Rules for February 2nd

I'd have to say that she produces zero. Kolat Interference and Kolat Bookkeeping both create precedent for the gold production of a holding (or Stronghold) to be changed in the middle of a purchase, and I'd have to say that incidental changes due to external effects would also modify the gold currently being spent. So, if I'm bowing a Blacksmith, and you manage to kill one of my Iron Mines in the middle of my purchase, I suddenly have to come up with another gold.

Perhaps I'm thick-headed Vaughn, but I disagree on this one. According to the way Duchon worded the situation, Kossori has already used her innate ability to produce the gold; it's there, waiting for that corrupt holding to add to the coffer so he can buy something. I don't see how dishonoring her AFTER THE FACT--even if you're still in the act of producing gold from other sources--should decrease the amount of gold she has already produced. Her Reaction has been resolved already. Now, if somehow she were dishonored in a Reaction to HER ability, I would agree with you whole-heartedly. any chance for a reconsideration?

There's always a chance. You bring up a good point, that any Reactions modifying her gold production should occur before her action/effect is finished resolving. So, you're correct about Phillipe's example. That specific play of cards would not reduce her gold production to zero, but it's conceivably possible for cards to exist that would result in such a situation by dishonoring her.

I'm sticking to the ruling that gold production can be changed by changing incidental things about the gold producing card (Seppun Kossori's personal honor, the number of Iron Mines in play), but any changes *would* have to happen directly in response to the gold production, not later in the payment/purchase sequence.

I was wondering, if one of my personalities is dishonored by the spell Secrets on the Wind and Solar Eclipse or Final Words pops up, would my dishonored personalities once again become honorable because the two events ends all existing spell effects.

Nope. Permanent changes to the game environment (destruction of a personality, honor gain/loss) are not undone by Final Words or Solar Eclipse.

And don't forget Purusha, who I THINK can shoot you from any province, and can only be shot at if his province is the one under attack.

Nope. Purusha can only be used at the battle where he's assigned. No telescopic sights for him.

I'll just be over in the corner, sulking. Right after I explain that Imperial Funeral is still the card causing the honor loss, just like Iaijutsu Challenge is still the card causing that honor loss, even though it was the decision of another player to make it do so. Unless a card specifically and explicitly says that the personality making the choice is forced to cause the honor loss, the card itself is considered to be causing the loss.

Taking the last statement above to heart, I still have to think that the wording of IF is too ambiguous as stands. From my POV, it is indeed the personality(s) involved that cause the honor loss. So, by this reasoning, IF also cause the honor gain involved if that decision is the one made?

Yes. However, the personality who bows/doesn't bow would still be considered to be involved in the creation of the gain/loss for purposes of seppuku and dishonor.

My question is if I play White Shore Plain during a battle and my tactician who has not used his tactician trait gets a force bonus equal to his Chi at Battle Resolution, keep the force bonus until the end of the turn?

Yep.

I was looking over the archive and read the following on Seppun Sensei:

If an entire action is cancelled, and not just the honor gain / loss portion of it, you do not keep any honor you would have gained / lost. [JA, 24 June 2000]

This kind of goes to the cancelled/negated thing. If the effects of an action are negated, then does the honor loss/gain still occur?

First off, actions are never negated, only canceled. Anyone who brings up Flee the Darkness will automatically get grim-fwapped.

It is possible, however, for some effects of an action to be negated. This is not the same thing as canceling the action, even if all effects of the action are negated (i.e., the action only has one effect, and that effect is negated).

So, I guess my question to you is, was the honor gain/loss part of the action negated in whatever example you're asking about? In other words, you really have to give me something more to work with. If, in some hypothetical situation, all effects (including the honor gain) were negated, then no, the honor gain would never occur. If the honor gain were not negated, then it would occur. If the action is canceled, then it wouldn't. Could you be more specific?

Actually, you can use Banish under Uona, it's not considered searching.

If you take the top card only. You may use Banish to look at the top four and to reshuffle, but you can't take any card but the first.

Not true. With Banish, you draw the top card. Legal under Uona. Then, you draw the top card again. Also legal. Draw again (still legal). Draw again (still legal). Then three of the cards you just drew get reshuffled back into the deck (not covered at all by Uona Sensei). Drawing specifically means taking the top card of your deck into your hand, always, and Banish says nothing that would supercede that.

