We don’t have a ruling on that - but we do have it for Blackguard/Snitch:
Snitch:
Once per run, you may expose an unrezzed piece of ice when you approach it. You may then jack out.
Which is exactly like Drive By - ‘Expose … Then, X.’
The ruling is precisely as I have outlined through nested triggers: the rez decision happens first, then the jack out.
Thus, Drive By and Blackguard does combo (and it’s painful for the corp). And Drive By does work with Aumakua.
Not sure if it’s technically a rules question but here goes:
Player A plays Punitive Counterstrike and announces trace strength. Player B verbally implies (“hit me”) to not boost and take the damage but says he wants to rethink/recalculate the trace a second later (before handing his grip to the opponent to do damage).
Action was not really passed back to the player A yet. No board game change. No paid ability windows etc.
What kind of floor rules violation is this and what should the outcome be?
P.S.: Premier tier event
I can’t find anything in the floor rules that says this is a violation, and therefor must assume that it isn’t, and is completely fine. As you said, there’s no game state change, nor was there a move to change the game state that would inform Player B as to a potential consequence that Player B might not have been otherwise aware of, so I can’t see why a reversal of a decision made only a moment ago is a problem. I can see Player B’s opponent being disappointed that they don’t get to fire the punitive, but disappointment isn’t a rules violation, it’s a feature. 
The closest thing this might be to in the floor rules is a “missed trigger,” which it obviously isn’t really; there’s no triggers that were missed, just a considering of the action to a trigger.
The only case I can imagine is if there were a corp card that allows for boosting a trace after it has already been declared (some sort of Disrupter-like) ability, in which case the runner could be accused of fishing for information about the presence of such a card on the board.
But there isn’t. Thee’s no conceivable way anything has changed. This is about the same as a player declaring ‘Click one, draw’ and then a second later saying ‘Actually, click one, run,’ before having actually committed the action.
I suppose you could argue the runner is looking for the subtle smirk of the corp player signalling a second punitive in hand, before deciding to defend against the trace…But this seems more an enjoyable feature of the game than a rules infringement.
But floor rules state:
I did not know that. Good catch.
In my experience very few people play by this rule. What, if anything, should we do?
Until FFG actually has something in place as a way to handle it, that’s entirely up to the judge called.
I’m just curious if that is how people are playing tournaments.
Have we gotten this update? I didn’t notice a new FAQ
I haven’t heard anything, but we do know that there is a new FAQ coming before Worlds, so I’m still waiting for that.
As the rules state it could be played that way and if someone wanted to enforce those rules they would probably be able to. However, I think the Netrunner community is pretty forgiving when it comes to “take backs” like that provided no extra information has been revealed. Netrunner is a complex game and you are always having to think about so many things you can sometimes forget about what you are doing in the moment.
If you want an example of these “take backs”, there was a game in the top cut of worlds last year (I think it was Ben Ni playing Timmy Wong). Timmy ran on HQ with two pieces of rezzed ICE and none unrezzed. Upon getting to the second rezzed ICE, Timmy realised he was a credit short so he asked if he could have played it as if he took a credit before the run. Ben being the nice guy he is agreed and the run was successful. In this situation Ben could’ve easily said no but he and many other players I’ve seen play a more forgiving game of Netrunner.
I’ve seen this a lot in a variety of card games. Players who are very skilled, want to win on their skill. Players who are not as good want to win on their opponents mistakes. Yes, there is some overlap among skilled players who greatly wish to win, but top tier ANR players are much more forgiving than the middle tables are.
There is a large grey area around how much of a take back should be allowed, but I agree with the general rule of thumb that most of the community uses, which you mentioned above “no additional information was revealed.” My other guide line is “has another player played their entire turn since the missed event?” (e.g. adding a datasucker token, install Tapwrm via SMC, take 2c from Daily Casts).
Question: If you use loki to copy a howler, does the subroutine do anything? Parts of the subroutine are broken due to self reference, but I was unsure about the install and rez part.
Howler subroutine for reference:
You may install and rez a piece of bioroid ice from HQ or Archives, ignoring all costs, placing it directly behind Howler. If you do, derez that piece of ice and trash Howler after the run is completed.
According to ANCUR B&W UFAQ:
If Loki gains a subroutine with a self-reference from another piece of ice, such as a trap like Kitsune, what happens?
Everything in the subroutine resolves as normal, except for any effect with a self-reference in it. The reference does not refer to Loki, so it cannot resolve.
Based on the example of Kitsune, I’d expect the effect fizzles because you must place the ice directly behind Howler which is a broken self reference. Then, since you couldn’t install the ice, it cannot be derezed, and you don’t trash Howler because of the broken reference.
My reading of the first sentance is that the install location is a requirement on the effect resolving. This is different from a Wormhole/Bloom interaction since instead of resolving subs on another card you’re copying subs from another card.
And it’s not just about niceties, there’s a practical element too. If you are going to strictly enforce that all moves are final, it’s natural that players will then spend more time thinking about each of those moves, and the game will go longer.
How does Wetwork Refit work with Loki?
Wetwork Refit: Install Wetwork Refit on a rezzed piece of bioroid ice as a condition counter with the text “Host ice gains " Do 1 brain damage.” before all its other subroutines."
Loki: When the Runner encounters Loki, choose another rezzed piece of ice. Until the end of the run, Loki gains the subtypes of that ice and the subroutines of that ice before all Loki’s other subroutines.
End the run unless the Runner shuffles his or her grip into the stack.
Wetwork Refit is a constant ability, so that subroutine would get applied and then Loki’s ability would trigger on encounter and add the other subroutines.
So if Loki copied an ice with an etr, it would come before the brain damage sub from Wetwork?
Also, what if Loki copies NEXT Silver (as the only two rezzed ice)? Does it have 1 or 2 subs?
