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.
Martin Lund (rules official), 11 February 2010
Besieged Borderlands says:
"Battle: Bow this card: Give each non-Unique Personality without your Clan alignment in your current army +1F, or +2F if he is opposed."
Given that the Designer's Intent on this card's ambiguous functionality for players without a Clan alignment shown here it would appear to inappropriate to allow this ruling to govern the first few weeks of a Kotei.
It is especially problematic because in addition to running against the now-explicit intent of the author of the phrase, the ruling goes against all three of the following: 1.) the popular use of the card 2.) the intuitive reading of the card 3.) the strict logical reading of the card
The card logically reads as giving each non-Unique Personality, for whom "has your Clan alignment" is not true, the Force bonus. Whether "has your Clan alignment" is FALSE or NULL it still evaluates to Not True.
The ruling in question also fails to cite any place in the comprehensive rules that supports the idea that the entire action fails due to the lack of the existence of a defined Clan Alignment.
Even the old Oath of Fealty precedent doesn't support this ruling, going back 10 years. It shows that Oath v. Shadowlands was specifically a patch-job for game balance that went against the literal and intuitive reading of the game rules and cards.
L5R-INFO says: > > The Horde is a very difficult faction to balance. They > > were originally designed with full knowledge they'd have > > several checks-and-balances in the metagame: they'd never > > go first, they're not immune to the Favor, the Shadowlands > > trait has by far the most, and the most powerful, counter- > > cards in the game, they can't buy people for 2g less, and * * * > > they can't play Oath of Fealty at all. Messing with any of * * * > > the initial constraints is asking for trouble. That's why > > the ruling goes against the new rulebook rule that all of > > an action's effects which aren't prohibited still happen. > > > > -- > > Jeff Alexander > > Lead Designer, Legend of the Five Rings TCG > > jeffalex at wizards.com
Given the weight of the evidence and arguments I would humbly petition for this ruling to be overturned so that players excited by the newly offered prospect of Palace of the Breaking Dawn are not handed surprising, crippling rulings or disqualifications that go against everything the brand seems to be trying to accomplish with this Kotei Season.
Thank you, - Marty Lund
A player, 26 February 2010
Besieged Borderlands reads: Battle: Bow this card: Give each non-Unique Personality without your Clan alignment in your current army +1F, or +2F if he is opposed.
Its CE 15 MRP will read: Battle: Bow this card: Give each opposed non-Unique Personality that do not share a Clan alignment with you in your current army +2F.
The comprehensive rules have been updated about Clan alignment: "If a player has no Clan alignment, then all other players and Personalities (even Unaligned ones) are "without" that player's Clan alignment, and do not share a Clan alignment with that player."
As a consequence, if you are an unaligned player (e.g. your Stronghold is Palace of the Breaking Dawn), then both versions of Besieged Borderlands will affect all your non-Unique Personalities in your current army, because all of them are without your Clan alignment and do not share a Clan alignment with you.
Zen's ruling has been fixed accordingly.