I know that Skorpios can RFG the program that I trash to Scavenge. But if the corp does that and the runner uses Scavenge to install a program from hand, does the runner still get “by the cost of the program trashed” the discount? Or is it like Punitive Counterstrike, which (iirc - please correct me if I am wrong here) doesn’t “see” points on agendas the runner forfeits or Turntables away.
When your turn begins, place 1 power counter on Trope.
click, remove Trope from the game: Shuffle 1 card from your heap into your stack for each power counter on Trope.
Can the runner use Trope’s click ability to shuffle in less than the number of power counters? Since it is not worded along the lines of “Shuffle up to the number of power counters…” would indicate that you cannot.
If yes, I am assuming the runner cannot use Trope’s click ability if there are less cards in their heap than there are power counters, right?
I think you can fire trope in that situation, because of the “do as much as you can” rule.
I believe your interpretation is correct. It would behave similarly to Preemptive action which I though we had a UFAQ saying you must have 3+ cards in archives to play but it turns out there wasn’t. But, as you pointed out, the lack of the “up to” clause means that it requires a minimum number of cards in archives equal to the number of power counters on trope before it can be used.
A) The program trashed as part of scavenge’s effect is considered to have been trashed, Skorpios just says that it is RFG’d instead of added to the heap (but it was still trashed). Therefore the cost reduction would still apply because the program had been trashed.
A) I’ve not seen that ruling before, and it’s not in the UFAQ. I’d be inclined to say you’re reading is wrong though. Turntable requires an agenda be stolen (and then it’s swapped), similarly agendas forfeited were still stolen. Again, I could be wrong, but I believe the agendas stolen is a maintained game state thing. I.e. if I steal a Standoff and swap it for Government Takeover with turntable I still stole 1 agenda point last turn, regardless of where it ended up.
I did some Googling
this ruling is from 2015 so I dunno if it’s still correct, but it says that if you forfeit an agenda then Punitive can’t “see it” any more (and that Turntable does not affect Punitive). Even if that is still correct, it’s not clear to me that Scavenge + Skorp would work the same way.
@Crunchums is correct. If a card doesn’t have the words “if able”, then it is can be partially resolved. Compare to a card we know cannot resolve the variable amount (X in this case), Counter Surveillance:
Make a run. If successful, instead of accessing, pay X credit to access up to X cards from this server, if able. X is the number of tags you have.
They specifically have the “if able” clause for effects that are all or nothing. So if you have Trope you can use it as long as you have at least one card (i.e. changing the game state). But if you do have enough, you must choose that amount.
There was an errata to say “printed” agenda cost in FAQ 3.1. I don’t see the errata in the latest FAQ (4.1), but maybe it’s not needed since it’s in the Revised Core Set, although I don’t know if they made the change on the printed card.
I think the relevant rule is that an effect exists independent of it’s source, so I don’t think it matters if the card is in the game. Same for Punitive after it’s errata.
That’s kind of a weird ruling, but the issue there seems to be that Punitive is retroactively trying to figure out how many points were stolen last turn. Scavenge doesn’t have that problem, since the card isn’t R’dFG until after the effect has started to resolve and Scavenge has identified its target (and it probably wouldn’t care where the card goes regardless).
Thanks for the clarification!
But like @ovamod7 said, the stolen agenda isn’t a “source” for Punitive’s effect. It’s possible that the Punitive errata changed that ruling, but it also wouldn’t surprise me if the ruling is still that Punitive doesn’t “see” the stolen agenda because it has been removed from the game.
I think the consensus then (this was I could find), was that since it says “printed” then it doesn’t need to reference a specific card (and potentially fail finding it). This is what makes sense to me.
Question about upcoming Compile. If I use compile to install a Femme Fatale and target the first ice I encounter, I suppose it is too late to use Femme Fatale to bypass this ice, correct?
Correct - the Femme trigger condition has already been met by the time Femme is in play. Same as Diana’s Hunt.
Question about Laamb. Do I need to match the strength of the ice in order to make it a barrier? Normally Icebreaker can only interact with ICE when they do, but this is a on-encounter effect, which may be different.
I would think it would work similar to the bypass ability on Femme Fatale. My intuition is that you would not need to match strength. I wasn’t able to find a more definitive rationale than that in the rules.
It’s a good question. It is possible we might get further clarification when the UFAQ comes out, but in the meantime, I would expect that it wouldn’t need to match strength.
Weird, the UFAQ rulings for whispers are showing up in NRDB already, but I’m not seeing the page up on ANCUR yet.
At any rate, the entry for Laamb agrees with @Sanjay – Laamb sets up a trigger that is met when you encounter an ICE. This trigger allows you to pay 2 credits to give the ICE barrier. This is, like Femme, distinct from an icebreaker ability that interacts with the ICE (and requires strength to meet/exceed).
I believe it would require matching strength if the text was
2$: Give an ICE currently being encountered Barrier subtype
due to the rules reference text under “Icebreaker” on page 14:
The Runner uses icebreakers to interact with and break
subroutines on ice. An icebreaker can only interact with ice that
has equal or lower strength than the icebreaker
assuming that “interact with” includes “adding subtype” (which it might or might not, I don’t see a definition of “interact with” but it definitely includes breaking subs and definitely does not include boosting breaker strength).
I was going to respond similarly. It looks like the ability was written as a conditional ability so strength does not have to match, as opposed to a paid ability or the pseudo paid ability of the Adjusted Matrix errata.
Can public agendas be exposed?