replies for 14 September

ruling questions (jeff)

1. I destroy my opponents fortification in a battle where none of his units where defending, can he response to my honor win with the winds truth with a shugenja outside the batle?

There is no honor gain for destroying Fortifications. They are not part of the defending army.

That being said, if we assume that there is some honor gain (let's say there was one defending unit), then the answer is "yes". The rules of Presence and Relevance only apply during the Battle Action Segment. The honor gain from a battle happens during the Resolution Segment.

2. if there is a tide in a game (dragon vs. shadowland for example), can the dragon concede to the shadowland player by the rules of a tie?

It's always possible to concede.

Does the shadowland player then wins by an honor victory, and if this is true, can the shadowlands win by an honor victory?

If you have to shoehorn it into one of the existing types of victory, it would have to be a Military Victory. It would never be Honor.

3. I remember reading about a way to resolve ties by using a point system that gives points for rings, provinces, honor points, etc? Is this a valid metod, can anyone explain this metod?

That was only used to resolve games that run out of time. It's not used any more. Now, a tied game is worth 0 match points to both players. Since a loss is 1, one player will invariably concede to the other.

4. I need a copy of the code of bushido, where could I find it? Is not in Alderac site anymore!!

I'll need to ask Ray on Monday.

Shiryo no Taisa

A question for Jeff, who seems to be answering most of the Rules questions at the moment:

Shiryo no Taisa Reaction: When a player takes an action before the Defender's first action during a battle containing this unit, cancel that action.

I've always played this as meaning "before the Defender's first normal opportunity for an Open or Battle action during containing this unit".

Strictly as written, it's useless for the attacker in a 2-player game, since as soon as the defender takes any sort of action, for example Purusha's Reaction, Shiryo no Taisa's Reaction can't be used, and if you're the defender, you can only use the Reaction once, as you've then taken an action.

So, have I been playing it wrong, or does it need clarification?

You've been playing it exactly right. "Before the Defender's first action", "before the first normal Battle or Open action", and "when/after the Battle Action Segment begins" are equivalent.

Matsu Hokitare

When exactly do battles start? Can Matsu Hokitare's Reaction be used in response to Tactical Maneuvres?

Hokitare uses the word "battle" in the context of a Defender's Province, so he can use his reaction any time a Personality leaves the Province he is at, even if that battle is not currently being resolved.

replies to 10 September 2001

Relevance can be satisfied by either targeting or affecting something in the battle (or the battle itself). Poisoned Weapon satisfies Relevance.

Er, OK, yes: it reduces the Chi of one of the participants in the duel.

However, assuming I have a unit in the battle (so Presence isn't a problem) which of the conditions for Relevance does Acquiring Favour satisfy if I'm trying to send a unit home with Tsudao?

None, which is why I had to rule that it was legal anyway.

It's obvious now there are more problems caused by the new reaction rules than there were old problems fixed. I'm convinced Reactions need to be made exempt from Relevance once again. I very much want to keep Presence a requirement, however, since prohibiting interference in other players' battles was one of the driving issued behind the changes initially.

Relevance of Reactions

OK Jeff, can we get a more explanatory of what, under the current rules, constitutes "affecting the battle"?

Sure: the exact same things that constituted "affecting the battle" under the old rules.

You'll understand that I can't ever give you an exhaustive list. The moment I do that, everyone will point out the dozens of cards that technically don't fall under it but intuitively should, and therefore don't work the same way anymore, and how the new definition is, ergo, stupid. Look what happened with "perform".

I have a hard time understanding which Reactions are now legal in battles. My current feeling, just from reading the rules, is that Confusion at Court shouldn't be usable against Tsudao's Favor - and this feels wrong.

It feels wrong because it is wrong. It's a failing of the new restrictions on Reactions during battle, which is why they need to be reassessed.

I'm very confused by your reply. How does having a unit in the battle affect whether the cards satisfy Relevance?

Right now, both Presence and Relevance matter. Answering his original question exactly to the letter would have been pointless as he was only asking about one of them.

APC rules question again

Question: does this let the _same_ PTTG affect a Personality more than once?

No.

So, you only get to target one personality once?

Correct. Each of your Samurai will get, at most, +1 Yu no matter how many Plum Tree Training Grounds you play.

Erratta question to Jeff

with all of the new courtier cards in APC, I noticed that Kakita Atoshi (soul of Kakita Torikago) has the Samurai trait, while the original one actually had a courtier trait. Clarification of this please.

Play him as written.

Rule_of_Relevance & Reactions

In a message dated Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:57:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Hiruma Daigoro writes: Maybe it falls under the first of the "Cardinal Rules" listed on page 5 of the APC rulebook? Fall on Your Knees states "Play this card when a player plays a Reaction in the Battle Action Segment." Which would seem to explicitly overrule the Rule of Relevence, and therefor takes precidence over the rulebook,correct?

Nope. It's not explicit.

Let's look at a similar rule from Warlord. Warlord has the Golden Rule (card text overrides the rulebook when the two conflict). It also has a rule that a die roll of 1 is an automatic failure and cannot be modified or rerolled. Now, let's say there's a card reaction that lets you reroll a failed die roll. Can it be used on a 1? Looking only at the Golden Rule, the answer is "yes". This, however, would mean that the "1s can't be rerolled" rule is absolutely and utterly powerless.

Reusing events was replies to 11 September / (Jeff) rules Q's

If togashi sensei is in effect, can a player use the Kaneka wind's effect to discard events "locked" face up in thier prov by the sensei's effect?

Yes. The only prohibition is against voluntarily discarding them..

So then, if Kaneka is used and the event is put back under the deck, I assume it doesn't resolve a second time yes? The effect seems to get around the Togashi sensei quite nicely. I favor, put the card under my deck, and get a fresh card and a resolved event in the same turn. Seems rather open to abuse to me.

Events don't resolve a second time, Kaneka or no Kaneka. Kaneka gets around Togashi Sensei's effect quite fine. I don't consider it an abuse at all, any more than using Essence of Air + Winds of Change on yourself would be.