Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Official Rules Question Thread

I think the answer lies with the corp. If they have SMC/Clone Chip or other paid access to Clot, just take actions more deliberately as the corp, giving the runner an opportunity to interject between actions.

4 Likes

In my play group (8-10 people) this has become more of an ettiquette issue than an actual rules issue. If someone is moving too fast, then the other player has every right to say “woah woah woah you need to back that up”.

Ever play Warhammer 40K: Conquest? The number of times in a game you have to say “Any combat actions?” is staggering. There are tons of abilities and cards that can be used as a “paid ability” would in Netrunner, except many are directly from your hand. It’s easier to communicate and ask the question to your opponent often so that both players are clear when priority has been passed and when the have the opportunity to continue.

It’s different in Netrunner though, since you can only do anything about fast advance if you’ve got cards in play that can do stuff at paid ability speed. So let’s assume that in the situation you provided the runner has a clone chip or SMC in play with which to grab a Clot. My experience so far has been: after the corp installs the breaking News and decides not to use the Astroscript token the corp would say “any reactions?” quickly before taking any more steps. By asking the runner if they have any actions, they’ve clarified that they are passing on paid abilities.

The corporation should not be trying to sneak a fast advance through, otherwise they risk losing agendas from playing too quickly and being forced to back track. Against a fast advance deck, both players are fully aware of Clot and know how the timing windows work in various situations. If the cards that allow the runner to react are on the table, I think the responsiblity is on the corp to ask at the necessary times, and for the runner to either take his actions in those windows or indicate verbally the corp can take their next click.

6 Likes

I think the onus is on the Corp in these types of scenarios.

The only way for them to be able to go ahead “legally” is to actually confirm with the runner that they don’t want to use any paid abilities. If you’re running any kind of FA tech, you should be intimately familiar with when someone could clot you (basically always), and need to verify with the runner if you can proceed.

If you don’t explicitly confirm, and the runner is clot, they are entirely within their right to say “I was thinking about it, and didn’t pass priority yet” after you’ve tipped your hand. Sure that can be seen as a “rude” play, but so is rushing through the timing structure of a turn without waiting for me. I’ve had this debate with a few people, and most of them say “well if I give them enough time, that should be fine! I don’t want to tip them off to my next move by asking!” and I think everyone who says this is thinking about this interaction the wrong way. This is a huge opportunity for bluff plays, trying to get the runner to commit to spending resources when really it’s an NAPD you just dropped on your SanSan. As corp, you need to take ownership of the timing structure and ask the runner if they’d like to react everytime it could potentially matter, which means that when you actually do go for the astro chain when they’ve got clot, they won’t want to burn the 4 SMCing for clot when they could use that 4 to steal the NAPD. Install a new PAD when you’ve got an astro token scored? Move to play your “shipment from sansan” from hand and pause, asking them if they’d like to react.

For the runner perspective, and from a “play-to-win” mindset:
If I wasn’t running clot, I’d ask at the start of the game that my opponent be mindful of paid ability windows, which the hope that now they’d always have the threat of clot in the back of their mind, and hopefully play (sub-optimally) around this. Whenever they ask, make a show of considering the boardstate, and ultimately decline to tutor for your clot.

If I was playing clot (which I always do! :P), I wouldn’t say anything, and I would hope the corp wouldn’t explicitly ask if I was done using paid abilities. After they’ve tipped their play, the runner is entirely within their right to say “hey, I was still thinking, and never declined to use paid abilities”, and then clot. If the corp contests, it really comes down to them having made a mistake (not respecting the timing structure) so judges must side with the runner 100%.

^ There’s also the flipside of this, where if a corp knows you are doing this, they can install an NAPD, go to SfSS it, basically baiting you into “interrupting” them, and then advance + icing.

I assume I’ll get some flak for playing this way, but I do really believe this is the correct way of doing it. Runners have always had the opportunity to “react” in the timing structure, but only since O&C (hivemind chakana) has it really mattered.

TL;DR: FA is now a bluffing game that both sides need to be mindful of. The rules state that the runner must explicitly be finished using paid abilities before the corp can take their next click. Don’t be afraid to use this!

6 Likes

The extension of this is that any time there is a shard on the table, you need to ask if the runner wants to use a paid ability after every action.

And the extension of that probably means the runner needs to ask the corp if want to use any paid abilities if there’s a Jackson/facedown card anywhere.

exactly this. those in the camp of “I should be able to play around clot just by giving random pauses without explicit communication and then not letting the runner go back to a window I say they ‘passed’ on because they didn’t speak up quick enough” are in the wrong here; getting in the habit of explicitly communicating about windows as NBN is not only courteous and fair play, it also opens you up to your main actual line of counterplay, which is to bluff an agenda with every install and make the runner jump the gun on their clot.

5 Likes

Here’s a weird one for you:

I’ve got three (unrezzed) copies of Marcus Batty protecting a server with a rezzed Architect in it and a Kitsune at the front, and the runner runs that server. Is the following sequence of events legal (assuming I win every psi game)?:

  • I rez Batty and Kitsune, firing the Kitsune sub with Batty to make them access a card from my hand

  • I rez the second Batty, firing an Architect to install the Kitsune from Archives back to where it was

  • I re-rez the Kitsune because it’s still the paid ability window in which I can rez ICE at this position, and rez the third Batty to fire it again (or alternatively, can I then let the runner hit the Kitsune, no Batty involved?).

