post for 1 April 2002

Has Feared Duelist been officially released?

I know a few came through from somewhere, but has the card been officially distributed?

No.

Rules Questions

Fear targets a unit. Can the ability on the Asako Towers cancel the Fear affect when their unit is targeted?

Yes.

For the sake of rulings, does an action always target a Personality if it says that it targets a unit?

Yes. Vice-versa as well. [DA rulebook p. 47]

Ancestral Protection Question

Reads:

Reaction: Play this card when an action targets one of your Personalities with an Ancestor attached. Destroy the Ancestor to cancel the action.

Can you use this to cancel Events?

No.

Normally I would say no, because an Event is not an Action. However, Ancestral Protection's wording is with a lowercase "action". I know I am looking for a loophole here, but I am just trying to make sure I fully understand the card and all of it's uses before trying it out.

"Action" is only capitalized in the context of the phrase "Action card". Even with a lower-case "a", the term "action" really does mean just that: actions. Not Events, not things like assigning or seppuku.

post for 29 March 2002

Doesn't Ambush target both units, and therefore satisfy Relevance if either is in the battle?

Yes.

Official Rulings: Dragon Tattoo

I hate to tell you this, but that is altogether untrue. Since SYmpathetic Energies was printed, the ability to shift fire tokens to other personalities without the inhibition of getting bowed for all eternity has been possible. It has been a long-standing rule, that unless the card text specifies otherwise, a +1/+1 fire token was just a bonus token, with no other meaning aside from that, it didn't restrict or inhibit the personality in any way. So, essentially, this reverses a rule that has been in place for some 5 years now, and it IS a big deal. It severely changes the way certain decks work, both open and restricted.

It does not reverse that ruling. The inability to straighten has not been changed to be a property of the tokens. It's a permanent effect of making them, not a side-effect of possessing the ability to make them.

Off the box personalities

Why didn't Unicorn or Shadowlands get an off the box personality in this new set. Each clan were suspossedly getting one, but Shadowlands and Unicorn were left without one.

Everyone was brought much cloer to equal numbers. Ratling, if you'll notice, got two.

Gold Legal?

In Dark Allies, I pulled several cards that were not bugged with the Gold kanji.

These are: Shrine of Reverse Fortunes(R) Deep Earth Sanctum? (R) Shackled Oni Clear Water Village Trusted Advisor

Are these cards Gold-legal?

All cards in Dark Allies are Gold-legal. Once it releases we'll have a full list of cards affected by this error.

Terrible Standard, Oni No Akuma + Forgotten Tomb

Also, if Oni no Akuma is placed in the Forgotten Tomb, is the province from which it came destroyed? Or is it destroyed when Oni no Akuma emerges from the tomb, or is it not destroyed at all? I suspect the latter.

The MRP of Oni no Akuma destroys the Province "from which it was played". If it's not played from a Province, it doesn't destroy one.

Kaneka's Blockade clarification?

Greetigns All,

I have a query about Kaneka's Blockade.

Just to clarify, regardless of who has to discard Fate cards, they are discarded from the top of the deck, right?

Right.

Dark Allies Pre-Release...

Phoenix took first (just because they had better honor holdings than the lion...) Lion Took second (with only 12 gold holdings yet)

All the starters have 11 gold holdings pre-sorted. If you had twelve and he had more, he got luckier in his booster packs.

In theory, Lion has an advantage in Sealed Deck because their Personalities are costed with the expectation their Stronghold will only produce 3 Gold. You are hurt less than anyone except possibly Shadowlands by having to use 2-for-2 Holdings.

I also have to say that the selection of fixed cards for the starters needs work. (12 gold holdings to build a deck just isn't enough, even a 30 card deck) and more of the cards need to be geared towards the stronghold's specific strengths if that is possible. A lion deck where the stronghold ability is to attack an extra time per turn really requires Rallying Cry to be effective, Only one in the starter was extremely disappointing.

All the starters have 1 Rallying Cry pre-sorted. Rallying Cry is a game-winning card in Sealed Deck; I'm always uneasy about giving more of it to one clan than to another even when it doesn't mesh so utterly perfectly with a Stronghold ability.

Question for any AEG staff that can answer it...kindof important

Teeth of Osano-Wo isn't listed as a DA card in the DA rulebook. Its printed card number (the number on the card) is 161, but the Rulebook states that card #161 is Shiro Agasha.

