™BlackNoah™ / RotsHeaven
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

™BlackNoah™ / RotsHeaven

Discuss anything here! Dedicated to the secret society unknown to humankind also known as ™BlackNoah™
 
HomeSearchLatest imagesRegisterLog in

 

 Unexpected Betrayal with no 'army'

Go down 
AuthorMessage
kashue
2008 KOTEI CHAMPION
2008 KOTEI CHAMPION
kashue


Number of posts : 570
Age : 45
Location : Southern Encampment
Registration date : 2008-01-03

Unexpected Betrayal with no 'army' Empty
PostSubject: Unexpected Betrayal with no 'army'   Unexpected Betrayal with no 'army' Icon_minitimeMon Jun 16, 2008 2:44 pm

Unexpected Betrayal with no 'army'



Unexpected Betrayal with no 'army' Icon_post_target_unreadby Dross Swprdra on Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:44 am This post is regarding an earlier ruling: http://www.alderac.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=59722 In that ruling it was indicated that "Unexpected Betrayal would qualify as an effect that alters the force of an "army," and thus there is no army on your side for Unexpected Betrayal to cause that Unit to contribute to. The new effect would fail."

This seems to be contradictory to a more recent ruling seen here: http://www.alderac.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=68693

In this ruling it is indicated that a non existent army is treated as an army with zero force. Thus it seems that if Player 1 plays unexpected betrayal sucessfully on player 2, and then player 1 loses all units in his army, he would still be considered to have an army with zero force and zero units, thus the unit hit with unexpected betrayal would apply his force to player 1's army.

Here is the highlighted rule from the more recent rules discussion:
Glossary, Army: This is similar to the rules for absent stats; if anything in the game needs to know the Force, number of units, or other numerical aspect of an "army" with no units, it is always zero.

I don't mean to resurrect a dead discussion, but I am now confused. Does the new ruling governing armies with zero units change what the ruling should be for unexpected betrayal?

Thank you for your help
-Dross



ANSWER:


<BLOCKQUOTE>Dross Swprdra wrote:Here is the highlighted rule from the more recent rules discussion:
Glossary, Army: This is similar to the rules for absent stats; if anything in the game needs to know the Force, number of units, or other numerical aspect of an "army" with no units, it is always zero.

I don't mean to resurrect a dead discussion, but I am now confused. Does the new ruling governing armies with zero units change what the ruling should be for unexpected betrayal?
</BLOCKQUOTE>

The thing is, there are more rules in the Glossary entry for Army than just the highlighted one from the recent discussion that you mention. There is also:

http://rules.l5r.com/Glossary_A#Army: "A side with no units is not an army. Specifically, its force total is zero, regardless of effects that modify “army” Force."

Unexpected Betrayal is an effect that modifies an army's Force. No army = no modification, as per the above.
Back to top Go down
 
Unexpected Betrayal with no 'army'
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Unexpected Betrayal VS Seikitsu Mountains or Ordered Retreat

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
™BlackNoah™ / RotsHeaven :: L5R :: Rulez-
Jump to: