Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About rmunn

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Dallas, Texas, United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm becoming convinced that Caleb, and the other FFG designers, get so many rules questions that they don't have time to keep careful track of their previous rulings. Which means you get inconsistent rulings like this one, where he reverses a ruling from two years earlier without mentioning that it's a reversal; I believe that's because he'd forgotten about his 2015 ruling, doesn't have a "past rulings" database to easily look it up in, and therefore didn't know that he was reversing himself. Another example is Hands Upon the Bow, which was relevant in another thread I recently participated in: Caleb first ruled that Hands Upon the Bow could be used against enemies immune to player card effects, then a few months later in a different email exchange he ruled that it could not be used against enemies immune to player card effects. I think the latter ruling is the correct one, because it does not target a framework effect, but it's still a confusing reversal. (Also, his ruling that the Hands Upon the Bow attack is not a Ranged attack, while correct according to RAW, is IMHO wrong from a game-design standpoint. For goodness' sake, the attack requires a character with Ranged! So I play HUtB as if it was errata'd to include the text "This attack is counted as a Ranged attack," i.e. like Great Yew Bow's effect. Sometimes that helps me, as in Rivendell Bow's +1 to ranged attacks, and sometimes it hurts me, as in Great Cave-troll's immunity to ranged damage. But it's how the card should have been designed.) Same. I'm going to treat the rules reference as if it has an action window between the enemy attacks step and the player attacks step -- the "mystery" window you're referring to, because you're quite right that that's the only way to resolve those weird inconsistencies. I'm also going to consider that there are action windows before and after each attack resolution, as well as inside the attack resolutions, in case another weird card interaction shows up.
  2. Looking at page 20 of the rules reference, I don't see an action window that you could use if there is nothing engaged with you. There is an action window right after the "deal shadow cards" step, so if you used Westfold Outrider's action to engage the enemy at that point, it would have the opportunity to attack you but would not have received any shadow cards, which could be quite useful in planning your defense since you'd know exactly how much attack was incoming. But the only other action windows present during the combat step are inside the Enemy Attack Resolution and Player Attack Resolution, neither of which will trigger if there is nothing engaged with you. So according to the text of the rules reference, I don't see any usable action window between the "Resolve Enemy Attacks" process (steps 6.3-6.6) and the "Player Attacks" process (steps 6.7-6.10). Note that the turn sequence laid out in the rules reference is different from how it appears in the printed rulebook included in the game! That rulebook prints the enemy attack resolution & player attack resolution steps in green, which means "Any player can take actions generally, or between the game steps stated in the rules." But a green box in the online rules reference does not mean "action window here", it means "this step might be repeated." E.g. if there are multiple engaged enemies, you'll repeat the Enemy Attack Resolution sequence once per enemy. But if you have no engaged enemies, the Enemy Attacks and Player Attacks steps are skipped and there is no action window available to use Westfold Outrider's ability. And since the rules reference also says that if there's a conflict between it and the printed rulebook, the rules reference takes priority, that means that there's no action window between the enemy attacks phase and the player attack phase. Now, I personally find this to be counterintuitive. I feel that there should be action windows not just inside the resolution of enemy attacks and/or player attacks, but between them as well. So I'd house-rule that what you want to do is allowable, and you can use a Westfold Outrider to, essentially, lure an enemy into a waiting ambush where they get no chance to attack. But just be aware that this is a house rule, and that according to the rules as written, your only attack window if nothing is engaged with you is right after shadow cards have been dealt.
  3. This response comes two months later, but I just want to point out that in the rules reference, under "Cost", it says that you cannot pay the cost of a card if "its effect does not have the potential to change the game state" (emphasis mine). So, for example, the 1-cost Leadership event Ever Vigilant ("Choose and ready 1 ally card") could not be played if nobody has any ally cards out. But Man the Walls ("Reduce the cost of the next ally played by each player this phase by 1") can be played even if it ends up doing nothing because nobody played any allies, because it did change the game state: it created a lasting effect that wasn't there before. Whether or not that effect whiffed is irrelevant: creating a lasting effect always counts as changing the game state, because it puts a new rule into play for a certain time. I mention this because I came across your "some events can end up doing nothing" sentence and thought at first that it was incorrect until I checked the text on the Man the Walls card. And so, since fewer people seem to be familiar with the Rules Reference than with the FAQ, I figured it was worth mentioning.
  4. I'd say that the phrase "that enemy cannot attack you" doesn't buff you as the player, it debuffs the enemy. And therefore while the card could in theory be played after an immune enemy engages you (because that's targeting a framework step), its effect (which targets the specific enemy that engaged you) would fail to resolve. And so you'd just have wasted a resource for nothing. (In fact, since you're not allowed to play cards that have no potential to change the game state, you'd probably be forbidden from playing the card in the first place.) The reason this is different from Hands Upon the Bow is because although "attack an enemy" is a framework effect (and Hands Upon the Bow just expands the power of your normal framework-granted attack, letting it reach into the staging area), there is no framework effect that grants the effect of skipping over the attacks from one enemy (or even all enemies) engaged with you. Since the framework doesn't give any way to have attack immunity from engaged enemies, the only way to have it is via a card effect, and therefore enemies immune to player card effects are immune to that one.
