a follow-up question... let's say you attempt to use the cavalry engage and it is negated with meditating mind... you can still try to use the cavalry engage to assign another unit in that battlefield?
No
Cavalry Engage is rulebook OPT (once per turn) ability.
I see. So you can only assign one unit per battlefield per turn with the engage ability??
No. One unit PER TURN.
What??
And it's not "assign", it's movement. So any action that negates movement may also stop it.
Ok, sorry, but I need to double check this: let's say I have 5 cavalry units... I didn't assign attackers... I choose a province, I use my cavalry engage and move 1 unit there... the other 4 units cannot move in that turn? Assuming you don't have other ways (strategies, etc) to move them
" the other 4 units cannot move in that turn? " - exactly.
😱
Unicorn has its own additional Cavalry Engage movement from Stronghold.
Also Naval is once per turn.
Welcome to Ivory-and-later Cavalry. 🙂
I knew cavalry had been nerfed, but I hadn't realized how nerfed it had gotten...
and Naval too...
Thanks goodness I have never relied on Cavalry or Naval
@Brook Cunningham @kempy_nezumi In Ivory and 20F rulebooks it doesn't say that Cavalry and Naval are Once per turn... in Onyx Rules it does say that Cavalry is once per turn, but it doesn't mention naval... I would like to know the source since I am teaching some friends to play
If there's no "any times per turn" or Repeatable it's once per turn as default.
Like for any other ability.
Got it, thanks!
Eg. Equip is Repeatable Open ability and Recruit is Repeatable Dynasty one. So you may use them any times per turn.
Awesome, I'll use those as reference
Hmm, if there's no Naval in Onyx Rulesheet so maybe there's no Naval in Onyx anymore? 🤔
I've understood Onyx datasheet to be supplemental to 20F CR.
Good. Burn all the kobune
I am trying to construct a full Onyx/SE CR before GenCon hopefully.
Well, there are naval personalities in ShE
There are Enlightened Personalities in Samurai even if this keyword was dead one during this edition. 😉
😮
And so on.
hell there's an Enlightened Personality in Onyx
Question with Mountain of the phoenix and Yaheiko Sensei. Would Yaheiko be able to negate the destruction from the terrain? its a battle action in play but I think its still a battle action.
No. It's a trait of the Terrain. The only effets of the action are to destroy an existing Terrain and put MotP in play.
that makes sense to me
Quick question. Can you play Imperial Gift if you have no items in your deck?
yes, it can show up after you have all your items in hand of discard pile as well
im happy with that, but it feels a little odd taking an action I know i can't complete
in lotus is attaching something considered resolving an action? in regards to daigotsu's trait
Yes, attaching cards is a Limited action in the Lotus rulebook. I am not sure if it's perfomed, though. I don't have the Rulebook handy. Check the attaching action and definition of performing there.
Effects are fine to fail. You just need to worry about targeting and restictions/conditions.
ok, its just been a while.... lol
Want to double-check this: Can I target the same personality in both parts? (assuming they are a monk or shugenja of course)
Yes
👍
question with the card Bracing Ground. A couple of personalities had a foce penalty, so I play Bracing ground. Then the terrain is destroyed. Are the penalties still applied?
The penalties never stopped being applied. The minimum takes effect (and, effectively, precedence) while the terrain is in play, and stops when it's gone.
got it, thanks
Under emperor editions rules. In emperor there is no engage phase yet, so the card Temple Grounds only has a battle action, the engage would not apply is what I think, can someone confirm?
I believe Engage was introduced in late Emperor. Note there are cards from dual bugged sets (Coils, Aftermath, Gates of Chaos) that have exclusively Engage actions/interactions.
Follow-up question: That terrain basically negates absent actions, right?
but an engage phase was added in the rulebook? or just cards with engage in preparation for ivory?
I believe it was added to the online Comprehensive Rules. They didn't add cards for 3 sets that did nothing. Check Kempy's Google Drive link pinned in the completed Emperor simulation tournament channel; I bet it's there.
As long as you, the person who played the Terrain, don't control a Cavalry unit there, yes, any action taken Absently is negated; though, not to say an action with the Absent keyword would be negated if its player actually has someone at the Terrain's battlefield, if you follow me?
Sure, I get it. Thanks!
