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, 28 August 2012
My question concerns the reaction on Shosuro Aroru. http://imperialassembly.com/oracle/#cardid=7089
If Shosuro Aroru is my only personality on my side of a battle, without any attachments, and my opponent targets him with an action, can I use his reaction to move him to a different location, assuming the action did not bow or remove him from play?
Relevent action: Reaction: When an action would target a ninja at Aroru's location: Choose another of your cards. The action targets it instead, if legal. After the action's resolution, you may move Aroru to a different location.
Alex Jones (rules official), 4 September 2012
My question concerns the reaction on Shosuro Aroru. http://imperialassembly.com/oracle/#cardid=7089
If Shosuro Aroru is my only personality on my side of a battle, without any attachments, and my opponent targets him with an action, can I use his reaction to move him to a different location, assuming the action did not bow or remove him from play?
Relevent action: Reaction: When an action would target a ninja at Aroru's location: Choose another of your cards. The action targets it instead, if legal. After the action's resolution, you may move Aroru to a different location.
Yes - and you may move him even if he bowed.
The "Choose another of your cards" is in the effects block, not the constraints block, so Aroru's Reaction is legal even if Aroru is the only card at his location. The choosing will obviously fail, and the retargeting. As long as Aroru is still in play, you may move him after the action's resolution; this is not dependent on him being unbowed, since the rule that Abilities on a bowed card may not be used is only checked when the action is announced.
A player, 4 September 2012
Doesn't this conflict with the Good faith rule?
http://www.alderac.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=99507
Good Faith Rule: When an action is announced, the player must be able to target all required targets, meet all conditions of the action, and pay all mandatory costs, to the best of his or her knowledge.
...
The intent of the Good Faith Rule is to prevent players from abusively attempting actions whose costs and requirements they know they cannot fulfill (for example, in order to exploit a Reaction to announcing the action), while at the same time allowing players to take actions whose costs and requirements they know they can fulfill. It should be interpreted in this spirit, and not as a way to block legal actions because of a technicality.
Alex Jones (rules official), 4 September 2012
Doesn't this conflict with the Good faith rule?
http://www.alderac.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=99507
Good Faith Rule: When an action is announced, the player must be able to target all required targets, meet all conditions of the action, and pay all mandatory costs, to the best of his or her knowledge.
...
The intent of the Good Faith Rule is to prevent players from abusively attempting actions whose costs and requirements they know they cannot fulfill (for example, in order to exploit a Reaction to announcing the action), while at the same time allowing players to take actions whose costs and requirements they know they can fulfill. It should be interpreted in this spirit, and not as a way to block legal actions because of a technicality.
Aroru's Reaction has a trigger, "When an action would target a ninja at Aroru's location". It has no required targets (nor optional), no conditions, no costs, and brings no cards into play.