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.
With shameful tactics to give any sort of force bonus you must :
1) target one to three personalities. 2) also you must dishonor the personalities.
Is this correct?
Also, this means that if the personalities were already dishonorable they could not be targeted by the action and therefore do not gain the force bonus, correct?
With shameful tactics to give any sort of force bonus you must :
1) target one to three personalities. 2) also you must dishonor the personalities.
Is this correct?
Also, this means that if the personalities were already dishonorable they could not be targeted by the action and therefore do not gain the force bonus, correct?
No, none of the above is correct.
1) All targeting is optional because it is preceded by "You may". Therefore, as long as the Rule of Presence is obeyed, you may choose to not target anything with this action when you play it.
2) Shameful tactics has only one colon, therefore it has no "constraints block" (which would be denoted by a second colon after the first). Costs appear in constraints; since there are no constraints, dishonoring is an effect (not a cost) of the action, and the action's other effects will occur whether your Personalities become dishonorable or not.
In regards to this post: viewtopic.php?f=59&t=82922#p1085878
This perhaps seems to be a different ruling than this one: viewtopic.php?f=59&t=81370&p=1064518&hilit=shameful+tactics#p1064542
There seems to be a few options here:
1. Target and dishonor no personalties. No +3F bonus to anyone. 2. Target and dishonor 1-3 personalties. +3F to each of these. 3. Target 1-3 already dishonored personalties. No +3F bonus to anyone since they were not targeted AND dishonored by the action.
Is this last option correct? I've been assuming that the targeting and dishonor is not a cost, but it is a condition to get the +3F.
This perhaps seems to be a different ruling than this one(.)
I think you'll have to be more specific as to what contradiction you see between them.
In regards to this reply. viewtopic.php?f=59&t=82922#p1086184
Sorry, I'll try to be more specific since I could have read more into AkodoGilador's ruling by assuming"target and dishonor" is a single block of text:
http://rules.l5r.com/CE_Effects#Order_of_effects
If multiple effects are caused by a single piece of text they occur simultaneously, unless otherwise specified by language such as “consecutively.” Examples: “Bow all Oni”; “Dishonor two Samurai”. When simultaneous effects caused by a single piece of text create multiple game procedures containing more than one step, each step of each procedure takes place simultaneously, in parallel.
I'll just restructure the question to narrow explicitly on what I'm thinking:
1. I am attacking with 3 personality in a battle. The defender has 1 personality. 2a. I declare an Action from Shameful Tactics and reveal the card. 2b. I perform no required targeting during the targeting step. 2c. There are no mandatory costs to pay. 2d. Resolve Action: I target three personalities and dishonor them. I then check to see if they are opposed and since they are, give them each a +3F bonus.
I have a total of +9 force after the action resolves. My opponent next kills one of my personalities, but bows his personality as a cost. I no longer have enough force to destroy the province.
3. I now have 2 (dishonorable) personalities in the battle. And the defender has 1 (bowed) personality. 4a. I declare an Action from Shameful Tactics and reveal the card. 4b. I perform no required targeting during the targeting step. 4c. There are no mandatory costs to pay. 4d. Resolve Action: I target two personalities and attempt to dishonor them. Since they are dishonorable, this part fails. I then check to see if they are opposed, and since they are give them each a +3F bonus.
Is this sequence correct?
I apologize if the above is pedantic.