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, 4 November 2010
Talisman of Jigoku +2F +0C 3 GC Attaches to a Crab Clan Personality paying 1 less Gold. Actions performed by another player's Shadowlands Personality may not target this Personality. Focus 4
Flanked by Nightmares Battle: If your current army has more units than the current enemy army, bow your target Shadowlands Personality: The enemy leader targets and destroys a Personality in his current army. Focus 1
Question 1 If I have only Personality with Talisman of Jigoku at the current battlefield and my opponent has 3 shadowlands persoanlities and he plays Flanked by Nightmares, does the action "fizzle"?
Question 2 If I have two Personalities at the current battlefield, one that has Talisman of Jigoku, attached and my opponent has 3 shadowlands persoanlities and he plays Flanked by Nightmares, can I attempt to target the personality with Talisman of Jigoku attached to have the action "fizzle"?
Zen Faulkes (rules official), 4 November 2010
If I have only Personality with Talisman of Jigoku at the current battlefield and my opponent has 3 shadowlands persoanlities and he plays Flanked by Nightmares, does the action "fizzle"?
Fizzle is soooooo Magic:the Gathering in the 1990s.
Effects do not fizzle in L5R. They fail.
And yes, the effects of the action will fail.
If I have two Personalities at the current battlefield, one that has Talisman of Jigoku, attached and my opponent has 3 shadowlands persoanlities and he plays Flanked by Nightmares, can I attempt to target the personality with Talisman of Jigoku attached to have the action "fizzle"?
http://rules.l5r.com/CE_Effects#.E2.80. ... t.E2.80.9D: "(I)f something is required to be chosen, a player is not allowed to choose an option that is currently prevented by 'may not; if there is another legal option to choose."