Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Official Rules Question Thread


#4575

I haven’t seen any actual ruling on this (official or otherwise), but from the discussion I’ve seen, the consensus seems to be that you get no Turning Wheel counters after a D&C run, because there has been no run on either HQ or R&D, just accesses as dictated by the text on D&C.

How D&C interacts with Aumakua is less clear, but if the accesses from HQ and R&D are considered separate from the access on Archives, then it seems possible that D&C could yield 3 Aumakua counters for a single run.


#4576

Thanks @3N1GM4 :slight_smile: What about spent counters during the D&C run - do I get to access additional cards from both HQ and R&D, only HQ or no additional cards at all?


#4577

I would expect spent TTW counters to give you extra accesses on both HQ and R&D based on how the cards are written, but I’m certainly not 100% sure on that either.


#4578

@ANCUR confirmed that is the case (extra accesses on both HQ & RnD) on Twitter.


#4579

How does Thimblerig interact with stuff like Mumbad City Grid and Code Replicator?


#4580

I have a question about Deep Data Mining: when do you check how much unused MU you have ? When you play the card or when the run is successful ?


#4581

My understanding is that the number of cards to be accessed when using Deep Data Mining would be determined in step 5.5 of the Run Timing Structure, as with any other run. So, if you used up some of your free MU during the run, you might access fewer cards than you would have otherwise. It doesn’t matter how much MU you had when you played DDM and started the run, AFAIK.


#4582

Does not work with Code Replicator or MCG.
https://netrunnerdb.com/en/card/22039.


#4583

It depends on the order you trigger them. Since the Corp controls both triggers, they can decide the order. MCG and Thimblerig are basically the same effect, but when one trigger is completed the ice that was just “passed” is no longer there, so the second trigger off of passing that ice cannot be resolved.

Code Replicator works if you choose to trigger it first, but then you’re no longer passing Thimblerig (but approaching it), and it cannot resolve it’s trigger (that is until the Runner passes it again). If you swap Thimblerig first, then it’s no longer being passed, so the Corp cannot resolve Code Replicator.

Basically, the Runner moves between ice when they “pass” it, but they are (almost) always fixed in the same “position” (number of ice until the server is approached). Effects can move the runner or move the ice around the runner and as long as the same ice is just “behind” them, then the “whenever… passes” trigger can resolve.


#4584

Meridian ( subroutine Gain 4c and end the run unless the Runner adds Meridian to his or her score area as an agenda worth -1 agenda point):
Are we agreed that you gain the credits only if the runner chooses to end the run? I’m not sure if we’ve got precedent for whether ‘and’ or ‘unless’ takes priority in this case.


#4585

I’m certain that you only gain the 4c if the Runner chooses to end the run, but I don’t know if there’s an actual ruling anywhere yet.


#4586

Closest thing to official we have is Damon (!) weighing in and implying that you don’t get the credits if you add it as agenda in this Netrunner Dorks thread:

This isn’t incorrect templating, it is templated correctly. You could say that the correct templating is bad because it allows for casual reading to mistake how it is meant to work, which is a different thing.

In order to always gain four it would need to have a period between the two. “Do A. Do B unless C.”

So, I would rule it that way.


#4587

Can you elect to pay a cost and then prevent part of that cost? My reading of the rules reference is that if the initial choice to pay a cost is legit w.r.t. causing a change in game state, then you are free to prevent part of the cost. Obviously, the effect would not resolve in this case, but anything triggered by paying those costs would resolve.

e.g. I’ve got a sacrificial construct, a tech trader and a clone chip installed. I trash clone chip to install some 0-cost program from the heap (gaining 1 credit from TT), then trash saccon to prevent CC’s trash (gaining 1 credit from TT). I use my sweet 2 futurebuxx to play deuces wild and go on to win the game by exposing a piece of critical ICE.


#4588

I’m just going off my recollection from previous conversations with @jakodrako about this, so I’d be happy if someone else can think of some more official justification:

You can prevent paying costs. However, if you prevent even part of the cost of the ability, you will not get the effect. That part you know.

