Not at all. I appreciate the thoroughness. Do you know where @jakodrako is getting this from?
There was no precedent provided. However, he did say that, in general, choosing and acting are not separate in Netrunner, which I think is generally true. I have no counter-precedent for it at least.
I’ve seen people play Maw different to the way I’ve interpreted it.
Maw reads: “The first time each turn you access a card not in Archives and do not steal or trash it, the Corp must trash 1 card from HQ at random.”
If the runner accesses a card with Maw installed and steals or trashes it everything is fine. However, the next card they access and do not steal or trash (either through multi-access on the same run or on a completely separate run) should trigger Maw, correct? I’ve seen people play it as the first card they accessed was stolen/trashed so the Maw trigger essentially fizzles. Then the next card they access is no longer the first card accessed so Maw does not trigger for that turn.
I guess it boils down to is the trigger the first access or the first not stealing/trashing.
As an extension, the runner runs HQ with Maw installed. They access an Archangel which fires its subroutine and bounces the Maw back to the runner’s grip. Does Maw still trigger? If it is ruled the second way from above then it would certainly not trigger. But ruled the first way above I can see a case for it triggering.
I believe your interpretation is correct. For the trigger to fizzle if the first accessed card is trashed/stolen, I’m pretty sure the wording would have to be something like, “The first time each turn you access a card not in Archives, if you do not steal or trash it…”
Maw doesn’t fire off of an Archangel accessed in a server (R&D/HQ) if the Archangel bounces Maw. After debating about this on slack, I asked Jako to roll me through his interpretation of it. Basically, Maw is conditional on the access ending (it’s referring to the overall access of 4.5.X; it cannot be referring to the access event at 4.5.1 of normal “on access” effects, because it needs info from 4.5.2). Since Maw will have bounced back to hand before the access ends, Maw could not fire.
As another example, Maw does fire in the case of an accessed agenda being hosted on Film Critic; all that matters is that it is the first time that an access occurs without scoring or trashing occurring.
Also note that, if the trash is replaced (IE: Salsette Slums), it is still considered to have been trashed, and thus Maw will not trigger (and can still be triggered off of later accesses). This might seem counter-intuitive given film critic, but SS replaces the trash, whereas Film Critic merely prevents the scoring from happening (pre-empt’s it).
Note that there is some ambiguity here; it’s been brought up to Commander Boggs from what I gather. But how I perceive it from what Jako mentioned seems reasonable; I’d roll with it unless Boggs overturns it.
Holmegaards first sub is “trace(6) the runner cannot access any cards this run”. I think the successful trace means that replacement effects like indexing and account siphon don’t work. It’ s deliberately different to Eater. Can someone confirm this or correct me?
Looking at the words printed on the card, I don’t see any mention of the trace needing to be successful for the effect to happen.
So it really is a guess what the designer meant for the card to do instead of interpreting the text on the card.
The effect, as wrote, would prevent replacement effects (like AS). As Bubba mentioned though, as wrote and based on existing precedent from Gemini, this happens regardless of if the trace actually succeeded or not; all that matters is the sub fired.
The fact that the access denial occurs regardless of trace success was likely unintended (and I’d expect some sort of FAQ entry, or at least a UFAQ). I think the designer probably across what they wanted the card to do aside from that though (but, really, who knows?).
I wouldn’t be surprised if the rules are changed to specify that unless stated otherwise on the card, the text after a trace happens If Successful.
Might affect the older astrology ICE? (Taurus, Gemini, Sagittarius, uhh… The other one.)
Virgo
Yes, I think that template change would be welcome. But they would need to revisit (and alter) how the astrology ICE work. Either that or just default the first sentence to “if successful” (then astrology is unaffected, as their independent effect is on the second sentence). Though, having per-sentence breakdowns is likely not intuitive…
Is that not the case in the original rules document? I have it in my head it says exactly this.
Nah, it says that once a trace is won by the corp, to then resolve any “if successful” text following the trace. I thought exactly the same as you til I looked it up.
Cannot vs can.
This one is cannot, and on Eater, this is “can” (sort of)… This is if my memory serves.
-edit - Memory doesn’t serves
I wonder if this ice permit to trade access. I’d say no.
Somebody needs to write it in an FAQ, but imho the templating change is fine. I may be too forgiving but I see no ambiguity over meaning. Maybe no clarification is needed over access replacement either, but I think I’d have used parenthetical (or trigger effects that replace access) if that’s the meaning.
The sticking point for me is still the astrology ICE (well, and that core rule book problem mentioned, but that can be resolved with FAQ update). It’s not as simple as no longer including “if successful”, because there are existing clauses that do not specify successfulness, and do not because they are intended to fire regardless (such as Gemini).
I suppose this question have been asked a million time, but can I trash an agenda the Runner scored, with Hunter Seeker ?
(or is it like Tennin’s “card”)
Does Seidr work with Enhanced Login Protocol or Ruhr Valley?
Scored agendas are outside the play area, and are not considered installed anyway, so they cannot be trashed.
Ruhr and ELP are costs to start the run; they do not occur during the run. For the same reason, ELP does not function with Heinlein.
Thanks! Also, Deep Data Mining says
Make a run on R&D. If successful, access 1 additional card for each unused MU up to 4.
That means 4 additional cards for a max of 5 total cards accessed right?