I believe that in Emperor, Engage was triggered in the same window as "Reaction upon engaging"
I found it somewhere before and cannot for the life of me cannot find it at all now. where would we find the clarification about how honesty works? pretty sure it is a rulebook ability to repeatable battle to turn an honesty card in your hand face up and then when you play the honesty card in the future you gain the honesty bonus written on the card if there is one?
Yes, that's right. It's in the Onyx Datasheet.
yeah in the rulebook you can find this. but of course there is nothing about an engage keyword, I searched from the begining of the emperor thread, but couldnt find the online comprehensive Rules, @kempy_nezumi could you put the link of the comprehensive rules, or if you can help confirm if an engage action can be played before a battle starts? is there any rule for engage actions in emperor or it can be ignored in emperor?
Again, I'm almost sure you don't ignore like ~15 different cards spanning 3 sets (search Oracle for Text: Engage, Legality: Emperor, and you'll see several that use it exclusively). It wasn't the Emperor channel thread, but the "emperor-2023-12" completed tournament thread that has a link to his Google drive, where he has a copy of the Rulebook but also a folder with Comprehensive CE/EE Rules. My problem, I can't figure out how to open the contents of that folder? Maybe you can? https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1AR9prjH9KBk4XcyaoSwpBO_BzlCQDIE4 If not, maybe @kempy_nezumi can help.
yeah found it and download it, I opened something like a website and trying to figure it out where to find this. Just to point that they do include useless keywords, they introduced duelist in gold and it didnt do anything until Lotus
The first Duelist was in Scorpion Clan Coup, actually. 😉 But those cards I mentioned to search clearly use it with mechanical intent.
From latest online Emperor Comprehensive Rules:
As you see, Interrupt and Engage on dual-bugged expansions worked differently in late Emperor as they work in Ivory.
It's just offline version of CR page i made with winhttrack years ago. You must download whole archive, unzip folder and just open index.html with any browser app like opera, edge etc.
And about dual-bugged Events:
You say "differently", whereas I'd say "effectively the same"; tomato, toMAHto. 😉 But thanks very much for pulling out those clarifications! 🙂
Ok, I want to double-check this. Can I target an already bowed personality or follower for Man the Walls!? and Can I target an already straighten personality for Heart of Honor?
1) no, because there's "bow to do something" in effects 2) yes
Is that because "bowing" is considered a cost, while "straightening" is not?
No, bowing in effects is not a cost. But this 1st action will not produce effects, becasue effect is conditional (bow to...)
So maybe i was wrong - you may announce this action, but it will not produce effects if you wont bow Personality.
That is more accurate to say, yes.
Got it. Thanks
So, regarding Heart of Honor since the straightening part is separated of the rest by a period (.) it doesn't matter if you manage to straighten the personality or not, right? Just attempting to do it would be enough
yeah
ability should be worded "straighten your target bowed Personality" to create such restriction. now you may target it in any state
Cool, thanks again!!
if you have no presence, can iweko's shadow cancel kano's alliance engage?
No, the Interrupt does not have Absent
I am double checking this . Does [Shinsei's Heart] counting as a ring for [Kisada's Funeral] cause it is meanwhile action?
No.
hmm HA! a player
Er, why? Kisada's funeral only checks during actions, during which Shinsei's heart has the Ring keyword
Jim was talking that Kisada's Funeral reducing actions, and Shinsei's Heart during actions is counting as a ring, But if You say so it will count as a Ring only for actions that call for a Rings
or uses/counts Rings
There is a similar interaction here with Shinsei's Heart and Shiba Hiroyuki- if it isn't a Ring duriung the action, then Hiroyuki does not get the +1 (assuming you gave the temple an Element).
The issue I have is that if that is not how the holding works, then its practically useless
It's a Ring for actions, meaning actions that count, target, bow or straighten a Ring can use this holding. Kisada's Funeral checks Ring presence as part of its trait, therefore not as an action
It says "for" actions, not during them. The Ring is checked by the funerals continuous effect, not the action itself.
It works for example for this lil guy
I fail to see the distinction.
