I’m speaking about the rules :
“A conditional ability is a type of triggered ability that has a specific condition for a trigger. Conditional abilities typically use the “when/ever” convention. There are two types of conditional abilities: optional conditional abilities and required conditional abilities.”
Then :
"Page 6, Column 2, Paragraph(s) 1, Core Rule Book
Identity Card
Each player has an identity card that is placed face up in his play area. The identity card does not count toward his maximum hand or deck size, and is always active during the game."
Makes me think ID are constant, not conditionnal. Crisium grid have a condition to be used : a run must be made successful on its server for it to trigger : a trigger is not the definition of constant / conditionnal even if rules said constant have no trigger, they do in fact have one, used in particular when solving simultaneous effects.
Active and inactive refer to whether or not a card can affect the game state. For the Runner, this is all installed cards. For the Corp, this is installed cards that are rezzed and agendas in the score area. The rule you’re quoting is saying “even though identities are not installed or rezzed or anything else that would normally make them active, they are special and get to always be active.”
The words active and inactive do not describe abilities.
Irrelevant. Notice the rule book says “typically use ‘when/ever’”.
“The first time” is a trigger condition. There’s really not any arguing about the fact that “the first time” defines a moment in time at which the ability goes from not affecting the game to resolving.
So, if we do a successful run with Sneakdoor, the game log records a successful run on archive. Am I right ?
If it’s the case, I don’t understand why we can trigger Security Testing on the “second” successful run on archive if we can’t trigger CtM on the “second” trash.
No. Sneakdoor + SecTest on Archives works the same as Slums/CtM. The first successful run on Archives is replaced with a successful run on HQ. The next successful run on Archives would not be the first one, so SecTest does not trigger.
Both of the rulings you’ve attempted to quote predate the ruling that made Lukas give actual understanding and rules instead of random rulings for all the cards as he saw fit.
They also both predate the latest FAQs, which help break down some of the subtle differences between run steps 4.4 and 4.5, how things trigger and resolve, etc. in the question dealing with Security Testing and Account Siphon.
“Next time you are wondering if an ability is a constant, assume that it is unless it uses “when,” “whenever,” or has a colon that denotes it as a paid ability.”
=> So, I’m right to assume CTM is constant ?
Look to your Q15/16. It doesn’t predate anything.
“The game remembers what has occurred and keeps a record. However, the ruling about Net Shield and Tori Hanzō might need to be revisited in light of the reversal of Security Testing and Crisium Grid.”
Sectest v Crisium grid still gives 2c today after Crisium is trashed, that is not outdated, even if you got those “quite out of nowhere emails to me” 5 days after that reversal of ruling.
You had the same reflex with “ping 3 centrals with Sneakdoor / R&D to launch an event” as @Wiegraf btw, which is funny to me, because you’re both probably the best unoff rulers I know
So. There is an inconsistency, should we agree on this ? If yes, then this should be lifted by an OFAQ entry ?
For step 2.1.1.1.2, What language is used to indicate that this is setting up a replacement effect for the future? As opposed to simply doing the thing the card states you should do upon resolution of the trigger?
(‘The other game’ answer would be that the word ‘instead’ is present, as that word has a specific and reserved meaning, and card templating is very very careful to never use ‘instead’ if they don’t specifically mean ‘replacement effect’. Because you could make a plain English reading of the sentence and understand that, normally, you would trash a thing when you pay its trash cost. However, Slums says that you will remove it from the game, rather than trash it. Under that plain English reading, the card is never trashed, it only had its trash cost paid.)
Think you’re thinking of Sec Testing/Siphon interactions. The Sec Testing/Crisium Archives thing is still in the latest FAQ.
No. You can assume whatever you want, but it’s a trigger, with a condition. I’ll let you guess what kind of ability that is.
Just like every other replacement effect. A trigger condition must be met for the replacement to be used. You have to “encounter” a Tollbooth to bypass it with Femme. You have to have an access phase in order to replace it with Siphon’s ability. You have to trash a card in order to replace it with Slums’ ability. You have to take a damage before you can “Prevent the first damage each turn” with Net Shield, otherwise all damage is never considered taken and you can keep preventing damage (do you see how that works?). You can argue about wording and semantics all day long, but that’s how it’s always worked.
“Next time you are wondering if an ability is a constant, assume that it is unless it uses “when,” “whenever,” or has a colon that denotes it as a paid ability.” are Lukas’ words.
