Does Hunting Grounds prevents the meat damage from Weyland Consortium: Builder of Nations ??
My first thought is that it is not an ice ability to prevent, but have been wrong before so…
BoN is not a “when encountered” ability “on a piece of ice”.
2 Likes
Just checking.
If I have Jeeves.
I can play Hedge and Consulting Visit into a double operation.
Yes, similar to this question answered in the Liberated Mind UFAQ:
If the Corp triggers Mumbad City Hall three times with Jeeves Model Bioroids rezzed, can they reveal Consulting Visit for the third usage of Mumbad City Hall and use the click from Jeeves to pay the additional cost?
Yes. Jeeves Model Bioroids triggers off of the Corp paying the clicks, and due to the chain reaction rule it must resolve before Mumbad City Hall continues on to play the Consulting Visit.
3 Likes
Related question: with a rezzed Jeeves, can I do the following:
- Hedge
- Hedge
- Consulting Visit (for another Hedge)
Rather, are additional costs resolved after costs (IE: letting Jeeves interject; making the play valid), or are additional costs resolved concurrently with costs, making the play invalid because we would fail to pay the cards costs?
I’m guessing the answer is that it can’t be done, but just want to be certain.
I guess it could also be invalid even if costs were separate from additional costs, because we’d observe that the card would have no effect on board state at the time of attempting to play (same as allele not being triggerable on an empty archives, despite that paying the costs would change that).
All depends on how additional costs are treated.
No. You have 3 clics, not 4, and Jeeve is not a clic discount.
The situation is very different from triple MCH (Jeeves) apply effects of MCH which would cost you an additional clic.
Yep I know it’s different from triple MCH. It’s why I posed the question even after the triple MCH question was answered. Thank you for the answer though. I do see your point.
Is there any other weigh in on this? I’m specifically wondering how additional costs are treated. Considering how interactions with other cards are, I’m beginning to doubt they are concurrent (since you can decline to pay additional costs specifically).
They are part of the cost as a total, but you can decline them.
This don’t lead to a situation that makes you pay “half costs”.
Either you play the total and trigger the payed ability, either you refuse the additional, you don’t pay at all and you can’t trigger.
Rulings on costs & additional costs are part of the FAQ, between the ruling that makes us glitch on the other thread and the list of all cards.
I don’t see where the FAQ says that you can’t end up paying half costs. All I see for additional costs is this:
Additional Costs A player may decline to pay an additional cost, even if he or she is able to do so.
This doesn’t clarify if additional costs are treated separately from actual costs or not, or if they are evaluated when determining if able to play a card.
An equivalent example would be hacktivist + PAD:
- Can I attempt to rez it with 0 cards in hand?
- If I forget about it, pay 2 to rez PAD, and my opponent reminds me about it, and (let’s assume) the TO + opponent won’t let me take it back, am I locked in to trashing, or can I choose to forgo the additional cost?
(1) would show that additional costs are considered for evaluating if I can perform an action. (2) would show if additional costs are concurrent.
1 Like
From the FAQ,
“Additional”
The word “additional” denotes an ability that modifies another
ability or a game state. The additional ability is resolved
simultaneously with any ability it is modifying, and under the
same conditions as that ability.
I think this is meant to cover additional costs being simultaneous with printed cost.
2 Likes
No. All costs have to be paid to do a thing.
No, but you also would have to undo the rez action in the first place (De-rez PAD, get money back) You are never locked in to paying additional costs if you don’t want to. It just means you can’t do whatever thing you wanted to. (See: Gagarin’s ID ability.)
2 Likes
The FAQ definition of “Additional” is what I was missing. Everything is clear. Thanks all.
1 Like
Out of the Ashes + Three Steps Ahead; what’s the interaction here?
Three Steps Ahead
Play only as your first [Click].
When this turn ends, gain 2[Credit] for each successful run you made during it.
On one hand, cards like Jeeves are known to not work if they were not rezzed during any of the spent clicks AFAIK (and Ashes in the heap would fire before the TSA ability was setup). On the other hand, TSA specifically says “[…] run you made during it.”; different than Jeeves, which requires you to spend three clicks (past tense in resolution on ashes vs. present in condition on Jeeves). Ashes was, after all, definitely a successful run you made during your turn.
I’m leaning towards Ashes paying out for TSA (given that these things are tracked by the game, not the cards), but uncertain.
You’re correct. The difference is Jeeves has a trigger condition of spending the three clicks, while Three Steps Ahead just references something that happenef as part of its resolution.
2 Likes
If someone uses Cerebral Static against Ele Scovak while she has a credit on her, can she still use the credit? Can she use it for anything she likes?
No - the credit stays, but she can’t use it. (Also, note that if the static is played while the credit is spent, it won’t refresh until the first start of turn after she had removed the static.)
2 Likes
From the upcoming Obelus, do we have any precedent for handling a conditional triggered ability with ‘or’ describing two possible conditions? (I couldn’t find an example)
The first time a successful run on R&D or HQ ends each turn, draw 1 card for each card you accessed during that run.
More specific to Obelus, will it trigger on the first successful run of R&D as well as the first successful run of HQ? Or just the first successful of either?
Fair question – I’d bet dollars to donuts (not such a risky wager, I guess, given inflation) that it triggers once per turn, but I’m not aware of any precedent for handling the or.
(Absurdist side note: this is also relevant to System Outage, should one’s preferred gender pronoun switch mid-turn.)
4 Likes