The problem isn’t in the replacement, the problem is in the triggering of the ability. Tori triggers on first net damage. Ok, done. She then replaces it. Next net damage that happens, she just goes ‘I’ve already triggered’ and doesn’t trigger again. Same thing for CTM. Watches for the first trash, and once it sees a trash, no longer cares and won’t trigger again… The question revolves around whether sees this replaced Trash in order to trigger.
thinks
For a Tori analogy, imagine a Runner resource that said ‘Once per turn, when an unbroken subroutine would resolve, you may discard a card instead.’ Imagine that Resource during a run on a Tori server with only a Komainu. Does Tori fire? What about against a Neural Katana only?
I don’t think CrushU’s question is what everyone is yelling about. It’s rarely applicable, and only applies to An Offer You Can’t Refuse run that hits an upgrade. That situation seems sufficiently ambiguous that I don’t dislike “yes” or “no” as an answer.
Several people dislike “no” as an answer when the runner doesn’t use Slums to trash a pad campaign after slumming one earlier the same turn.
No, I think really people disagree on “trashed a(n installed corp) card”.
With this, you’re understanding the “trash action”, if there is one.
With this, @CrushU and I (and others) understand where the card goes, what the runner is doing.
Both understandings lead to our respective conclusions, and both are right.
I’m browsing “instead card” to find one atm, will edit to say. Good thinking.
-edit- Related "insteads"
Harbinger.
Immolation script.
Pawn is very specific on the instead aswell.
Slum got its baroque instead effect.
Showing Off decomposate the normal access into top cards => bottom
Tori Hanzo is specific
Unrelated “insteads”:
Networking got it’s event non-copy effect & trash singularity/glitch.
The Price of Freedom have the same “problems/glitch” of Networking.
LARLA is specific on the instead aswell.
But the problem remains on CTM’s trigger, then it’s really harder to find, because I would need to find strange interaction with one of those “non-direct” replacement effect.
It’s not really hard to find one trigger that is not “quoting the corerules” though. But for a basic “trashes a (…) card”; it’s harder because most of the time, it makes no differences.
It’s more that a ‘no’ there is inconsistent with preventing CtM from firing if runner pays the trash cost on two installed cards.
Here’s why:
If the Runner doesn’t get traced before the card is RFG’d, then the card is RFG’d before CtM could trigger.
We know this, because if it’s the Corp’s turn, their effects would happen first in a simultaneous situation.
Since the Runner doesn’t get traced, this isn’t a simultaneous situation.
Therefore, if it’s the Runner’s turn, it’s still not a simultaneous situation.
Therefore, RFG happens before CtM triggers, and thus it’s still waiting to trigger.
QED.
kidding.
Because it’s inconsistent, it’s throwing people for a loop. I’m trying to identify how/why it’s inconsistent. Which currently, boils down to ‘If it’s simultaneous and the CtM has triggered, preventing future triggers this turn, then it should depend on whose turn it is to determine the order of the effects.’
Nothing currently declares that Replacement Effects always happen first.
But consider what determines if any effects happen in the order they happen in. The most recent effect must be resolved first.
“Chain Reactions
If during the resolution of an ability another ability meets
its trigger condition, then a “chain reaction” is created. The
ability that just met its trigger condition resolves immediately
following the active effect on the current ability. If this ability
results in another ability meeting its trigger condition, then that
ability is also “chained.” Resolve all the abilities from the most
recent trigger condition before continuing”
You understood “trashes an installed corp card” like the “action” of trashing an installed corp card. And you’re right in your reasoning, and your conclusions are right with this understanding because there you can invoke rightfully the Cascading ruling like you never said but suggest.
But he (and I) understands “trashes an installed corp card” as “a - the runner must be trashing, b - that is a corp card, c - it was installed and d - the runner actually trashed one card”. Like cards, action results and where cards are going. Then our reasonning leads to our conclusions, and they are right with this understanding.
(d) is absent in your understanding (not saying it’s wrong !!!). This is really making the difference between the results.
For exemple, “I” have to wait if there is a prevent and “you” do not.
Slum is acting as this “prevent” by putting the card OOTG and not in archives where trashed cards belongs.
That’s also why I got confused with past tense btw, because I’m asking myself the question “where does that card goes” since post #1 on that matter.
(not saying anybody is wrong again !!)
The problem is we can’t identify by wording whether CTM tells about the “trash action” (to summarize your point of view) or the process & goals (to summarize ours).
Well, all I can say is that you’re making a distinction between tenses and want to divide every little thing into “about to do” “is doing” “did” when all the game sees is the actions you take and the effects of those actions. If you’re saying CTM triggers on the result of trashing (the card going to the heap?), not the act of trashing, then that’s where your error is.
Hmm. From digging around ANCUR… Constant Abilities have no rules associated with which one takes precedence at this time. Which I think is fine, since Slums/CtM are both Conditional Abilities anyway.
Only two things can cause a conditional ability to fail to resolve: Simultaneous Effects and Chain Reactions.
I believe Chain Reactions doesn’t apply?
From the discussion here, Simultaneous Effects doesn’t apply, because otherwise Current Player would matter.
This is the impasse. Because CtM can no longer trigger this turn, we say CtM triggered but failed to resolve. Neither Chain Reaction nor Simultaneous Effects happened, so what caused it to fail to resolve?
Hang on, going to read actual FAQ, because ANCUR doesn’t have anything like that in it… (Super not a dig at you, Jako, I understand it’s hard to maintain the site when stuff changes. I’m just saying I was using ANCUR as gospel, which is a compliment! ;))
Will Edit if I find anything…
EDIT: The entirety of what the FAQ says about Replacement Effects:
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.
Most interesting? It only says that other replacement effects can’t be triggered off the original effect. Is this what you’re pointing to? That despite the fact that the original effect has been replaced, we can still trigger ‘trashed a card’ off of it?
Their point is Cascading (chain reaction if you wish) worked, because they see the “trashes an installed corp card” as a whole action, not where cards are going.
Let’s assume it applies.
(1)Slums triggers on paying trash cost, (2)sets up the replacement, and (3)chains into the replacement, causing RFG. (4)CtM cannot resolve.
When did CtM trigger during that chain? If it triggered at 2 or 3 then CtM should’ve resolved before the rest of the chain, by Chain Reaction rule. If it triggered at (1), then Simultaneous Effects should apply. And it cannot trigger at (4), because CtM doesn’t trigger on RFG.
There’s definitely nothing there that says we should ignore Simultaneous Effects rule for Replacement Effects. So we’re back to: What is causing CtM to trigger and fail to resolve, since Simultaneous Effects isn’t? Is it because Slums sets up a Constant Ability Replacement Effect? that seems… convoluted.
