>From: Kristmundur Bergsveinsson <khb@...>
>Subject: Re: L5R Rules question
>
>I have a question about seppuku and "Dirty Politics".
>
>If I target an opponents Dishonored Samurai with "Shame" can I use
>"Dirty Politics" to prevent the honorloss before the opsing player
>can seppuku?
>
>Since "Dirty Politics" say "Before another player loses Honor, negate
>the loss, then gain Honor equal to the amount you negated"
>
>And Seppuku can only be done when a samurai (or courtier) causes you
>to loase family honor.

Seppuku is done when the Samurai is targeted by an action, performs
an action, or makes a decision with that result. [DE p. 88] He is
targeted by the Shame long before any loss actually happens, so
responses to the targeting (seppuku) will always happen before
responses to the loss (Dirty Politics).

;;;;;

>From: Daniel Holbrook <danimal_210@...>
>Subject: [L5R-CCG] Chasing Osano-Wo
>
>Can I bow any of my shugenja in any location for
>chasing osano-wo? If not, what is the extent to which
>I can bow for it?

Chasing Osano-Wo is a Battle action with no built-in restriction that
the caster has to be in the current battle. It follows all the normal
rules for Battle action legality: you can do it if

You have at least one unit in the current battle, AND

the caster OR the target is in the current battle. [DE pp. 80-81]

;;;;;

>From: "Billy Vaughn" <Billy_Vaughn@...>
>Subject: [L5R-CCG] Rules Question - Naval Attack
>
>If I attack with all naval personalities and my opponent has one naval and
>two other peeps to defend, can I declare a naval invasion?
>
>Naval
>If every Follower and Personality in only one army has the Naval trait, then
>immediatly after the battle is chosen for resolution....

Yes. Only one of the two armies has the Naval trait on all its
Followers and Personalities.

;;;;;

>From: "Bryan K. Winston" <bryan.winston@...>
>Subject: [L5R-CCG] Question for Jeff on the Egg of Panku
>
>I've always thought when the Egg went into play it became a copy of the
>personality it copied for all intents and purposes. And that this
>removed it's unique trait allowing your opponent to play his/her egg if
>desired. Is that correct?

That is correct as of the Diamond Edition wording, which is the most recent.

;;;;;

>From: "ZiYaM" <ziyam@...>
>Subject: [L5R-CCG] [RULES] Kinuye and Playing With Madness
>
>I have a question for Jeff.
>
>Some persons I know have a particular interpretation of this 3 cards :
>Asako Kinuye - Playing With Madness (PWM) and Bloodspeaker Sanctum.
>
>The problem is they think that PWM can be played with Kinuye with
>the use of the Sanctum.

It can. PWM is a Maho Kiho. Kinuye does not need to bow when casting
Maho Kihos. It can only be cast by Shugenja, though, which
Bloodspeaker Sanctum provides.

>So, there is my reflexion :
>
>PWM has a cost : Bow a shugenja.
>Bloospeaker Sanctum allow a personnality to cast a kiho as if he
>were a shugenja.
>
>In the fact, Kinuye DON'T become a shugenja, so she cannot satisfy
>the cost of PWM because no shugenja is bowed to pay that cost...

Kinuye removes bowing from the cost. Otherwise her trait would be
useless.

;;;;;

>From: "Scott Schultz" <scott@...>
>Subject: [L5R-CCG] Rules Question - Suspended Terrain vs. My Father's Weapon
>
>Suspended Terrain:
>Delayed Terrain Battle: When the Resolution Segment for this battle ends,
>bow all units still in it. This bowing is not a result of battle and cannot
>be negated. These units cannot straighten during their controllers' next
>Straighten Phases.
>---------
>My Father's Weapon:
>Weapon Straighten this Personality at the end of the turn you bring in My
>Father's Weapon into play.
>----------
>
>I had played My Father's Weapon on a personality. That personality
>participated in a battle in which Suspended Terrain resolved. At the end of
>my turn, my opponent and I had a discussion with the result that I convinced
>him that Suspended Terrain wouldn't prevent the straightening effect from My
>Father's Weapon because it was happening at the end of my turn and not
>during my next straighten phase as specified by Suspended Terrain.
>
>Was I correct?

Yes. [card text]

;;;;;

>From: "Teiran" <teiran@...>
>Subject: [L5R-CCG] Intresting Ring of Water Tricks
>
>Here are some of the things I've done in the past to get out the Ring of
>Water which have caused my opponent to stare at me like I was an idiot who
>had lots his mind.
>
>I attack with three personalities. My opponent defends with no one, and
>then stares at me as I play Come one at a Time. My opponent goes, "But,
>you're the attacker! You can't play that." "Yes, yes I can." My opponent
>then stares at me when I proceed to send all three people home, leaving his
>province undestroyed.

