A topic from AEG's L5R CCG Rules forum, copied for Oracle of the Void from a copy of the forum saved in October 2015, so pages it didn't save are missing. Players' names are left out; the rules officials are named. Rulings are as they stood on these dates; later rulings, the rulebooks and the Rules Archive may differ.
A player, 24 July 2007
In reference to this, please forgive again my poor understanding of the comprehensive rules, so fascinating but quite hard to learn, but I don't understand precisely why, in the case of a tied battle, the controler of the army destroying Bayushi Hisako would gain some honor nonetheless. Below let's suppose that one Hisako is destroyed while defending so that the Attacker may gain honor from resolution.
Mr Lund suggested to check out the Battle Resolution entry in the L5R Comprehensive Rules (emphasis mine) : "If the Armies tie: the Attacker and Defender simultaneously rehonor any dishonorable personalities in their own army, and then destroy all cards in their respective enemy leader's army. The destruction is an effect of battle resolution. If no personalities in his army were restored to honor or remained dishonorable during resolution, the Attacker gains Honor from resolution equal to the number of cards he destroyed this way. The Defender then does the same if none of his personalities were restored to honor or remained dishonorable during resolution."
After destroying all cards in both armies but before checking whether the Attacker actually gains Honor from resolution, Hisako's Reaction is played. It dishonors a (now destroyed) Personality who was attacking. Since Hisako's Reaction can't target a dead Personality, let's assume that one of the honorable attacking Personalities somehow survived the massive destruction from battle resolution before Hisako's owner uses her Reaction, targeting this lucky veteran. Maybe it can be done with Death after Life since this Reaction may be played after the bloody slaughtering of both armies...
At the time this Personality is dishonored, we are still in Resolution Segment so this Personality is "dishonorable during resolution" ; to be correct, this Personality has become "dishonorable during resolution" but has she really remained "dishonorable during resolution" ? Indeed I'd like to think so but even if it is true, is it really what matters most here ? If that is not the one point that says why the Attacker gains or doesn't gain honor from resolution, may I be bold enough to ask what is the main explanation to the fact that "Hisako's reaction won't prevent any Honor gains", please ?
As you must have noticed, I am a little bit confused with battle resolution. Maybe I didn't understand correctly the question in the previous thread or some of the rules about resolving tied battles. I hope this second question is not too much an annoyance...
Thanks by advance for your brightful explanations.
Martin Lund (rules official), 24 July 2007
In reference to this, please forgive again my poor understanding of the comprehensive rules, so fascinating but quite hard to learn, but I don't understand precisely why, in the case of a tied battle, the controler of the army destroying Bayushi Hisako would gain some honor nonetheless. Below let's suppose that one Hisako is destroyed while defending so that the Attacker may gain honor from resolution.
Mr Lund suggested to check out the Battle Resolution entry in the L5R Comprehensive Rules (emphasis mine) : "If the Armies tie: the Attacker and Defender simultaneously rehonor any dishonorable personalities in their own army, and then destroy all cards in their respective enemy leader's army. The destruction is an effect of battle resolution. If no personalities in his army were restored to honor or remained dishonorable during resolution, the Attacker gains Honor from resolution equal to the number of cards he destroyed this way. The Defender then does the same if none of his personalities were restored to honor or remained dishonorable during resolution."
After destroying all cards in both armies but before checking whether the Attacker actually gains Honor from resolution, Hisako's Reaction is played. It dishonors a (now destroyed) Personality who was attacking. Since Hisako's Reaction can't target a dead Personality, let's assume that one of the honorable attacking Personalities somehow survived the massive destruction from battle resolution before Hisako's owner uses her Reaction, targeting this lucky veteran. Maybe it can be done with Death after Life since this Reaction may be played after the bloody slaughtering of both armies...
At the time this Personality is dishonored, we are still in Resolution Segment so this Personality is "dishonorable during resolution" ; to be correct, this Personality has become "dishonorable during resolution" but has she really remained "dishonorable during resolution" ? Indeed I'd like to think so but even if it is true, is it really what matters most here ? If that is not the one point that says why the Attacker gains or doesn't gain honor from resolution, may I be bold enough to ask what is the main explanation to the fact that "Hisako's reaction won't prevent any Honor gains", please ?
As you must have noticed, I am a little bit confused with battle resolution. Maybe I didn't understand correctly the question in the previous thread or some of the rules about resolving tied battles. I hope this second question is not too much an annoyance...
Thanks by advance for your brightful explanations.
99.9% of the time, the solution is simple: In a tied battle all personalities are destroyed simultaneously. Outside of exceptional circumstances, there are no legal targets for Hisako's ability in play by the time the Reaction would trigger. Everyone died and left play.
I suppose if you had some special anti-death effect like Hida Daizu XP you might still have a legal target.
Even then he wouldn't qualify as someone who "remained dishonorable during resolution." He became dishonorable as reactions were played to destruction. He did not start out dishonorable and then remain so. The "remained dishonorable during resolution," clause is there for the hedge case where someone would have been restored to honor at the appropriate time in Battle Resolution, but an effect of some sort prevented that from happening.