Rulings for 7 February 2001

Ring of Earth Question

If, at any time from battle declaration to the end of the attack phase, the army attacking a given Province has more Force than that Province's Strength,

Hmm. If I am reading this correctly, if my opponent assigns an army of sufficient strenght in the infantry phase, and then at the end of the assignment phase moves a unit out with Tactical Manuvers, I am still able to play the ROE after the battle resolves. Correct?

Correct.

Rulings for 5 February 2000

In a message dated 2/7/01 9:58:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, writes:

If it was applied before the battle began, like Gohei's, then it won't be negated.

If Gohei's force bonus is applied before the battle begins, why doesn't ISotF cancel the bonus?

ISotF: Battle: Reduce to 0 all force bonuses for cards in this battle, except for bonuses from attached cards.

In Search of the Future DOES cancel Gohei's bonus. I don't know why you think it doesn't.

Rulings for 5 February 2000

I'm going to overturn Vaughn here. The rulebook clearly states that if a Reaction makes one or more targets of an action illegal, that that action does not affect those invalid targets. This is a REVERSAL.

Well, O- Ushi Sensei is not a reaction though. I can't play a reaction in response to my opponent choosing what to check for, such as Fall on Your Knees, etc... Anyway then, my question still remains: what is the procedure for picking legal targets?

You have a point about O-Ushi Sensei not being a Reaction, but I'm going to stick with my reversal unless the rest of the Rules Team has serious objections. The fundamental situation is the same: a target is becoming illegal immediately after being selected. Between exactly matching the spirit and intent of the Reaction rule, and the fact that the game does not allow for repeatedly picking targets until one "works", I feel I have ruled correctly.

Rulings for 5 February 2000

In a message dated 2/7/01 9:58:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, writes:

I've rethought it and I say it needs to stand. Gaheris only allows actions with certain effects to be played. If you don't know, at the time you play an action, whether its effect will be a valid one by Gaheris's text, then you can't play it.

By what I read on this Gaheris ruling, a player shouldn't be allowed to play Superior Strategist in response to his opponents playing of Deadly Ground.

Oh, there'll be repurcussions of this either way, let me assure you. It's not like there have never been inconsistancies within the archives before.

Rules for February 6th

How would it be ruled if Gaheris was attacking a player with the region Osari Plains at his province, and the opponent had a Terrain in hand that would end the battle and send all opposing personalities home, or send home a particular opposing personality home, i.e. Gaheris, upon terrain resolution?

Currently under discussion.

Rulings for 5 February 2000

Also this will probably be a reversal on Rekai exp2/ Burning it Down ruling right?

Probably not.

This ruling has little to do with Rekai Exp2 in particular. Burn It Down is in the center of the spotlight on this one. It's a Reaction that broadens the range of valid targets for another action. As such, it would have to apply before you pick a target for the modified action.

Final ruling on canceled actions

okay, so that means that if an action states: destroy this card to do X, then X never happens when cancelled, but the card is still destroyed.

Correct. Costs aren't refunded.

And if the card states: Do X once a turn, then X never happens when cancelled but can still be performed once a turn. Right?

Right. It's not been performed yet.

Rules for February 6th

I was saving that can of worms for if Jeff eventually ruled that the delayed action doesn't work. With Osari Plains, the Terrain's action is no longer delayed. What then, rules, guys?

What then is that you give us more than 18 hours to resolve the issue, please. I get the list in digests so this list doesn't swamp my mailbox, Dave is gawdawfully busy with his new card game that goes to print this weekend, and Zen is on the other side of the globe. *grumble*

Rulings for 5 February 2000

Check the new ruling on "conditional" force bonus - which I'm trying to understand fully:

Conditional bonus are recalculated permanently.

That's not the ruling. The ruling is that, if the condition stops and then starts again, you get a brand-new bonus that doesn't suffer from anything that has been done to the original bonus (like In Search of the Future).

RULING PLEASE

Shiba Raigens text states: Reaction: Bow Raigen when an action targets one of your Shugenja. If Raigen is a legal target for the action, redirect the action to Raigen.

If Raigen bows when one of my Shugenja is targeted, how can I redirect the action to my own bowed personality? Other than Touch of Death there shouldn't be many actions that can be redirected to Shiba Raigen, after, as the first sentence of his text states, he bows when someone targets one of my Shugenja.

Once Raigen bows, as the first sentence of his text states, how can he now be a legal target for me to redirect the action to? After all players are unable to target their own bowed personalities aren't they?

Point the first: "When you redirect an effect, you are only bound by the effect's original controller's targeting requirements. [27 June 1997]" So it doesn't matter that YOU couldn't have targeted your own bowed Raigen if you'd been the one casting the spell. Your opponent COULD have.

Point the second: don't forget the Rule of Obvious Legality. If strictly adhering to every rule makes a card unusable in all practical situations, it's an exception to one of them.

Final ruling on canceled actions

The Rules Team has come to a unanimous decision.

There will be no reversal of the current rulings regarding canceled actions. They will continue to count as never having been attempted, which means, in particular, that actions with no costs but a limit on the number of times they may be used will remain usable.

Which then begs the following questions, 1.Are canceled and negated going to be considered game terms and entered in the glossary?

