Adeiko ruling rules question clarification (L5R rules board)

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, 30 September 2007

Hi again.

I was probably misunderstood in my previous post, so I will try to be more clear in this one.

I was not asking for the ruling to be changed, your intent to prohibiting the particular card to react to delayed effects was clear; you have said that it does not react to the destruction of personalities (like Assigning Blame, for example) but to the resolution of the action than produced the destruction, as Mr Lund says:

The final ruling is that Adeiko's Reaction triggers after the Action, Battle Resolution, or Event is considered to have finished its Resolution - not the Resolution of a particular effect of the Action. If the destruction effect hasn't happened by then ('delayed effect') then it won't trigger Adeiko when it does get around to happening.

His response, constituting in fact the ruling in question, results in the ruling changing the card text in order to fit it to fulfilling the role you believe it should in the game, as the card text clearly says that Adeiko reacts to the resolution of the effects, not the action.

Furthermore, this part of the general rules: "References to an action or trait's "effects [plural] resolving" are equivalent to the action or trait itself resolving", as I understand it, please correct me if I am wrong, abolishes the differences in the wording of actions that refer to resolution of effects and resolution of actions, as now everything is considered to resolve when the action itself resolves, even the delayed effects, even though, as Mr Faulkes stated in his reply to my previous post, their effects are in fact applied in a later point in time.

Does that passage mean that Adeiko's text, and any other card's that reacts to resolution of effects, not of actions, should be read in accordance with Mr Lund's ruling, i.e. as reacting to resolution of actions, effectively, as I displayed above, rendering the differences in wording null and void?

Thanks again, and if you could also answer my previous questions (argumentatively and not stark "yes / no" answers if it's not too much trouble), that would be great.

Zen Faulkes (rules official), 30 September 2007

His response, constituting in fact the ruling in question, results in the ruling changing the card text in order to fit it to fulfilling the role you believe it should in the game, as the card text clearly says that Adeiko reacts to the resolution of the effects, not the action.

When one looks back at the first thing I put in my previous post:

http://rules.l5r.com/Effects#Delayed_effects: "(D)elayed effects are still said to 'resolve' when they are first activated, but are actually applied at a future time." (Emphasis added.)

That's the basis of the ruling. No "changing the card text" occurred.

Does that passage mean that Adeiko's text, and any other card's that reacts to resolution of effects, not of actions, should be read in accordance with Mr Lund's ruling, i.e. as reacting to resolution of actions, effectively, as I displayed above, rendering the differences in wording null and void?

Looks that way.