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, 26 September 2009
Just wanted to ask... what am I missing?
The current ruling on how Deflection works against tokens generated by Isawa Fusota seem to indicate that the previous ruling on Shikibu no Oni and Seiden Sanzo might be at odds with the idea of the resolution of an action. As I understand it, Shikibu ignores the destruction effect of Seiden Sanzo because he is not facing a destruction effect as the action resolves, but it is delayed. But if a targeting still occurs for one, and counts as an action... wouldn;t the destruction effect also count as a resolution of a created delayed action?
Zen Faulkes (rules official), 26 September 2009
Just wanted to ask... what am I missing?
The current ruling on how Deflection works against tokens generated by Isawa Fusota seem to indicate that the previous ruling on Shikibu no Oni and Seiden Sanzo might be at odds with the idea of the resolution of an action. As I understand it, Shikibu ignores the destruction effect of Seiden Sanzo because he is not facing a destruction effect as the action resolves, but it is delayed. But if a targeting still occurs for one, and counts as an action... wouldn;t the destruction effect also count as a resolution of a created delayed action?
What rulings are you talking about?
Mod nudge: When referring to old rulings, please include relevant links to those rulings. We need context to have a hope of answering things correctly. Thanks!
A player, 28 September 2009
Just trying to help out with this
I believe the ruling this refers to is here.
I am not sure I agree that the other topic mentioned is related, but the shikibu ruling does seem off to me. The timing rules specifically mention they apply to reactions and triggered traits. The "consuming by Jigoku" of Shikibu's trait is neither of these, it seems more like an indefinite conditional effect to me, rather than a delayed effect. Which is what the original ruling treated it as. "If he is in play after the action's resolution...". The trigger for the trait is shikibu's imminent destruction. The if clause is not part of any trigger. I only point this out because it means the following does not apply "Responses to a trigger must be taken as soon as the trigger occurs; the player may not choose to delay them without support from card text."
Seems to me Shikibu was in fact in play "after the action's resolution." which would satisfy the condition for having to destroy someone. It is poorly worded as far as cards go, when there are so many actions with delayed destruction effects. Seems like the intent was to not have to kill somebody if shikibu was "Unexpectedly Intimidated" or something similar, not to grant him access to effects without cost. But I am not part of the design team, so I won't speculate further on what they were or were not thinking about.