Lets take Wheels within Wheels as our example action here- when this action is played Kisada's funeral checks to see if I have a Ring. During this check, because an action is being played, the Temple should count as a Ring.
this should be mechanically be because if it does not gain the Ring keyword during actions, then it makes all of the actions that say target a Ring work very oddly with it because technically it doesn't have the Ring keyword and thus fail the Good Faith targeting rule
but common sense says that they still target it.
so what we are left with is a handful of things it technically works for, and a bunch of things it doesnt
yeah as I was checking there are few cards that calls specificaly for a Rings
interesting one is Ishiken Sanctum ;P
I'm not arguing that they dont exist, what I'm saying is that it works for some but not others and you just gotta know which is which. I find this...not great.
It should work for all, or none
as I understood it it only works if an Action calls/counts/checks Rings specifically
See my above statement
and I dont understand it cause
just seen this 😮 SANDAYU JOINED THE DRAGON!!!
You know. it just needs state that it do sth with rings and during that action holding counts as a ring
now i need to see if other monksai joined the dragon
there are I think at last few of thouse but thats are Rule chan so this discusion there will not be welcome
the issue I have is that you have decided that Hiroyuki, who checks for rings, does not get the +1 for this temple, thus it works for some but not all
It does work for all actions that look at Rings, counting, targeting, bowing or straightening.
The penalty applied by Kisada's Funeral is not caused by an action, its caused by the trait.
Therefore, since it's not an action checking for Rings, Shinsei's Heart is not a Ring
I get the ruling. It still feels arbitrary. It also means that Honor decks still have very little they can do about Kisada's Funeral.
Phoneposting, so can't see Hiroyuki's card. That being said, if the +1 is from his trait, then it does not check for rings as an action, therefore is consistent with the ruling on Kisada's Funeral
Yeah, I'm sorry you feel it's confusing or arbitrary, but it pretty much boils down to "does the text within the action itself say Ring"? If yes, the Holding counts as one. Otherwise, no.
the core difference is Hiroyuki check specifically as part of an action but Kisada's funeral does not. the trait effectively checks, do you have a ring? is this a non battle action yes, then -1 honor from the action if it gives you honor. the Trait does not add into the action but instead checks those two boxes and then if the criteria are met then it triggers otherwise it does nothing.
at least that is my logic behind it
It's not arbitrary at all. Reading the card explains the card. It counts as a ring for actions. Traits are not actions
TBH i'm probably up in arms about this because Honor feels like its holding on by a thread right now.
and this was one of my core defenses against a card that will just shut my deck down
better to know how this works now not to be informed during the Tourney...
agreed
Seeing Hiroyuki now, that counts as an action that checks for Rings, therefore it would include Shinsei's Heart (if you did not use its Open previously, though, it doesn't have an element keyword, which then adds 0 to the count, since Hiroyuki checks element keywords)
This is not a helpful argument, becuase my understanding was that the trait causes the actions to look for Rings. While this is incorrect, it is an example of how two people can read something differently, and why the disagreement came about in the first place
Thats also why im accepting the ruling, but putting my own 2 cents in
Keep in mind that traits work different in comparison with Open/Limited/Battle/Engage actions... that's why, for example, if as a result of a duel you negate a personality's abilities, that cannot nagate the trait of that personality
I'm not finding the ruling for this, though, in neither this nor the Onyx server. Or did you mean during the match?
That was me misunderstanding the conversation
I do apologize, everyone. I've been under more stress the past few weeks than I've realized, and it seems to have gotten to me. @Brook Cunningham a player a player thank you for setting me straight on this
We've all been there, some way or another. And I apologise in turn if I at a certain point came off as condescending, it was not my intention
Under Lotus Rules, using the dragon stronghold Shiro kitsuki
can the player bring one of his face down personalities under his provinces if you dont have the honor requirement?
the stronghold only says ignoring costs but not if he can ignore honor requirements
I'm pretty sure not, for the reason you give; it doesn't say you can ignore it. I can double-check the Lotus Rulebook to be sure, though.
thanks
Yeah, there's no distinction made about when/how you bring a Personality into play in it; you always have to meet their HR when doing so, unless it's explicitly waived.
is there a way to create tokens in game ? i know double right click creates a blank card that you can make whatever but i'm running the kitsune shugenja that create animal attachment and the easiest way i have found to show the animal is duplicating the shugenja and using the circles at the top to show the force, gold cost, chi etc so i remember they have an ability
I think that's precisely the way to do it... I do the same when needed and I've seen onther players doing that when they need to create personalities/followers due to card effects
okie dokie thank you i just mainly wanted to be sure that would be okay and "tournament legal"
different people use different methods, but they amount to basically the same as you do, either copy the card that creates the new card, or create a blank card, title it appropriately, and either way use the circles one way or the other
For AEG era cardpool/formats you may add such lines to your deck (manually in text editor). So when game starts you will have such proxies next to your fate deck (as face down cards).
