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, 21 November 2011
Following to this subject.
Palmer answered the question with an older post of Zen Faulkes, but the ruling seems uncompatible with this recent post, where MacBeth2001 explained that "Rulebook rehonoring negation of the Honor Gain or Only Actions Speak's negation (...) both occur in Step A".
Even if the CR Timing Sequence create ambiguïty by stating that some "triggered rulebook effects" are applied in step B., it seems clear for me that triggered rulebook effects which "negate, prevent, or substitute the occurrence that defines the trigger" as defined in step A - such as "Rulebook rehonoring negation of the Honor Gain" - have to be applied at this step.
Maybe I was mistaken in the CR analysis, but anyway MacBeth2001's and Palmer/Zen Faukes can not be both true. Thank you for your coordinated answer.
Brook Cunningham (rules official), 21 November 2011
Following to this subject.
Palmer answered the question with an older post of Zen Faulkes, but the ruling seems uncompatible with this recent post, where MacBeth2001 explained that "Rulebook rehonoring negation of the Honor Gain or Only Actions Speak's negation (...) both occur in Step A".
Even if the CR Timing Sequence create ambiguïty by stating that some "triggered rulebook effects" are applied in step B., it seems clear for me that triggered rulebook effects which "negate, prevent, or substitute the occurrence that defines the trigger" as defined in step A - such as "Rulebook rehonoring negation of the Honor Gain" - have to be applied at this step.
Maybe I was mistaken in the CR analysis, but anyway MacBeth2001's and Palmer/Zen Faukes can not be both true. Thank you for your coordinated answer.
The most current ruling (mine) is correct.
Please note that my ruling which contradicts Palmer's and Zen's still post-dates both of them. In the case of contradictions, you should follow the most recent ruling rather than a "majortiy" rule.
Granted, we try not to have contradictions, and these occurred very close to one another, but it is impractically difficult in general practice to find all older rulings that are later reversed and correct them. So, again, in such a case, the most recent ruling is correct.