Playing the Terrain was, in fact, legal, but sending people home was
not.

"WHILE THERE IS ONLY ONE DEFENDING PERSONALITY, that Personality may,
as a Battle action, issue an unrefusable challenge to an opposing
Personality, and each player may, as a Battle action, send one of his
or her bowed or unbowed attacking units home bowed." [card text]

Both Battle actions are only usable while the defending army holds
exactly one unit. He had zero.

;;;;;

>From: Whitecat31@...
>Subject: Re: [L5R-CCG] rules for 9 Feb. 2004
>
>> >From: "Kit Falbo" <kitfalbo@...>
>> >Subject: [L5R-CCG] Clairification on Strategic crossroads and ambush
>> >
>> >Can a player use the battle action given to them even if they
>> >can't legally bring a unit into battle?
>>
>> During an Ambush, a player who has a unit in the battle may use
>> its action. It will do nothing. A player with no units there
>> may not use it because it is known that it will not meet the Rule
>> of Presence.
>>
>
>OK, Jeff.. Please tell me if this is legal according to your ruling.
>
>I play ambush, and ambush another bowed personality with one of my
>personaliteis. My first action I play strategic crossroads. TMy
>opponent passes.
>I use strategic Crossroads and target another guy to move into the battle.
>This fails because of the ambush restriction.
>My opponent stares at me like I am an idiot (I AM BY THE WAY) and passes.
>Again, I use strategic Crossroads and target another guy to move into the
>battle. This fails because of the ambush restriction.
>My opponent stares at me like I am an idiot AGAIN and passes.
>Again, I use strategic Crossroads and target another guy to move into the
>battle. This fails because of the ambush restriction. I have now performed 4
>battle actions in a battle and play the ring of Water.
>
>Is this legal? According to the way I interpet your ruling, it is.
>
>I would like to point out this ruling from you and why I think it is
>illegal.
>
>Because other units may not move into the battle, any action that would try
>to move in another unit (e.g., Tireless Assault) are not legal because they
>will not satisfy the Rule of Relevance. [JA, 11 August 2003]
>
>So all though presence allows us to do really stupid things in battle. I
>think relavence would prevent this.

This is being forwarded to the Rules Team. The pertinent question is
whether the Terrain is "a card or token at the battle". [DE p. 81]
It's not in the discard pile until it gets destroyed; clearly it's in
play somewhere.

Tireless Assault in this situation is clearly against Relevance
because Tireless Assault's card itself is not at the battle. That
ruling is not going to change.

;;;;;

>From: "Billy Vaughn" <Billy_Vaughn@...>
>Subject: RE: [L5R-CCG] rules for 9 Feb. 2004
>
>The way I thought the SH works, was kinda like Hunting Tiger does.

It USED to. That changed in Diamond. The Most Recent Printing makes
the discard an effect of targeting rather than an additional cost.

;;;;;

>From: Martin Lund <kaioto@...>
>Subject: Re: [L5R-CCG] rules for 9 Feb. 2004
>
>Comments Below:
>
>--- Jeff Alexander <jalexander@...> wrote:
>>
>> If there was no action -- and there wasn't, since it
>
>> was canceled -- then you couldn't have targeted
>> someone with an action. I don't know what you mean
>by
>> "canceled actions never happened".

Did I actually type that? Erk. Sorry. What I meant was,

"I don't know what you mean by 'I thought all that "canceled actions
never happened" was a thing of the past.'"

(Sorry for the triple layer of quotes.)

A canceled action does not count as having happened.

>[MARTY] "If an action or Event is canceled, the entire
>thing is stopped. It does not successfully resolve."
>(DE Rulebook, Page 72)
>
>"The first time each phase each other player targets
>one of your Personalities with an action, he must
>discard a card from his hand." - Razor's Edge Dojo
>
>Now, perhaps my interpretation of the word "stopped"
>and "targets" is off here, Jeff. "Stop" means that you
>cease playing out the Action. The Action fails.
>"Targets" is something that occurs independently of
>the Action being successfully played (well before its
>effects could resolve).
>
>There was an Action, even if it failed, because the
>personality was targeted and triggered Razor's Edge
>Dojo. A failed Action, is still an Action, even if it
>is not considered "played." Cancelation does not go
>back in time and undo this sequence.