Proxy Personality: Beiko's Bear Proxy Personality: Denhei's Snake Proxy Personality: Gina's Fox
List of available proxies are in Oracle of the Void, but not all of them works, especially if they have same or really similiar names to normal cards.
Also it's more a question for (link)
Can I redirect the targeted personality with [Overwhelmed]? Meaning last target mostly.
That depends entirely on what effect you're trying to use to redirect it? Also, are you the person playing Overwhelmed, or did your opponent play it? More details, please. Thanks! 🙂
1) My enemy's [Overwhelmed] -> interrupted that i cannot move -> I try to use [Flame's of Protection]
2) I have one personality with significantly higher force
irrevelant cause it states of who's action
First question: Ah, see, at the time that you would Interrupt with Flames Protection, Overwhelmed is not targeting your Personalities yet, so it wouldn't negate it. Second question: The action is moving your Personalities, but you are the one targeting/choosing them.
I feared just that 😛 thanks for Your help
But Could Yaheiko sensei Crab Zerker negate it with its "bow +elite" ?
or is there the same issue? (just out of pure curiosity and for broader audience)
Yaheiko doesn't care if the action ever targets the Berserker, only if it will affect him. So yes, Yaheiko could negate Overwhelmed's destruction effect.
That said, better make sure you do your math correctly, because the Berserker you try to save with Yaheiko might not be your highest-Force Personality after Yaheiko gives him a -3F hit.
A follow-up question... let's say my opponent plays Overwhelmed and since I don't have 2 personalities I have to target my only personality in the battlefield to destroy... at that moment can I use flame's protection to negate the destruction?
Nothing has yet been targeted at the Interrupt step. You can only play interrupts then, not wait for a later moment.
Got it, thanks
Very unclear on the Rehonoring rules.
There are a number of ways to rehonor dishonorable Personalities.
0.1. Before a player gains one or more points of Honor from an action or trait that targeted or came from one or more of his or her dishonorable Personalities. If rehonoring the Personalities is not one of that action or trait’s effects, the dishonorable Personalities’ rehonoring is substituted for the Honor gain. 0.2. Before a player gains Honor from attaching a card to one of his or her dishonorable Personalities, the Personality’s rehonoring is substituted for the Honor gain. 0.3. Before a player with one or more dishonorable Personalities in his or her army gains Honor from destroying enemy cards in battle resolution, all such dishonorable Personalities are rehonored, substituting for the Honor gain. In a tied battle, all dishonorable Personalities in an army are rehonored before being destroyed, in substitution for their army’s leader’s Honor gain.
I guess what I'm not understanding is where it says "rehonoring is substituted for the Honor gain" but shouldn't it be worded the opposite way? Where honor gains are substituted for rehonoring? The main gist of the rule is that "when this Personality gains me honor, instead of that I'll rehonor them", or am I misunderstanding?
I'm not sure there's a hard grammatical rule if you say "substitute X for Y", whether it means that you are taking way one and replacing it with the other, but if there is, I have mostly heard it as "substitute X for Y" meaning the Y is going away and you're getting X instead, as it appears in the Rules text. Does that help?
Even if there's not a hard grammatical rule, the context is fairly clear regardless, no?
Yeah, the intent is clear even if the grammar isn't clear to me (but it does make me curious to investigate the "rule" for the "substitute X for Y" phrasing), Thanks!
Wiktionary says you are correct!
(transitive, in the phrase "substitute X for Y") To use X in place of Y. I had to substitute new parts for the old ones. (transitive, formerly proscribed, in the phrase "substitute X with/by Y") To use Y in place of X; to replace X with Y. I had to substitute old parts with the new ones.
I suppose that explains a few recipes I've messed up 😓
Good to know! 🙂
🤣🤣🤣 WIKTIONARY, BAHAHA
I mean, if it says I'm right, I ain't gonna knock it. 😛 But it also helps that I am. 🙂
Im gonna edit that page, and say "if you read this, Brook is right"
Don't forget to add a citation link to my Facebook.