What’s interesting is in the example you mention, you would only get one credit: the one from the Sacrificial Construct trashing. The Clone Chip was never trashed, so it would not trigger Tech Trader. You did not actually use the trash can ability on Clone Chip, because that involves trashing a card.

You would need to click for another credit before playing the game winning Deuces Wild.


#4589

Hm, actually in the rules ref I see (under Abilities -> trigger steps)

Trigger Met: The trigger condition of a conditional ability has
occurred or the trigger cost of a paid ability has been paid, and
the ability is ready to trigger. If a paid ability or an optional
conditional ability enters the “trigger met” state, the ability is
considered to have been “used”. …

At this point, I would expect the TT’s to have their trigger condition met, since we have “used” a trash ability. Next step is:

Trigger: The ability is ready to resolve and becomes
independent of its source card. An ability that has triggered
must resolve and can continue to affect the game, even if the
source card becomes inactive. Once an ability is triggered,
players can use prevent/avoid effects to modify what they would
do, but no other actions can be taken. Once no more prevent/
avoid effects are being applied, the ability resolves.

if we prevented the effect, it would definitely fit in here (after the ability was used). If you prevent the cost, it’s less clear. I think that given jako’s discussion and generally making a lick of sense, “preventing a cost from being paid” should be part of the “trigger met” step before the ability is considered to be used.

One more important contrasting scenario for when an ability is considered to be “used” is firing SoT + tech traders to levy when you are on less than 5 credits (e.g. on 2 credits with a game-losing Deuces Wild in the bin and 3 TT’s). I’ve seen it played as “you can trash SOT because playing the event and paying its cost is part of the EFFECT, which happens after you have ‘used’ the ability.”

edit: This would be crystal-clear if under “Cost” in the rules ref, the existing text

If any part of a cost is prevented (for example,
preventing a card from being trashed that has a paid ability with
the cost of trashing that card), then the associated effect does
not occur.

was changed to

If any part of a cost is prevented (for example,
preventing a card from being trashed that has a paid ability with
the cost of trashing that card), then the associated trigger does not enter the “trigger met” state and the associated effect does not occur.

In any event, this is pretty clearly the intent (and prevents dumb game-breaking decks like this).


#4590

I think the Order Of Sol triggering off Sure Gamble (or any other play cost) fits in here. The ruling on that is, if you have 5 credits and you play Sure Gamble, you momentarily go down to 0 credits. This triggers Order Of Sol to give you a credit. Then Sure Gamble resolves, gives you 9 credits and puts you up to 10 credits.

Both cases you pay the play cost for something. In paying the play cost, it triggers some conditional ability. The conditional ability resolves fully. Then the effect of the original something resolves. In your example, since you now have 5 credits you can play Levy.


#4591

The issue with that comparison is that Order of Sol says “first”, which designates it as constant. And Tech Trader says “whenever”, which designates it as a conditional. [EDIT: This used to be true, but does not apply to new cards, see discussion below.] So, we can’t assume that timing is the same, but it does show that cost is a distinct step and happens before the effect. Also, the timing is still similar because Tech Trader off of Sacrificial Construct is a chain reaction.

With that clarification, I still think I agree with @internet_potato and you. Tech Trader pays out when you use Clone Chip and Sacrificial Construct. I don’t think that if you prevent a cost you negate that it was paid at some point. Like would you get 1 credit back if you prevent trashing of a hardware for Trade In? I think preventing cost been discussed recently in relation to a UFAQ (maybe Obokata), but I haven’t taken the time to find a good example.


#4592

Nope. Anything that states a moment when something triggers is a triggered effect. Constant effects use language “has” “is” “gains” etc.


#4593

If I score a Hostile Takeover as The Outfit with Employee Strike up, do I get the 3 credits? Why or why not?


#4594

My understanding is you would not, because the Corp’s abilities fire first on their turn, before the ability on Strike causes it to be trashed and only then does your ID become active again, by which time it’s too late for the bad pub you took off Hostile to cause your ID to fire.

I’m sure someone with better rules knowledge than me can explain more explicitly using the technical rules terms :slight_smile: but I’m fairly sure the outcome is you don’t get the 3c.

I think it’s the same when for example you score a Chronos Protocol through Strike, the Strike is not RFGed as I understand it.