A canceled action didn't happen. It didn't "resolve but not
successfully resolve" or "get taken but not played" or any other
paradoxical combination like that. It happened, or it didn't happen.

>Has the player whose Action was canceled - played -
>his or her first Action this phase? No.
>
>Has the player whose Action was canceled - targeted -
>a personality controled by the RED player with an
>Action this phase? Yes.

See, this is what I'm trying to avoid. How can a player have targeted
an action when she hasn't taken any?

;;;;;

>From: Whitecat31@...
>Subject: Re: [L5R-CCG] rules for 9 Feb. 2004
>
>Phoenix player with a Ring of Air in play, goes to battle against a Lion
>player.
>
>In this big battle the Phoenix player has
>Shiba Yoma Exp
>Isawa Yoriko with an ancestral sword and Kuro's Fire attached
>and an
>Isawa Ihara
>
>The Lion player has in the battle for defense.
>Akoko Ieshige with a farmland follower token
>Kitsu Juri with a farmland follower token.
>and
>Kitsu Tomoe

And you're eating a ham sandwich on a Tuesday. Got it.

>
>The Phoenix player plays sneak attack and bows Isawa Yoriko and casts Kuro's
>fire.
>At this point why does Shiba Yoma Exp not Gain the force bonus and Akoko
>Ieshige does?
>
>Relavent text on Shiba Yoma Exp
>Immediately before each time a Kiho or Spell is cast while Yoma is in the
>current battle, he gains +1F/+1C. .
>Relavent text on Akodo Ieshige. Ieshige gains +1F each time an opposing
>player takes an action during an Attack Phase.

They do both gain the bonus. I don't see where I said otherwise.

Yoma gets the bonus immediately before the Spell is cast. If the
Spell is canceled, the bonus goes away -- retroactively, if
necessary. So does Ieshige's.

>The first range attack by the Kuro's fire targets the farmland follower on
>Akodo Ieshige. The second range attack targets Akodo Ieshige. The Lion player
>drops down flee the darkness and bows Kitsu Juri. How much bonus should Shiba
>Yomo Exp have?
>
>A. +1/+1 From the Flee the darkness
>B. +2/+2 From Kuro's Fire and Flee the darkness.

A.

>Another question:
>At any point of the casting and using of the spell Kuro's fire, could Isawa
>Yoriko bow the spell instead to unbow herself, and at what point could this
>happen?

Yes: immediately after the casting stage goes by with no
cancelations, before any effects are produced.

>Or could she use the Ring of Air to unbow herself, and at what point
>could that happen?

Immediately after bowing. [card text] The Ring of Air doesn't care of
the Spell or Kiho even happens.

;;;;;

>From: "Kit Falbo" <kitfalbo@...>
>Subject: [L5R-CCG] Taking actions you know won't work.
>
>As with Strategic crossroads and ambush.
>
>Is it always legal to take actions you know won't work?

There is no rule against it. (It would be misleading to say "it's
always legal.")

>Do the smart card options only work on cards with choices? Or can I
>now choose to give Iuchiban to my opponent when they target him with
>vilgilant witch hunter?

Those are two entirely unrelated issues.

The "Smart Cards" ruling says this:

"Whether an action is legal to try takes into account the known state
of the game (i.e., ongoing effects, bowed status, placement of units
in battle), not just the action's own effects."

As an example...

I have an imaginary Action card that says "Limited: Gain 2 Honor and
draw a card."

Let's say an Event happened this turn that says, "For the rest of the
turn, negate all Honor gains."

Can I play my imaginary Action card just to draw another one? Yes.

Now let's say a different Event happened instead. This one says, "For
the rest of the turn, negate all Honor gains and card draws."

Can I still play my imaginary Action card, just to shrink my hand?
Yes. It's legal even though it won't produce any effects -- there
is no rule against that.

Okay, third example. Now the Event says, "For the rest of the turn,
cards that create Honor gains cannot be played."

Can I play my imaginary Action card under this Event? No! It creates
an Honor gain.

But...

If this latest Event happens, AND the first one ("negate all Honor
gains") also happens, now I CAN play this Action card. Why? Because
it's not going to count as "a card that creates an Honor gain" due to
the effects of that other Event.

That's the Smart Cards rule.


The ruling that a card that forces another player to do one of several
things requires him to pick one he can actually do has been formalized
much more recently, but I imagine was followed as an unwritten rule by
players for longer.


--
Jeff Alexander
Lead Designer, L5R CCG
Alderac Entertainment Group

_______________________________________________
L5r-ccg mailing list
L5r-ccg@...
http://alderac.com/mailman/listinfo/l5r-ccg_alderac.com