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.
viewtopic.php?f=59&t=95590&p=1266688&hilit=Suitengu%27s#p1266688
I read the above thread. Why does it work that way? I thought that when an action was taken it fully resolves. There are no chains essentially.
Thus, why doesn't the fact that Entrenched Position was used first and fully resolved cause the action's effects to be negated even if Suitengu's Torch's reaction is used afterwards?
viewtopic.php?f=59&t=95590&p=1266688&hilit=Suitengu%27s#p1266688
I read the above thread. Why does it work that way? I thought that when an action was taken it fully resolves. There are no chains essentially.
Thus, why doesn't the fact that Entrenched Position was used first and fully resolved cause the action's effects to be negated even if Suitengu's Torch's reaction is used afterwards?
Entrenched position does fully resolve, and sets up negation that will negate the effects of the action. However, Suitengu's Torch's reaction then also fully resolves, and sets up a prevention to that negation. Therefore, when the original actions effects are resolving, it will see both negation and prevention of negation, and the prevention of negation wins.