The card is Gold-legal and, if you double-check, it should be numbered 151 out of 161.

Question about No Hiding Place

Quick question, can No Hiding Place be used for a range attack on a personality with followers ?

No. Aside from allowing the target to be in the Defender's home instead of opposing, all other targeting rules and restrictions apply.

Blackened Sky Q

Could you use Arrows From the Woods to increase a ranged attack during Blackened Sky?

No, by the MRP of Blackened Sky. No actions are allowed by you, including Reactions, except ones which create Ranged Attacks.

Off the box personalities

I disagree with the Ratling sh, because you can buy any ratling with 6 gold or less with the sh only (6-1-2=3: the minus one from the sh special ability, the minus 2 for faction)I haven't looked hard enough at the rest of the clans to count off the top of my head....

By errata, the Warrens of the Nezumi no longer provides the 1g discount for Personalities -- just other types of Ratling cards.

secrets on the wind and shadowlands questions

Isn't secret on the winds political because it causes dishonor

Secrets on the Wind is not Political because it's in Gold Edition without the "Political" keyword, and starting with Gold Edition, that's all that matters.

It never was Political before, either. The only actions that fell under the "Political" definition were those that modified an honor loss or gain that something else created.

another question is Toturi Tsudao Text Political Battle: Discard the Imperial Favor to send an attacking or allying Personality home from this battle, bowed. You may take this action during a battle in which you have no units.

Tsuburu no Oni Text Unaligned Nonhuman Cavalry Shadowlands You must destroy one of your Personalities to bring Tsuburu no Oni into play. Lose 5 Honor. Tsuburu no Oni cannot attach Armor or Followers. Reaction: When the Battle Action Segment ends, if Tsuburu no Oni is attacking and no units are defending, Tsuburu no Oni gains +6F.

Kyoso no Oni Text Unaligned Nonhuman Shadowlands Lose 3 Honor and destroy one of your bowed or unbowed Holdings, if any. Kyoso no Oni cannot attach Followers or Items. Elemental Battle: Bow Kyoso no Oni for a Ranged 7 Attack.

Goblin Wizard Text Unaligned Shugenja Nonhuman Shadowlands Lose 4 Honor.

Don't all these cards list there requirements with the secetion I underlined

Nothing was underlined in my copy. I, like many readers, don't download fancy formatting or HTML or MIME encoding, or anything else that fills messages with unreadable computer code when viewed by someone who just happens to use a different mail-reading program than the sender used to write it. Please highlight things with all capitals, or quotation marks, or something else which is universal.

ie you must lose 3 honor and destroy a holding to bring in kosoyo no oni and shadowlands horde cant lose honor then then how can they pay the requiremnets of losing honor

Those are effects, not costs. Compare the wording to the Personality destruction of Tsuburu no Oni, which IS a cost.

and by the same ruling couldn't anyone use a wind if someone else had the favor

If a card says "Do X to do Y", then X is a cost. This comes straight from the rulebook, and Toturi Tsudao follows this format exactly. So, no, if I don't have the Favor, I can't use that ability (barring some other card that lets me pay that cost, like Acquiring Favor).

and anyone can ignore any requirements such as "will not join" because both ways requirements are ignored by the player

I don't understand this sentence.

Sender: owner-l5r-ccg@alderac.com

Greetings.

This issue came up in the pre-release I ran today. I wsih for an official ruling.

Goblin Slingers 1 / 0 0 / 4 / - Nonhuman * Shadowlands Lose 3 Honor. Battle: Bow for a Ranged 3 Attack. Battle: Bow for two consecutive Ranged 2 Attacks targeting cards in the same unit.

If this card were attached to a Personality with a Ranged Attack, or a Personality who had another Follower which had a Ranged Attack, could it combine one of its consecutive Ranged Attacks with one from another card in its unit? If so, which of the two consecutives does it combine with, the first or the second. Or is that up to the player?

It's up to the player. He can combine with either.

If the first of its two destroys the last card in that target unit, is its second one lost?

Yes.

On Tsuruchi and his Soul Of, do they both become Ranged 3s?

Yes.

rules question...

If one was to use the event Alliance while playing any NON-shadowlands stronghold, would alliance work for SLH personalities? The rule online reads... [...] So this means that because there is no one word that is synonmous with SLH (like monk is for brotherhood), that Alliance wouldn't have any effect for SLH personalities, correct?

