Rules for 19 January 2005

Your Rules for Wednesday, January 19, 2005

Heart of a Hero & D'nir'ch

I have played Heart of a Hero. Now I pay 2 Gold to create a Weapon Item token from D'nir'ch's Battle action.

How is the Weapon Item token? A) +1F/+1C B) +4F/+1C

I see in DE Rulebook, Overview of Cards Type: Items, pag.47 that Items has: A. Force bonus; B. Name; C. Chi bonus; D. Gold cost; E. Traits, abilities, and flavor text; F. Focus value

The Item is created by an action. The Item has a stat named "Force Bonus" But I don't know if the +3F is granted to this stat or not.

If finally the answer is "A) +1F/+1C" please explain it.

The Item itself is +1F/+1C.

The bonus it actually gives to the Personality it is attached to, for as long as it remains attached, is +4.

Having a +1F weapon normally confers a +1F bonus to the wielder. Other effects can change this bonus to the Personality without actually altering the Item itself. Heart of a Hero is one of those kinds of effects.

So, when you take an Action to create that Item, a Personality gains the Item, and instead of getting the "normal" +1F from a +1F Item, he gains a +4F bonus. If that bonus ever ends due to the Item no longer being attached, future bonuses conferred by attaching the item are distinct from that old one. They won't have that +3F increase from Heart of a Hero the original bonus received.

Yodin Sensei [RULES]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 03:44:08 -0700

On Wed, Jan 19 2005 14:39:55 "Philippe Duchon" , <duchon.philippe at free.fr>

Is there an Errata to Yodin Sensei, which clarifies its interaction with the new card templating (ie. Dawn of the Empire/Web of Lies)?

There is no errata. It doesn't need any.

OK, I see what you mean. Targeting in the new templating is typically just targeting, not "targeting with card effects", is that what you mean?

Yeah, I apologize if I wasn't clear about that. Since Dawn, Actions have been broken down in Cost/Timing-Targeting/Effects. We as players, now have targeted Abilities & Actions, but not always "targeting with card effects" (As per the new templating).

Actually, you still do. No rules have changed. The new template moves parts of the card around so all the targets are listed in one place and explicitly labeled, but that's all it is -- a different way of writing the cards. The mechanics of the game are the same as before Dawn.

There is zero difference between

"Limited: Destroy a Personality." (Diamond wording)

and

"Limited: Target a Personality. Destroy him."

and

"Limited: Target a Personality. Destroy the target."

They all work exactly the same way. All involve picking a target for the destruction effect after announcing the action and before paying its costs. All involve targeting with an effect.

(Side note: We use pronouns whenever we can to make shorter, easier-to-read cards. The third example above is a legal wording, but unlikely to be used in favor of the second. When targeting requirements are trickier, like "Target a Personality with Follower," we would write the effect as "Destroy the target." or "Destroy the Personality." instead, since referring to "him" would be ambiguous here.)

Ring of Air

If I play Ring of Air from my hand after my 3rd effect, put it back in my hand via an effect, and play a 4rth spell effect/kiho, can I put it back into play?

Ring of Air says, "Play Ring of Air after casting three or more Spells and/or Kiho in one turn."

4 counts as "three or more," does it not? Responding to the 4th or 5th Spell and/or Kiho cast in the turn is perfectly fine.

for purpose of rehonoring what does INVOLED mean?

For purpose of rehonoring what does Involed mean? Please I cant seem to figure this one out.

This is definitely a Jeff question.

Forwarded.

Kan'Chek

a)On the accumulated rulings,under "Moto Gaheris"(the well-known and much hated one)it says:

""An action card must immediately and unconditionally remove Gaheris's unit from the battle to be be legal. An action card that might remove Gaheris (e.g., Stand or Run), destroys Gaheris (e.g., To Do What We Must), or ends the battle (e.g., Entrapping Terrain), is not legal. [ZF, 2 August 2000]""

If the destruction of Gaheris(and his subsequent placement in the discard pile,or wherever else-in any case,NOT in the current battle:an unconditional result)is NOT considered to be immediately and unconditionally remove Gaheris's unit from the battle,how can the destruction of the shugenja bearing a spell be considered to be immediately and unconditionally remove the spell from play?

The Gaheris ruling stems entirely from Designer Fiat that his phrase "removes Gaheris from the battle" was intended to apply to movement only. There is no parallel with Kan'chek. "remove[d] the Spell from play" means removed in any way and for any reason, just like it does on every other card with the phrase "removed from play".

b)As another member of the list has pointed out,there are cases when destroying the caster of the spell doesn't outright and unconditionally destroy the spell itself.

In those cases, Kan'chek can attempt to cast it. He is only prevented from trying to cast if it is known in advance that the Spell will leave play as a direct or indirect result of paying its cost if no optional Reactions are used or other conditional effects occur. This is a straightforward application of the "Smart Cards" ruling.

That should cover everything for Wednesday. If I missed your question, please repost it with the flag [RULES] as part of a Clear and Distinct subject line. I'll get back to you at the first opportunity.