Like, comment, and subscribe!
Wikipedia itself can be hit or miss depending on the subject and the editors' whims but wiktionary has never once failed or disappointed me!
Say a strategy says "bow a follower to do X" is the strategy performing the action or the follower?
specifically im thinking of 'Directed Fire'
There's no performing in Onyx
what about naval?
In Ivory and in Onyx Naval must come from ability from card in unit
err i guess it doesnt say perform does it, 'come from'
ok so that would mean printed on the card then
Exactly
got it
ya i was confused about the 'come from' clause but as we determined that means 'from an ability printed on a card in that unit'
"from" is defined in the Comprehensive Rules
Just for me to understand it right... in the engage step you check for naval possibility and anounce that you will take it and when battle actions start the turn after you take the first battle action. This is then different from cavalry, where you actually act in the engage step and move your cav unit to the current battlefield? Am i right?
correct
Yes. You announce Naval as Engage ability. When Engage Segment is done, you have opportunity in Combat Segment to play Battle Action first, before Defender.
Thanks 😀
The intent of the scout is to never have more than 1 at a battlefield at a time, so should this combo not work based on fair use ruling? Or is this the one go around?
like... if I have one at the battlefiend, and then use kanos to pull one from the ditch
Equiping from discard isnt moving or assigning.
Correct, I see the work-around, but wanted to make sure the "golden rule/fair use" ruling didn't override that
now to get used to killing two of the scouts each battle 😦
Restriction is only checked while assigning or moving. Other ways to bring it into play are ignored.
its worded in such a way that it seems the intent was to not allow more than one at the same battlefield
but ok thank you.
Mind you, take care not to Kano equip a second one on the same personality, otherwise that one will never assign again in the future
(Unless of course you use the engage on it and destroy it end-of-battle)
Thank you. I was just playing a game and didn't want to activate it because I didn't know how it should go lol
Question on how these cards interact as the meditating mind has to target Churo's unit but not him directly. I don't this Churo can interrupt here as does not target him directly but his unit but wanted to confirm just in case.
Targeting a unit is synonymous with targeting its Personality directly.
Churo can negate MM's Battle action.
that is not the way I expected that to go but I am very happy with that outcome.
Soes [Zanshin] negates destruction from Honest []Collision of Wills] or invested [Avenge Your Slights]
Yes. While clearly Zanshin was written from the perspective of negating the standard "destroy the loser" effect, the effect "destroy (a card in) the loser('s unit)" pretty inarguably also falls under the umbrella of "destruction for losing".
great that is nice to have it clear. I was 90% sure it is, 10% hope its not ;p
Does that open/dynasty action acts retrospectively? for honor gains in all the phase or just for future gains?
Just future, from the point the effect starts until the phase ends.
In Emperor... how this card works? Once it triggers both players lose 1 honor in each turn? let's say: Player A activates the event, automatically, both players lose 1 honor. Afterward, Player A ends his turn and Player B's turn begins and automatically both players lose 1 honor again... so on and so forth... am I right?
👍
"before each of your Events Phases begins" would mean each player (Player A and Player B) would lose 1 Honor on each of your turns
Wait... do you mean only in the turns of the player who activated the event????
Whoever owns the Event, on that player’s turn it triggers
Yes. Only the Event's owner's turns.
Ahhhh that changes everything... that way that event is not that nasty as I first thought
hey, check this out
Yeah. My fault i read it wrong.
"before each of your Events Phases ends, each player in turn order starting with you loses 1 Honor."
for what it's worth, I forgot it worked like that too.
and then I saw people responded, and read the card and... like... yeah, it's actually written that way.
The card's text is confusing
Agree to disagree? 😛
@Brook Cunningham Fast one for You...
Usually in card games, words like "your" refers to the card's controller, in all fairness
does this guy work on both Dynasty phazes?