Of course, I did look at the Timing Structure of a Run chart. It says that at 2.3 that the approached ICE can be rezzed and there’s a window to trigger paid abilities and rez non-ICE cards. Still, it’s a bit weird and it may not count as “the approached ICE” any more or the fact that ICE is trashed may mess up what part in the timing chart they’re at or something?

2 Likes

@Xenasis, courtesy of @tvaduva earlier in this thread.

EDIT: Ooh, it says “destroyed” is that different from “trashed”?

EDIT2: Found this from @gumOnShoe also in this thread -

So I guess the first does apply here, and your idea doesn’t work @Xenasis, because the first time you trashed the Kitsune with Batty, the paid ability window would close, and move on to the next piece of ICE.

2 Likes

Aww, I feared as much. Thought it might be worth double checking, though.

There has to be a way to kill people with this stupid server that doesn’t include Amazon Industrial Zone… :frowning:

3 Likes

Sorry, all such ideas are hereby directed to the “AIZ Jank” thread, it has no place in serious competition. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

Honestly, if anyone can create a serious deck with AIZ, you should do it now, it gets rotated out soon!

Well, if you have snare in hand and replace the architect with some damaging ice, fun could ensue.

I have a few Marcus Batty doubts (even if it may be not that complicated for someone who knows the structure of a run better than me):

  1. Marcus Batty installed and Rototurret as outermost Ice. Mimic and Corroder installed for runner. May I rez and activate MB trashing Mimic (and then Corroder with the true Ice subroutine)?
    MY GUESS: I rez and use MB ability at 2.3. This implies that it’s working even if Rototurret is not the outermost ICE because there’s no option for the runner to jack out
  2. Same situation as 1) but the ICE is a Galahad and I have a Lancelot in hand.
    MY GUESS: it’s not working. I can give Galahad the Trash one program sub only when Galahad is encountered and the runner has priority so he can break subs before I use MB.

All that sounds accurate to me.

At 2.3, the runner has his paid abilities first. Generally this is either nothing or possibly Clone Chip to either bring in a breaker or parasite the ICE being approached. Assuming your ICE yet lives, when the runner passes priority, this is your opportunity to rez ICE and use non-ICE. So you may use and trigger Batty at this step as you suggest in example 1. I think you could trash Mimic with Batty and then also hit Corroder, since it’s too late for the runner to Jack Out. Be advised that after encountering the ICE, the runner still has a paid ability window, and so may be able to Clone Chip his Mimic or otherwise get out a breaker to break that ICE after all (Personal Workshop is another possibility).

In your second example, Grail abilities do not trigger until encountered, and then the runner, being the active player, gets to use paid abilities first. If he breaks Galahad, you could still use Batty for Lancelot destruction (the ICE gains the subroutines, remember), but it would be after breaking, so you could only snipe one breaker in that situation.

EDIT: Clarified and cleaned up some stuff.

1 Like

Can I use Street Peddler’s trash ability if there are only events hosted on the Peddler?

hmm, tbh it’s not clear, I think there are good examples to support either case. My feeling would be that “cards work how they seem like they should work” comes into play here, and that you can trash it for no install as long as there’s nothing that can be installed. Kind of like how you can pop an SMC for no program if there are no programs left in your stack that you can afford to install.

I see no reason they would’ve intended peddler to become an eternal card prison when it misfires (the misfire itself being a big enough penalty imo)

It’s true that the Runner has the priority in step 2.3, but just for clarity, they cannot parasite your ICE if it was unrezzed to start with (it doesn’t seem clear in the question whether the Rototurret is rezzed or not).

The ICE-rezzing window is the same as the Marcus Batty-rezzing window and the same as the Marcus Batty-firing window. So if the Rototurret is unrezzed, the Runner gets first dibs on the window (but doesn’t know it’s Rototurret yet and can’t parasite it, so probably doesn’t usually want to do much). Then the Corp can rez Rototurret, rez Marcus Batty and fire him all in one fell swoop (presumably trashing one program if the y win the Psi game). Afterwards, the window passes back to the Runner who can parasite the Rototurret, or bring Mimic back or whatever,

1 Like

Thanks a lot!

Agreed - the best example I’ve been given for this is “You can play Diesel with just 2 cards in the stack, can’t you?”. Same principle applies here, I think.

You can play Diesel with 2 cards left in stack or even 1, but you cannot play Diesel with an empty stack.

Same thing here. If there are no cards on Street Peddler that can be installed, then you cannot activate its ability.

3 Likes

This is different though - there the Diesel affects nothing else, but in the case of Street Peddler the other two or three cards end up in the heap, whether or not one gets installed.

I guess the appropriate Lukas quote is regarding partially resolvable effects:

"If the effect changes the game state in any way, then you can use it. If it does not change the game state in any way (other than the card itself, obviously, being trashed) then it cannot be played. You could think of it as “Would a prevent/avoid effect do anything against this ability?” If the answer is yes, then you can do it. If the answer is no, then you cannot. "

Still not concrete either way but I think Street Peddler can be used as it will still alter the game state whether or not there are three events on it.

1 Like

"If the effect changes the game state in any way, then you can use it.

In this case, the effect doesn’t change the game state because no cards are installed. The unused cards going to your Heap is a result of trashing Street Peddler. That’s not the effect in question, but rather the cost to the effect.

It’s like not being able to use cards that have “[Trash]: Prevent x”. Sure, the card is moved to your heap, that’s definitely a change in game state… but nothing can be prevented with the effect “prevent X”, so it cannot be used.

1 Like