Also
"“FIRST” — based off confirmation in the FAQ[6] and previous rulings that Rielle “Kit” Peddler’s and Reina Roja’s abilities are constant
Related cards: NeoTokyo Grid, Tori Hanzō, Feint, Inside Job, John Masanori, Security Testing, and a lot of identities (Engineering the Future, Near-Earth Hub, Gabriel Santiago, Ken “Express” Tenma, Laramy Fisk, Silhouette, and Kate “Mac” McCaffrey)"
CTM says :
"The first time the Runner trashes an installed Corp card each turn, you may trace4– If successful, give the Runner 1 tag (cannot be avoided)."
Lukas said Gabriel is constant. Then CTM is constant. They have the same wording.
3/ So if your replacement effect works like you says, then you would never gain 2c after trashing a Crisium grid on Archives. Lukas said the opposite end of 2015, hence the inconsistent CTM ruling.
That’s… literally all the text here. So, things I want clarified:
Are Replacement Effects a subcategory of Triggered Abilities?
This says that it changes an effect into a different effect. Is this done at Triggered speed, or is it constant? If it’s constant, does the replaced effect cause Triggers of its own? (If there’s a Trigger for A, and something replaces A with B, does the Trigger for A occur?)
What happens if two Replacement Effects try to replace the same event? Which one actually works?
Here’s my guesses for the answers: 1) No; Effects are not Abilities. Specifically, an Ability causes an Effect, but Effects do not cause Abilities. 2) Because Replacement Effects are not Abilities, they don’t Trigger, they just Happen and there’s no such thing as triggering or resolving for these. 3) I have no idea. This one hasn’t come up terribly often, since usually what we have is multiple Triggered Abilities causing Replacement Effects (SecTest+Patron on same server) and we choose the order the Triggers happen, but I don’t know of a case with multiple Replacement Effects trying to apply to the same thing. (The closest is Muresh Bodysuit + Guru Davinder? Both of them still are Triggered Abilities, though…)
Oh hey, here’s another one: Does Archives Interface trigger at all when you SecTest Archives? (Obviously even if it triggered it wouldn’t do anything because you’re not actually accessing cards… But does the Trigger of ‘Whenever you access cards in Archives’ happen?)
As I’ve said above in this thread, and as Jacob has said as well, that list of things is full of errors. We keep treading the same ground, as you keep ignoring past arguments, or forgetting them. “The first time” is a condition–a condition is met, and a trigger happens. It does not create a Constant Ability. If you actually read the entire article, you would see that Lukas was not entirely sure what constituted wording for a particular ability. He clearly misidentifies (or fails to identify) conditional abilities when Jacob lists Constant Abilities (either because of time or space constraints, or he just missed it–human error). Jacob was trying to piece together a semblance of consistency in FFG’s templating (a heroic effort). Yet, there are many errors in the list. For example: it lists “Bad Times” as a conditional ability, but it clearly creates a Constant effect. I have suggested that Jacob either remove the page or mark it outdated for a while. He’s been pretty busy in the real so give him a break.
In order to determine whether something is Conditional, you look for a trigger condition. Something must happen in order for it to “fire”
To determine whether something is Constant, you can see if it is affecting the rules of the game TWIY ability is Constant because the corp just gets 6 cards instead of 5.
Slums reads:
Once per turn, when you pay the trash cost of an accessed card, remove that card from the game instead of trashing it.
“Once per turn” is limit on the number of times the condition could occur
“When you pay the trash cost of an accessed card” is a condition that gets satisfied.
Trashing occurs when you pay the trash cost of a card.
“Instead of” denotes replacement. What are you replacing? The trash: “instead of trashing it.”
I’m not sure if I can explain a condition better than that.
You are correct, No. It’s a type of ability. Literally, from the FAQ:
Replacement Effects
An ability that uses the word “instead” is a replacement effect.
Once an effect has been replaced with a new one, no other
relacement effects can be triggered off the original effect.
Slums is a conditional (I should note, mandatory) ability. Net Shield is a paid ability prevent/avoid effect in the text.
“Once an effect has been replaced with a new one, no other
relacement effects can be triggered off the original effect.”
Yeah, no. You can believe what you want, but you keep trying to use ANCUR as a bible, it is a fan-created website that attempts to cull ideas and rulings together. Lukas is human. He makes lots of mistakes and made lots of mistakes, just like you or I. But I think that here, in August 2016, we have a better understanding of what constitutes a kind of ability than Lukas did when he was first pressed to define what each kind was, and to defend FFGs templating.