Without an explicit exception, Dynasty actions can only be taken in your own Dynasty Phase.
i feared that.. (cause when I am clicking throught phazes in SnM i see on my side dynasty only in my turn)
sad that after succeding in defending my prov and puting earth i cannot do that 😄
Don't put Rings into play during your opponent's turn; it's just rude. 😉
its only way for earth my friend
its mainstream way to get Ring of Earth
but there os not stated that inactivv player can not take Dynasty actions 😄
I was going to say, "Yamigatai" would like a word.
thats why i say mainstream
Yamigatai is a trick way 😛
Kempy performs "Wall of Words" Nimrod is incapacitated he goes home bowed
Kempy gains 1 honor 😛
gains
(sorry i was just making fun) /edit/ after tyhat what Brook stated 😛
Yamigatai have one slight problem for enlightement decks... its low FV
Yeah but it's still a staple for it
Can a player still pay the 1 invest even if it has a sincerity token?
Yes, you can overpay for a 0GC. You just can't overpay for an absent Gold Cost.
I mean can it invest for 1 instead of 0
because it permanently increases
the gc
Oh, right. That nuance escaped me. Let me see if I can come up with a definite answer....
...ok, yeah, if anything has a cost that is "X or Y", you can pay either as your choice. It just happens that the "Y" in this case has a certain condition to it even being an option.
awesome, thank you!
I dont understand the wording on that card correctly. Why should i ever invest 1 when i get the same benefit for investing 0? Thats how i read the card. You always get the same benefit as long as there are Sincerity tokens on the card. So what is the advantage of investing 1 vs. 0?
To gain Sincerity token you must leave this card in Province for a turn.
So you pay Invest to gain a pernament benefit this turn. Or you leave it in Province and Recruit this Holding turn later for base cost only to gain benefit.
I do not know what our Lion friend is ploting, but it may be relevant to some cards that target gold cost.. maybe. so there [again maybe] is a reason to overpay even if You have a sincerity token and a possibility to pay "0". I can see such possibilities in times when You will not have a target to spend that one gold pending in Your gold pool, but the reason why would he increase its GC on purpose eludes me.
Maybe i missunderstand invest on holdings vs. strategie cards? I thought you pay the invest cost in both cases when you play the card. So in this case you need 3 turns to get the full benefit of the card ? Holding is revealed in province. First round sincerity token is added. Second round invest of 1 is payed to permanently modify the card. Third round holding is played for 2 gold cost. Am i right this way ?
No. If the holding flips turn 1, you can buy it for 2, then pay the invest cost of 1 (raising the gold price permanently to 3) for the invest effect, OR buy it for 2 and not get the invest effect, OR let it sit there, give it a Sincerity token at the end of your turn, then on turn 2, buy it for 2 with an invest cost of 0 to get the invest effect
So yes, you're correct in that you pay the invest cost when you play the card, you're incorrect on your interpretation of this specific card
Ok. Thanks for this clarification. Now i understand it and it makes sense to me. OR is the main delimiter for the first sentence. So invest 1 OR invest 0 if... I always read it as invest 1 or invest 0 IF ... And so i came up with a different interpretation of the whole meaning 😀.
We will see. But he is definitivly plotting something 😉...
https://tenor.com/view/plotting-evil-smile-smirk-gif-15077338
There are some cards that target gold cost, and will likely be more with those mantis running around. So I suppose there could be some cases to increase the gold cost of a holding.
that was my call too tbh but I don't know any specyfics. but it may seem have sth in common with a certain follower...
Since this is also a spell can it attach to non-shugenja?
No
This says "must declare an attack this turn" does that mean they can go to the combat step and just opt to not assign anyone if they aren't dishonored?
yes
please note that a battle still occurs at each battlefield so the defender can engage in shenanigans such as Reprisal
it would also allow you to use things like determined challenge and kanpeki's dynasty to deal with problematic characters.
And everyone's favorite crane zombie! Hooray!
Quick question- what is the exact framework for duels in Lotus edition? Specifically, when are Focus Effects applied?
Focus Effect as rulebook effect was introduced in late Lotus probably in bridge Lotus/Samurai expansion. Earlier such effects were resolved as written on the cards "when revealed as a focus..."
So the timing, although odd, is effectively the same as Samurai, in that the focus effects trigger before resolution (and thus can cause some resolution alterations)
such as by changing focus values, or in an extreme case, killing a duelist before resolution
Yeah. Someone should post a scan from KD rulesheet to check if they introduced something different about dueling at the end of the Lotus. Checking Oracle i see that Focus Effect: was introduced in Khan's Defiance.
Cool, thanks for the clarification
With bonus paw
Omg, the bonus paw makes it
Cat's Defiance