Given these both trigger off "when Encountered", and on a run the Femme will resolve first does Komainu actually have any subroutines to break?

In other words, with a hand of 5 cards, can the Femme bypass this for zero or are you going to have to pay the 5 credits to avoid any damage?

Consensus seems to be Femme bypasses for 0, just like you skip the "When encountered" effects of Data Raven and Tollbooth. Yahtzee.

From what I've seen from posts about pawn shop and wyldside, I think you would choose what resolves 1st so if you choose the ice effect to resolve 1st you would pay X credits but if you choose femmes effect 1st you would pay 0.

I'm not entirely sure but this is what I'd go with if I came across this situation

From what I've seen from posts about pawn shop and wyldside, I think you would choose what resolves 1st so if you choose the ice effect to resolve 1st you would pay X credits but if you choose femmes effect 1st you would pay 0.

I'm not entirely sure but this is what I'd go with if I came across this situation

You don't get a choice in what you want to resolve first. The current player's turn always resolves first, and they resolve their own effects in any order they wish, but they cannot choose to have the corp resolve first if the runner is running.

Well, I'd agree with the previous posters, but the problem is that Femme vs Chum has set an "encountered" precedent that confuses the issue. I'd send this one to FFG for greater clarification.

I already have. Femme vs Chum is irrelevant to this discussion; Chum is already in effect if you didn't break it. Chum requires that you encounter another ICE an don't break; Femme requires that you encounter an ICE and by bypassing you don't break, so Chum fires.

Anyway, Lukas confirmed that if you Femme Komainu, it as 0 subroutines. He also answered for me that if you left a Chum unbroken then hit a Komainu and bypassed with Femme, because Komainu has 0 subroutines you are considered to have broken them all and Chum does nothing.

I don't know if you saw the epic throwdown on Netrunner Geeks FB but I disagree with how this ruling fits into the existing FAQ and rules framework. I understand the reasoning but I don't think it's elegant and I think Lukas just defaulted to the "Chum+Woodcutter" answer glibly.

"Bypass" says in the FAQ that " Any subroutines on the ice bypassed are not broken. " I think the most elegant answer would simply to say on Chum "If you bypass the next Ice, Chum does damage, regardless of the number of subroutines."

Because maybe Komainu/Woodcutter/Tyrant have subroutines and maybe they don't, but you skip Step 3.1 so you didn't break any and "any includes zero" as we have become used to saying.

Instead, we have a situation where because you didn't break any subroutines, therefore the number of subroutines you broke is zero, therefore you broke the number of subroutines the ice has and Chum is therefore satisfied. I find that confusing and am going to email to see if that's really where it's going to go.

Because maybe Komainu/Woodcutter/Tyrant have subroutines and maybe they don't, but you skip Step 3.1 so you didn't break any and "any includes zero" as we have become used to saying.

'All' includes zero, I'm not sure 'Any' does. I couldn't argue strongly for either case in this scenario; it seems to me that if you bypass you never reached the 'break subroutines' step of the encounter, so there's an argument that you didn't break 0 subroutines... except that smacks of not being able to spend 0 credits after an RSVP to trash ambushes orpower Yog.0, which I also thought of as somewhat daft.

Best logic I can see to support the ruling is the one you came up with: - You broke 0 subroutines. The ICE has 0 subroutines. All includes 0; ergo you broke all subroutines. Chum does not do damage.

Because maybe Komainu/Woodcutter/Tyrant have subroutines and maybe they don't, but you skip Step 3.1 so you didn't break any and "any includes zero" as we have become used to saying.

'All' includes zero, I'm not sure 'Any' does. I couldn't argue strongly for either case in this scenario; it seems to me that if you bypass you never reached the 'break subroutines' step of the encounter, so there's an argument that you didn't break 0 subroutines... except that smacks of not being able to spend 0 credits after an RSVP to trash ambushes orpower Yog.0, which I also thought of as somewhat daft.

Best logic I can see to support the ruling is the one you came up with: - You broke 0 subroutines. The ICE has 0 subroutines. All includes 0; ergo you broke all subroutines. Chum does not do damage.

I personally think this Twitter ruling will have to be walked back, or else clarified in the next FAQ. It contradicts the FAQ because it says those 0 subroutines are not broken. The problem is that breaking 0 subroutines and not breaking 0 subroutines are identical depending on how you parse the logic. It irks me that the go-to example in the FAQ is that Femmeing a chummed piece of normal ice triggers Chum, except along comes this corner case where that doesn't hold.

It would have been cleaner had the FAQ entry for Chum only been point 1 (subroutine resolution) which avoids the circuitous case of ICE which have no routines to break or resolve. On the other hand point 2 allows things like Nesei MK II to guarantee Chum-damage during the next ICE encounter by forcing an end run. I would also speculate that point 2 was put in specifically to prevent bypassing.

As I think Grimwalker was saying, it isn't elegant to have situations where "all includes zero" applies to both of the available operations. Some sort of tie-breaker will be needed to decide which side gets to have the zero.

Aside: after an RSVP I thought it was the ruling that you could spent 0 credits for things (or all those psi-mechanics break down in an infinite loop of despair and the runner is forced to concede)?

Aside: after an RSVP I thought it was the ruling that you could spent 0 credits for things (or all those psi-mechanics break down in an infinite loop of despair and the runner is forced to concede)?

It was; I meant to say I thought the argument silly. The ruling (that you CAN spend 0) was sensible.

Question regarding the "for the remainder of this run" text. Does the runner get the cards back at the end of the run? Meaning, he has 4 cards when he hits Komainu. Now he has 0 cards "for the remainder of this run", but I don't finish him. Does he get his 4 cards back after he finishes that run?

Question regarding the "for the remainder of this run" text. Does the runner get the cards back at the end of the run? Meaning, he has 4 cards when he hits Komainu. Now he has 0 cards "for the remainder of this run", but I don't finish him. Does he get his 4 cards back after he finishes that run?

Absolutely not. Read Komainu again.

When the Runner encounters Komainu, it gains "[subroutine] Do 1 net damage." for each card in the Runner's grip for the remainder of this run.

Look where the quotes are. It gains 1 subroutine for each card in the runner's grip. Those subroutines last until the end of the run, so when the run ends, Komainu resets to 0 subroutines. The damage the runner suffered (if any) is still suffered.

For the remainder of this run also means if you can force the runner back through Komainu (e.g. cell portal) it will retain the number of subroutines from when it was originally encountered.

For the remainder of this run also means if you can force the runner back through Komainu (e.g. cell portal) it will retain the number of subroutines from when it was originally encountered.

And potentially gain more, if you still have cards in-hand.