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 April 2010
So I was reading the comp rules, and I want to make sure I'm interpreting this correctly... there are times when being a duelist is a drawback, in that it actually limits your available options? For example.
I play Steel on Steel, targeting my 4C non-Duelist personality who challenges my opponent's 4C non-Duelist. Now, my opponent may choose to focus or strike, correct? Now, instead, I challenge my opponent's 4C Duelist personality. According to the comp rules, his Duelist MUST focus first, and CANNOT choose to strike? This seems odd to me, but that's how I'm interpreting the rules.
Alex Jones (rules official), 26 April 2010
So I was reading the comp rules, and I want to make sure I'm interpreting this correctly... there are times when being a duelist is a drawback, in that it actually limits your available options? For example.
I play Steel on Steel, targeting my 4C non-Duelist personality who challenges my opponent's 4C non-Duelist. Now, my opponent may choose to focus or strike, correct? Now, instead, I challenge my opponent's 4C Duelist personality. According to the comp rules, his Duelist MUST focus first, and CANNOT choose to strike? This seems odd to me, but that's how I'm interpreting the rules.
Under discussion.
The rulebook has a different wording, such that only the challenger is forced to focus if he is a duellist, which I'm sure was the intent: Duelist: Immediately before the first opportunity to focus or strike in a duel, if a Duelist Personality is the challenger, and the challenged is a non–Duelist with an equal or higher duel stat, the Duelist gains the first chance to focus. The Duelist must use this chance to focus instead of strike, if possible.
Brook Cunningham (rules official), 26 April 2010
The CR has now been corrected to reflect the Rulebook text that Alex quoted above. Apologies for the transcription error.