Whn you take control of an opponent's personality (Say, via Kuni Yori Ex3), and said personality dies, does it go to your discard pile (card's controller) or your opponent's (card's owner)?

It goes to the current controller's discard pile.

Hm. This contradicts some other rulings I've heard, both in tourney and from Jeff -- but from the latter a LONG time ago, and I believe I could be wrong. I'm not exactly questioning the ruling (I'm not sure enough about the memory) as much as wondering about it -- why would you say current controller's?

Because it's in the Archive that way. Under Death and Destruction:

A destroyed card goes in the discard pile of whoever controlled it at the time. If someone else owns it, the card does not change piles when the change-of-control effect would normally wear off. [DW, 12/2/97]

Huh. I just checked the rulings, and the most relevant ruling is this:

"You may get multiple cards from the top of your deck (e.g., Banish All Shadows). [VRD, 26 November 2000]"

This isn't the clearest way of putting it. Vaughn, please clarify. Do you mean that you can choose to take any of the four cards with Banish, even under Uona Sensei? If so, why? Doesn't "top" mean the top card only? Shoudn't we rethink both this ruling and the related Otomo Sensei ruling?

I don't think so. Because Banish uses the word draw, it implies a very specific effect. Drawing is taking the top card of your deck and putting it into your hand, nothing else. What happens to those cards after they are drawn is irrelevant, but for the fact that they were drawn, not searched for and retrieved.

Here's another question:

My opponent is attacking with Moto Gaheris (I wish he'd stayed in the Burning Sands where he belongs...), who is (as usual) carrying Kitsuki Kaagi's Journal. May I play Encircled Terrain? It _will_ send him home... does it make any difference if I play the Encircled from under an Armor of Sun Tao or with the Oracle of Earth, since those prevent it from being removed?

No, you may not play Encircled Terrain. It would, in theory, remove him from the battle eventually, but an action needs to immediately and unconditionally remove him from the battle (and not by killing him) to be legal under his prohibition. Actions that would eventually do are not not legal, especially in a case like Encircled Terrain/Kaagi's Journal, where there are multiple card effects involved in his removal.

Why should an immediacy test exist? It's not supported on Gaheris' text: 'Other players cannot play Action cards during the Battle Action Segment of a battle containing Gaheris unless the Action removes Gaheris from the battle.' Nothing there about 'immediately'. And are we SURE we want to extend the 'destroying something is not removing it' ruling from Test of Courage to this case? Vaugh? Zen? Jeff?

There needs to be an immediacy test to avoid causality arguments, like the one created by Encircled Terrain. Let's say that I have an Intelligence Agent in play when you play the Encircled. Now, I can target Gaheris with actions. Was your Encircled still legal, because now it *won't* send him home? And if it wasn't legal, how'd it get played?

In a comparable situation, let's say that I have a Kakita Toshimoko with Ancestral Dictate played on him targeting Moto Gaheris. Gaheris is attacking Province 1, Toshimoko is at p2. Should I be able to play a Superior Tactics to move Toshimoko into p1? It *will* send Gaheris home...eventually.

Likewise, the destruction!=removal case needs to be in place to prevent silly applications of cards like Test of Courage. Test of Courage should not be able to cancel Iaijutsu Duel. 'Removing' is moving the unit home or to another province, nothing else.

The question basically relates to Land of the Dead and the terrain Arriving at the Imperial Gates (great for spirits & Shadowlands). Say I have 3 spirits defending there with PH of 3 and force of 0 (ok, lets just call them Bayushi Meharu) and one spirit with a PH of 2 and force of 1. I then play Arriving at the Imperial Gates, my question being when the battle is resolved do the Meharu's have just 3F (for the terrain) or 6F (terrain & region) and will the other spirit have just 2F (terrain) or 5F (terrain & region)?

5F, for the terrain and the region. Arriving at the Imperial Gates only changes their printed force, so any in-place modifications to their force would continue to be in place, adding or subtracting to/from their new 'printed' force.

Perhaps an easier way to put it - is the force bonus generated by the Land of the Dead generated only once or is it a constant effect (ie recalculated whenever need arises)?

Traditionally, force bonuses from Regions have been granted when the personality assigns or moves into the relevant province. This is neither here nor there in relation to your question, but I wanted to answer it anyways. Most force bonuses are not reapplied constantly, and if Arriving didn't change printed force, if it changed current force instead, then the bonus from Land of the Dead would *not* reapply. But, that's not the case, so it's irreleveant.