“As an additional cost to rez” doesn’t make the agenda saccing part of the rez cost, I think. So no, wouldn’t need to sac a runner agenda to prevent the rezzing.
“You may pay credits equal to its rez cost” does not include additional costs.
2 Likes
blue text in the new FAQ
[quote]“Cannot”
Cards that use the word “cannot” prohibit an effect from resolving or an action from taking place. If two cards conflict, and the first card prohibits an effect, ability, or action using the word “cannot”, the second card cannot be played or triggered, unless the prohibited action is a condition granted by way of a non-prohibited effect. It should be noted, that while that card could then be played, the prohibited part of the effect still cannot resolve.[/quote]
i really wish this came with an example. my guess is that cards with multiple effects, and at least one being prohibited by the word “cannot” on a card, the card can still be played.
the only thing i can think of is Genetics Pavilion is out and the runner has already drawn cards and wishes to use Lawyer Up to remove tags or Fisk Investment Seminar to flood the corp (for whatever reason). after having drawn 2 cards, the runner wouldn’t be able to play any draw-only effects like Diesel, I’ve Had Worse, etc., but they could play ‘draw and…’ effects, and resolve the accompanying effect
my other reading of the effect is the Guru Davinder or Paparazzi vs Scorch Earth or Neural EMP, et al ruling that stated that if a ‘prevent all’ effect is up, you simply can’t play these events or effects that do it, even if it would have an effect (such as forcing a trash or credits paid to Guru). the prohibited effect is dealing net or meat damage, not playing operations, so the operations can still be played.
is either of these correct? if so, which is correct? if not, what does this ruling ‘clarify’ (i use the word clarify loosely since i am wholly confused by what it means exactly)
Nobody knows what this rule even means. It’s on my list of “FAQ review” questions to send Damon.
3 Likes
i am so glad to hear i’m not the only one who was completely confused by this
Can you use Replicator to trigger a shuffle when you install the last copy of a piece of hardware from your deck?
Text of Replicator:
Whenever you install a piece of hardware (including Replicator), you may search your stack for another copy of that hardware, reveal it, and add it your grip. Shuffle your stack.
My interpretation: the thing it allows you to do (“you may search your stack for another copy…”) is not conditional on there being a valid target in your stack. Per the FAQ, you shuffle (with no other effects) if you are unable to resolve the search.
It was suggested that since there are no valid targets for the search, you shouldn’t be allowed to do it (no change in game state),
Shuffling IS a change in game state, as long as you have at least 1 card in your deck. Whether it is a change if you’ve got only one card, I don’t know.
1 Like
Right, but similar to how you may not trash forger to remove a tag unless you are tagged (so you can’t use it for an instant unconditional draw in geist), my question is whether you are either allowed to do the search when there is no way it can succeed (or alternately whether the shuffle step in the replicator trigger is independent and can be performed on HW install regardless of whether there is a search or not).
According to the rulings on Mumbad City Hall in the Democracy and Dogma UFAQ, it seems like it should be legal. The stack should be as inpenetrable to the “game gods” as the R&D is, so the game should not in theory know whether there is something legal there to install, even though you know that there’s nothing left.
Might be different though, as we can probably see all copies of the card installed in front of us, but I’m guessing not.
1 Like
Awesome!. It is directly comparable to the MCH rulings in the FAQ you linked. Specifically the mention of “if the effect is partially resolvable, you’re cool”
Thanks!
I would like to know the answer to this as well.
On R4G some of us are asking themselves if there is an error for ADN Tournament Regulation v1.1
The bye gives 4 points (page 8)
A won game gives 3pts (so a full won match gives 6). (page 11)
I say it’s nice if it’s staying like this (this breaks most of “bye/win/id/id” situations), some says bye not at 6 is an ommission because it’s illogic if a bye is not a full match win.
Is there a problem here ?
Excellent question!
3 Likes
Too bad for me, I liked the consequences of this typo 
Question: If I’m playing Geist and I use Raymond Flint’s trash ability to expose a card, can I order the effects so I draw after the expose in order to hedge against a Psychic Field?
Or is the trash effect, since it is part of the cost of using the ability, happening before the expose ability and thus making me draw first?
Will rotation impact Rebirth?
1 Like
The chain reactions rule requires Geist to resolve before the effect of Raymond Flint.
Meaning, after Genesis cycles out can you still rebirth into Andromeda? No
2 Likes
Is the chain reaction rule a reversal of previous earlier rules? Or is it just a clarification? For some reason I had in my head that things got nested in Netrunner, but apparently not.
What? Chain reaction = nesting = cascading. They’re all names for the same phenomenon; that is, a triggered ability must resolve immediately, even if it interrupts any already resolving ability.
Info Sifting
If successful, instead of accessing cards, the Corp separates all cards in HQ into 2 facedown piles. Access all of the cards in one of the piles; you cannot access any cards in the other pile this run.
vs Dedicated Neural Net
you choose which cards the Runner accesses from HQ for the remainder of this run.
So does the corp make two piles, the runner selects a pile, and then the corp selects all cards from that pile for the runner to access, in the order of the corp’s choosing?