They're slated for inclusion in the Gold Edition glossary. They're game terms RIGHT NOW, and have had their current definitions for about three expansions. That's about how long Jessica has had them in her templating style guide.

2.Then does Flee the Darkness' negating of the triggering effect, not use up the limit?

The negation does nothing at all. Canceling has a higher priority.

Regions, Tattoos, and other Questions

1. Refuge of the Three Sisters and Exile's Road. Exile's Road becomes an exact copy except for name. There can only be one Refuge of the Three Sister in play at any time. Do i follow Exile's Road text to the letter, or do standard (such as Ninja Shapeshifter) copying rules apply. Does Exile's Road now say that there can only be one in play at a time, or can i have one Refuge and 3 Roads all with the ability of Refuge?

You may bring the first Exile's Road into play freely. Its title stays "Exile's Road", so it doesn't violate the Refuge's prohibition against more than one Refuge.

Furthermore, since the Refuge's prohibition is NOT self- referential -- it doesn't refer only to that one particular Refuge card -- that text does NOT become "Only one Exile's Road may be in play at any time." That means you can keep bringing in more Exile's Roads and copying that Refuge with them.

2.Come One at a Time. This can be played if there is more than one defender, it just has limited effect, correct?

Correct.

If it was played at a battle between two large armies, both sides could start sending units home if they wanted to, and as soon as there is only one defender, the defender gains that ability, correct?

Not correct. Only attacking units may be sent home. Also, by errata, both the send-home and the challenge action require that there be only one defending unit.

If the defender keeps moving personalities in and out of the battle, does each defender gets the challenge ability as long as that is the only defending personality?

By errata, the ability is not gained by the Personality, but is simply something the Defender can do.

3. The Agasha Libraries What defines an action produced by a tattooed personality

I believe the last rulebook definition was any action on the Personality or for which the Personality bows as part of the cost of using.

4. Shurin Storms This destroys the army too soon to fulfill the conditions for the Ring of Water, correct?

Correct. The Ring of Water requires that the army be destroyed during resolution.

5. Hoshi Eisai Is she correct as printed? Can she use her ability as many times as you want?

The non-experienced one says "twice per battle". The Experienced one can truly use her ability as many times as she wants.

6. Togashi Senai Cards with the "Tattooing" have no effect, do they? How about "Tattoos"

From the archive, "Tattoo", "Tattooed", and "Tattoos" will all count, but that's it. No "Tattooing", sorry.

7. Togashi Gaijutsu If you use the spell Reflecting Pool to give him an ability that targets, he would affect Senai, correct?

Correct.

8. Hitomi Juppun Cannot gain Force bonuses from action. I give him a Dragon Tattoo, then add three tokens. This makes him 5F 6C (because it's an action). After the end of the turn, it is no longer an action, now it is tokens, so he is 8F 6C. Unless he is in a battle and in search of the Future is played, now the tokens are force bonuses again and he becomes 5F again. Huh? Or is the action only giving 3 tokens and the force increase is a side effect.

The action only gives him tokens. The tokens give him a Force bonus. He's 8/6 right away.

9. Agasha Nabe With a Dragon Tattoo. He is in battle and he is bowed. If he has 2 or 3 tokens he cannot straighten at all, but if he has one token can he use his ability to destroy it and straighten? It is an action that is illegal until he destroys the token (because the action must be legal before it is attempted), so it can't work, but it seems like it should be able to.

Trying to straighten him isn't illegal -- it just won't be effective. And if he destroys his one and only fire token, he will, in fact, straighten.

10.Agasha Mumoko Battle: Bow Mumoko to give one of your defending samurai a 2F/2C bonus if there are Shadowlands cards in the opposing army. Does the samurai gain "2F/2C" or Does the samurai gain "2F/2C if there are Shadowlands cards in the opposing army."

Just "2F/2C". The "if there are Shadowlands cards in the opposing army" part restricts when Mumoko can be used.

11. Is it really unsafe to go swimming until a half hour after you eat?

I believe this is a myth.

12. Dragon's Tooth. Can this affect Dragons that are Dragon Clan?

Urk. I'm going to say yes. The text in parentheses is only clarifying what "Dragon" means and is not an additional restriction.

Rulings for 5 February 2000

In other words, you have to stop meeting the condition that originally triggered the bonus to be able to re-trigger it by meeting the condition again. If you never stop meeting the condition, then the bonus still exists as a 0f bonus. Stop meeting it, then meet it again, and the bonus (because it has gone away and now been reapplied) will be at full strength.

How about if I bow two personalities wand move my Ancestral sword from one to another after someone plays ISotF?

Irrelevant. The Sword's bonus is not conditional.

Forced March Question

Is the use of this card restricted to a different province only or can it be used to reattack a province after a bridged pass is blown, etc.

Forced March may only move a unit into the current Province. The unit it moves in must have, at some point this turn, been in an army at another Province. (It may or may not have been in an army at THIS Province, too, at some point -- it doesn't matter.)

More ancestor wackiness.

Ancestors plus Enlistment.

The rules say nothing about wether or not an Ancestor triggers effects that look for attachment or playing of followers, and past rulings would seem to indicate that for purposes of attachment, Ancestors count as followers, as with Kamoko.

Attaching an Ancestor will give you an extra draw under Enlistment, because that's not an effect being applied to the Ancestor.