Correct. You can name the Shadowlands as a Faction, but no one would get the 2g discount.

The Wandering Monk?

So what happens if I have a dead Wandering Monk and I use Speak with the Voices of the Dead targetting, oh say, Goju Adorai (will only join a ninja player)?

Do I bow Adorai to draw a card and then he spins rapidly around the table trying to find someone to join before arriving back at me?

The transfer of control and movement into his home don't happen, and you'd end up simply drawing a card.

post for 29 March 2002

Limited: Target one of your Personalities with the Tattooed trait and without a Dragon Tattoo. For the rest of the game, the Personality has a Dragon Tattoo and gains the ability "Open: Place one to three +1F/+1C Fire tokens on this Personality. For the rest of the game, this Personality cannot have more than three Fire tokens, cannot straighten by any means if he or she has any Fire tokens, and removes a Fire token instead of straightening during the Straighten Phase if he or she has Fire tokens."

So what happens if I have a tattooed Oni with 3 fire tokens and some other personality with 3 fire tokens and I try to Possess them together?

a) 3 tokens disappear b) The possession is cancelled c) The possession overrides the fire token restriction (now 6 tokens) d) None of the above e) One of the above and Jeff beats Leon with a stick

e), with a minor chord in c). The combined Personality also does not carry the "can't straighten with Fire tokens" or "loses a Fire token instead of straightening in the Straighten Phase" traits.

Official Rulings: Dragon Tattoo

So If I put the fire tokens on another personality with sympathetic energies, who has had fire tokens before then he will not be able to unbow?

Correct.

Also does it effect Togashi Mitsu? I think it bites that you can lock down somebodies Togashi Mitsu this way. I thought this was the reason why we never had the rule in the first place. Does GOLD constantly take precedence over the integrity of OPEN?

Mitsu has always been "lock-downable" by moving a Fire token onto him that was generated somewhere else. In fact, if the Dragon Tattoo ruling is extended to cover Mitsu as well, then he actually WON'T be locked down if he has never made one of his own a fire tokens, whereas historically he has always be adversely affected.

Also does this actually effect a personality who had the Dragon ancestor Gaijutsu no Shiryo on them that has the dragon tattoo attached?

It affects any Personality who has ever used the Dragon Tattoo's action to make Fire tokens, whether he has the Tattoo through direct play or that Ancesotr. It does not affect a Personality who has a Dragon Tattoo but has not yet used it this game.

post for 29 March 2002

Are there more considerations for change currently under discussion? Im sure a general poll on this list will turn up a couple of card culprits who are overpowered for gold and actually actively win games on a regular basis.

Btw. To all those who have been complaining about dragon whining over the matter, a dragon card was hurt such that it weakened one of our already weak deck types, this card was hurt without proper explanation and caused much confusion. Now the confusion has been cleared up, I'm sure the threads of the matter which will remain are those whining about the dragon whining and none-other.

Let me set something straight.

This ruling was not made because of Dragon's current strength in the Gold (or any) environment. Nor was it was made to change Dragon's current strength in the Gold (or any) environment.

The ruling was issued because the Design Team felt that the Dragon Tattoo was not functioning properly, and this ruling is the easiest way to get it to the point where it does with the least strain on the wording of the card and the least disagreement with past rulings (in particular, the ones on Sympathetic Energies). The rulings on Togashi Mitsu and the Dragon Tattoo have always had a high degree of Designer Fiat -- they worked the way they worked because We Said So. This new ruling was made because we feel it has LESS of that quality to us.

My playtesters were aware of the Gaijutsu no Shiryo/Dragon Tattoo combo. If they had universally felt it was too strong, Gaijutsu no Shiryo would not have been printed as you see him. Furthermore, the fact that there are, with the release of Dark Allies, twelve Gold-legal Tattoos, and ONE of them combos in a noticably potent way with the Ancestor, and said Tattoo (not the Ancestor) is the only card directly addressed by the ruling, biases me to a very large degree against the suggestion that, of the two cards, it's the Ancestor that's the problem.

Personally, I have only two regrets about the ruling: not thinking of it the day Togashi Mitsu Experienced was printed (and it's a wee bit late for that) and making the announcement so close to a weekend, where it was more likely to disrupt tournaments. For that, I apologize.