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.
Battle: Target an opposed unit: Give each Personality and Follower in it +1F. Before the next time this turn another player's effect destroys the unit or a card in it, negate that destruction.
I target my unit with Unstoppable Force, and later that turn I attach or transfer another follower to the unit. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't gain the force bonus, but would it be protected from the destruction from another player's card effect?
I target my unit with Unstoppable Force, and later that turn I attach or transfer another follower to the unit. (W)ould it be protected from the destruction from another player's card effect?
"In it" refers back to that original unit, so if the card is not in that unit, it's not covered.
Regarding this
It was ruled that "in it" refers to the cards that were originally in the unit. Why? (Namely, what rule is the basis for such a ruling)
Unstoppable Force creates a delayed effect that is triggered by destruction of the unit or a card in it. Whenever the delayed effect would be triggered, it would check the current composition of the unit, or at least I fail to find any rule that says otherwise. If the trigger is met (destruction of a card in the unit), why would it fail to be applied?
On the other hand, does it mean that if I transfer one of the cards that were in the unit when Unstoppable Force was played to another unit, it would still be protected by the delayed effect?
what rule is the basis for such a ruling(?)
Not every possible wording of every card can be covered by a rule. Some are just based on the normal reading of English. This is one such case.
And yes, this would mean that a card moved onto the target unit after Unstoppable Force was played could have its destruction negated.
There could be a contrary precedent somewhere. If there is one, I will, as always, be grateful if someone gives a link to it.
Regarding this, I'm afraid my question could have been misunderstood or conversely I misunderstood the first answer. So let me rephrase it just to make sure I understood the ruling:
-Unit A has one follower (e.g. Taoist Archer). -I target unit A with Unstoppable force. -I transfer the F6 Taoist Archer to Unit B (e.g. with Permanent Encampment).
If my understanding of the ruling is right, a Rout targeting Unit B would destroy the Taoist Archer, right? (Note: I think this is what you have thought I was asking; actually, my original question was the one following this)
-Unit A has one follower (e.g. Taoist Archer) -I target Unit A with Unstoppable Force -I attach/transfer a Sasumata (e.g. Obfuscation) to unit A
If my understanding, again, is correct, a Rout targeting Unit A would not destroy neither the Taoist Archer nor the Sasumata, right?
Otherwise, please clarify.
This second part is what I meant originally, hence the confusion. Apologies for any inconveniences this may have caused.
Regarding this, I'm afraid my question could have been misunderstood or conversely I misunderstood the first answer. So let me rephrase it just to make sure I understood the ruling:
-Unit A has one follower (e.g. Taoist Archer). -I target unit A with Unstoppable force. -I transfer the F6 Taoist Archer to Unit B (e.g. with Permanent Encampment).
If my understanding of the ruling is right, a Rout targeting Unit B would destroy the Taoist Archer, right? (Note: I think this is what you have thought I was asking; actually, my original question was the one following this)
-Unit A has one follower (e.g. Taoist Archer) -I target Unit A with Unstoppable Force -I attach/transfer a Sasumata (e.g. Obfuscation) to unit A
If my understanding, again, is correct, a Rout targeting Unit A would not destroy neither the Taoist Archer nor the Sasumata, right?
Otherwise, please clarify.
This second part is what I meant originally, hence the confusion. Apologies for any inconveniences this may have caused.
Zen's answers cover both scenarios: whether or not a card being destroyed is "in the unit" is checked in the "before the destruction" timing slot. An attachment transfered in will be covered, while an attachment transfered out will not.
In regards to this post:
viewtopic.php?f=59&t=81721
Does this mean that if I use Unstoppable Force and then later in the battle equip a new follower to the unit the new follower will receive the protection as well?
Thanks!
In regards to this post:
viewtopic.php?f=59&t=81721
Does this mean that if I use Unstoppable Force and then later in the battle equip a new follower to the unit the new follower will receive the protection as well?
Thanks!
That is correct.