Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Jakodrako's Primer on Netrunner Abilities


#61

yes, that is my point: trigger= paying the cost hence the structure is

  1. trigger
  2. resolve

The whole mess happens because triggers trigger off both triggers (;)) and resolutions. The first case leads to nested triggers, like fall guy +geist + tech trader, the second case leads to what is called chain effect in the FAQ, like ABT+ the foundry. These two situations are furthermore different from the case of simultaneous triggers, like booth + FF or Wyldside and Aesop’s.


#62

I think there’s some confusion here because early on I tried to associate the conditional timing structure to paid abilities, and I just heralded that point for a dozen or so posts before I realized my fallacy (or had it pointed out, rather).

@PaxCecilia is trying to correlate the two; essentially have paid and conditional treated the same. @V01d is pointing out that there isn’t a need for the third step (and maybe that’s true; I can’t think of a counter example off hand). Either way I feel like both of your models are valid on the current card pool.


#63

Also of interest to this thread; Jako did state in the main rules thread that Damon would be interested in hashing out these exact steps into an FAQ down the road (so that we don’t need to deliberate amongst ourselves how the black box that is Netrunner works internally :smile:).

No concrete dates given though.


#64

Don’t forget that trash abilities are resolved on the state at trash (new FAQ ruling). So while Wraparound would indeed have 7 strength with no fracter installed, the ability of Spike still works because it’s evaluating on the Wraparound from when it was strength 0.


#65

Ooooohhhh

When a card has a trash ability that is triggered, any reference
to the game state within that resolving effect is based on the
game state as it was at the moment of trashing, but with the
trashed card considered a new copy of that card in Archives or
the heap.

I knew this applied to Spike (so even though Spike is trashed, it is still considered to be 1 str) but I didn’t realize it applies to Wraparound being at 0 strength as though Spike were still in play.

Blah.


#66

How does this even function? There’s definitely a real time difference between trigger and resolve (we have rulings on this front), and the board state can be changed in between those times.

For the case of spike + wrap it’s simple enough to hack it and say “well wrap was strength 0 back then so everything is kosher”, but what about, say, SMC into Geist drawing the card you wanted to SMC?


#67

As far as I know, the FAQ ruling only affects cards that trash themselves as a cost. In this case and this case only, when we go to resolve the ability, we look at the state of the game before the card was trashed. (Besides Spike vs Wraparound, Street Peddler is another card that depends on this rule.)


#68

I hear you that it’s necessary for some card interactions, but from a timing point of view it seems like it’s a mess, having to look back at previous snapshots of the game. I feel like this opens up unintended consequences.

Like the SMC question; am I allowed to install the program i drew with Geist from paying SMC’s trash cost for SMC’s effect? Under this FAQ ruling I’d say yes?

No differently than wrap was strength 0 when I popped spike, Corroder (for example’s sake) was in my deck when I popped SMC


#69

Another example: if I have 3 tech traders, 2 credits, and SMC/clone, can I even install a 3 cost program anymore? I had <3 credits at the time I paid costs for SMC/clone; my tech Trader credits were not available to me when that was the board state.


#70

no, you cannot because you cannot trigger CC originally. Once you trigger CC by trashing it all the TT trigger simultaneously to Geist (which you are also playing, of course). You choose the order of their triggers because they are simultaneous and start to resolve them according to the order you chose (simultaneous triggers are nor nested triggers). Once you have resolved all the TT and Geist you go one floor down in the triggers pile and you find CC waiting to be resolved, hence you resolve it by bringing in the game its original target.


#71

no, you cannot because you cannot trigger CC originally.

This statement isn’t inherently true. If I have a shiv and a mongoose in my discard initially, I am definitely allowed to trigger CC. What I’m wondering is if I can decide to get mongoose thanks to my increased TT funding or not.

Edit: Sorry, should’ve read a little deeper. I still don’t think I agree though. You don’t choose the target of CC until the effect/resolve phase, AFAIK?


#73

Regardless, let’s play through the same example with SMC. There was never a target with SMC. There was a search.


#74

Yes, I am actually doubting it myself. On one hand I see that the selection comes in the resolving stage, on the other hand you cannot trigger effects that you are not sure you can resolve (which kinda make me think that you have to have a well defined target)


#75

This is that whole “you can’t do something that wouldn’t change the gamestate (not taking certain other steps into consideration)” rule. Say you’ve got Same Old Thing, 2 credits, and 3 Tech Traders. You want to play the Levy in your heap. If the only possible target for Same Old Thing is the Levy, or cards with over 2 credit cost, you can’t do it. If you have a single viable target in your heap (say you’ve also got an infiltration) then you’re fine to use Same Old Thing, gain 3c, and then choose Levy.


#76

If you have a single viable target in your heap (say you’ve also got an infiltration) then you’re fine to use Same Old Thing, gain 3c, and then choose Levy.

But this doesn’t cohere with the Spike/Wrap and Street Peddler ruling, which state that you look back to the board state at the time of trash (IE: when I had 2 credits).


#77

This is a very interesting point that I haven’t seen raised yet. I think I’ll confer with Damon.


#78

It seems like a relatively easy fix. The rule is trying to talk about the game state of the card that has been trashed, not the game state as a whole. It seems like there’s just a qualifier “of the trashed card” missing in the rule in at least 1 place.


#79

Sure. But then the philosophy behind Spike/Wraparound has to change because that has to do with a different card than the one activated.


#80

I thought we established that once a card is triggered it will resolve independent of its’ source? Wraparound becomes 7 Str but Spike’s ability of breaking up to 3 subroutines doesn’t care anymore. The restriction of matching strength is a restriction of the program, not the ability.


#81

Maybe if you look at the current board state, but only evaluate as if that specific card was not trashed. Almost like you’re pulling the previous state of that card forward into the current board state? That would make it cohere (peddler still considered to have cards under it, but you’d still be able to Clone for mongoose with TT money). Might’ve been what @PaxCecilia meant.