Akodo Shigetoshi (Experienced 2)

L5R CCG Rules board, 30 October 2011 to 1 November 2011

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, 30 October 2011

Akodo Shigetoshi - exp2 Reaction: After Shigetoshi enters play: Create a 2F Follower and attach it to a target Personality. Battle: Destroy your target Personality or Follower: Destroy a target enemy card; if your own targeted card was a Follower, the targeted enemy card must have no attachments.

My question is regarding the underlined part. If I kill Shigetoshi himself, does the action resolves right after his destruction or I am able to go on with the effects (Destroying an enemy card).

Zen Faulkes (rules official), 31 October 2011

Akodo Shigetoshi - exp2: If I kill Shigetoshi himself, does the action resolves right after his destruction or I am able to go on with the effects (Destroying an enemy card).

Continue with those effects. Effects do not stop because the card they are printed on is destroyed.

http://rules.l5r.com/CE_Abilities_and_a ... resolution: "Once the action resolution has begun, effects that influence the action’s ability to have been taken in the first place do not influence the activation of the action’s effects.

"Example: If... the ability’s card leaves play during resolution, all remaining effects are still activated."

A player, 1 November 2011

With regard to this answer.

Not sure the indicated rule applies since Shigetoshi would be destroyed during the "pay costs" step well before effect resolution, right?

I don't disagree with the ruling, but the reasoning seems flawed to me. Shigetoshi's destruction is a cost not an effect. If the reasoning is flawed that is more confusing to players than the ruling itself. So I ask is this really the right explanation for why it works this way?

I would have though it was because: While it is true that abilities cannot be used on cards from an out of play area without express exceptions in the ability itself, that is a condition of announcement and is only checked at anouncement and not required at any point after that. At which point Shigetoshi is in play, making the play legal. Even if Shigetoshi leaves play to pay the cost of the ability after that, the only way effect resolution gets stopped is if that destruction is some how interfered with, per the rules governing interfering with/paying costs.

If this is not the correct explanation, why is Zen's explanation the correct one?

Alex Jones (rules official), 1 November 2011

With regard to this answer.

Not sure the indicated rule applies since Shigetoshi would be destroyed during the "pay costs" step well before effect resolution, right?

I don't disagree with the ruling, but the reasoning seems flawed to me. Shigetoshi's destruction is a cost not an effect. If the reasoning is flawed that is more confusing to players than the ruling itself. So I ask is this really the right explanation for why it works this way?

I would have though it was because: While it is true that abilities cannot be used on cards from an out of play area without express exceptions in the ability itself, that is a condition of announcement and is only checked at anouncement and not required at any point after that. At which point Shigetoshi is in play, making the play legal. Even if Shigetoshi leaves play to pay the cost of the ability after that, the only way effect resolution gets stopped is if that destruction is some how interfered with, per the rules governing interfering with/paying costs.

If this is not the correct explanation, why is Zen's explanation the correct one?

The line quoted by Zen could probably be phrased better. It's actually implied by earlier paragraphs, such as this one under B, Explicit performing and required targeting: If any of an action's targeting or performing choices become illegal at any point after the particular choice has occurred, the action still proceeds.

Furthermore, as you point out, the only time the implied condition "If this card is in play" is checked is during A, Announce the Action: The only time an action’s conditions are normally checked is when it is announced.