  5. If the Git repository you mean is https://gitlab.com/rikus01/SWDataSet-OggDudes, then I know that that one has the Bigtent dataset, because I imported it from the last release ever made on bigtent before it went down. If there's more lacking, well, it's a Git repository: you can edit it yourself. GitLab makes that easy even if you're not a programmer and don't know how to use Git: every file has an Edit button that will let you edit it live (or paste new contents from your hard disk), which turns into a "merge request" that the repository's owner can approve. Once he approves it, it gets merged into the repository and anyone who grabs a copy will have a copy with your edits. So if there's anything lacking from that repo besides the Bigtent dataset, you can help fix the lack.
  6. I wonder why the rule about not taking notes during play exists. Is it just to save time (because writing down every card your opponent plays would be time-consuming and you'd be sure to go over 60 minutes)? I understand not being allowed to bring in external reference material besides the rules, but what's the purpose of the "no taking notes" rule? It seems to me that it could help detect certain kinds of cheating: e.g., if you've written down that you saw your opponent's clan champion come up three times already, when you see that card come up a fourth time (assuming the opponent hasn't played any fetch-from-discard-pile effects), you'd raise your hand and call for a judge. But if you're not taking notes, you'll have a harder time being certain: did I really see that card three times already, or is my memory playing tricks on me? I ask this because a while ago, I read http://l5rcheaters.blogspot.com/, which pointed out in http://l5rcheaters.blogspot.com/2010/07/intentional-cheating-part-2-majors.html that you should always write down changes in the game state, so that if your opponent lies about what happened two turns ago you're not relying on your fuzzy memory. With the "no taking notes during tournaments" rule, this recommendation is now illegal. Why, I wonder? I can understand if it's to keep the game moving, but if it's for another reason, I don't see the drawback in allowing people to take notes. Anyone have an idea?
  7. I didn't notice that at first, but you're right. However, this is a plausible amateur game: all the 4-4 corner points are taken except the one we can't see (and it's very plausible that White has that point), and there are no *glaringly obvious* mistakes, at least from a beginner's point of view. (Black's shape in the middle is bad, but I didn't notice it until you mentioned it.) Whereas the Go board that is visible in the movie Tron: Legacy is a lot less plausible as a game (way too many stones on the edge of the board, for one thing). I wouldn't be surprised if the Go game from the Kiku Matsuri story was painted by the artist playing a game himself and taking a photo of it partway through, or going down to his local Go club and asking permission to take a photo of a game in progress.
  8. I'm interested in the game of Go (though a nearly total beginner at actually playing it), so I was interested in the game shown in the Kiku Matsuri fiction. I've squinted at the board, and re-created what I think is that game's position in my computer's Go software. Some parts of the board are not visible, so I've marked those with an X in the image (including two stones, one white and one black, that I think are in those places but I'm not 100% sure). Any other Go players want to dissect this game and see who has the advantage in it?
  9. Counterargument: Everyone at GenCon will know what the other six clans can do, but the Scorpion clan's abilities will come as a surprise to everybody. Very Scorpion-y plan indeed.
  10. I've been hesitating between Unicorn and Crab for a couple of months now — I'm definitely a fan of the Screw the Rules, I'm Doing What's Right! trope, and both the Crab ("We defend the Wall, no matter what the rest of Rokugan thinks of us") and the Unicorn ("Our ways are different, but not wrong") appeal to me. But that story was the quintessence of "Screw the rules, I'm doing what's right!" I think I just found my clan.
  11. Thank you for posting The best haiku scene ever Yes, I do like this In each haiku thread This Avatar clip comes back Like a boomerang
  12. "This," says the Crab, and bashes the silly Dragon's head in with a Jade Tetsubo.
  13. On pretty much any Google spreadsheet that you've been given view-only access to, you can save a copy of the spreadsheet into your own Google Drive, and then make any changes you like to your copy without modifying the original. That might be another way for people to sort the data if they want to.
  14. I like what C.S. Lewis said about My Little Pony (despite having died decades before it was created): From "On Three Ways of Writing for Children", in 1952.
  15. For what it's worth, the OCTGN module for the LotR card game (which I love, as you can probably guess by my Samwise Gamgee avatar, and buy every expansion for) has been updating with card data, but no images, when the cards are officially released. Image packs get released six months later. That way, anyone whose local game store is a bit slow to get product (I live overseas, so I usually have to wait 1-2 months to get packs compared to people who live in the U.S.) can still test out the new cards in their existing decks. But anyone who's using OCTGN to play FFG's game without paying for it (shame on them) has to wait at least six months before they get the actual art for the cards. BUT... if you actually own the cards and have a scanner, it's pretty easy to make your own OCTGN images, and then you get the actual images immediately. That strikes me as a pretty good balance, and I'd suggest something similar. Imageless cards with text & numbers only when they're released, and images six months later -- but anyone who buys the cards and owns a scanner can just look up the right card ID number from the data, drop scanned images into the folder with the right filenames ("CardIDnumber.jpg" or something), and then the scanned card shows up in OCTGN.
  • Create New...