I found this ruling in the document.

2.9.0.9.1 If an ability with an “Only playable” restriction is negated or cancelled, it has still been played/activated, and may not be attempted again.

Now does this apply to abilities without "only playable" as well? Say the character is Mitsurugi. And I cancel one of his free enhances with No Memories. He continues to play 2 more. Pull of the tide's conditions is playing an ability 3 times.

Could I respond with pull of the tides to end Mitsu's combat phase or does the cancelled enhance not count towards the 3 required for Pull of the Tides. I thought it couldn't until I found that specific ruling.

Thank you.

Yep, you can respond with Pull of the Tides, because it doesn't care if the ability resolved or not, just if it was played.

Really? Why was it then that before when enhances got cancelled with Yoga Mastery it counted as you not playing an enhance so it was still your enhance? (Not sure if that sentence made sense)

My guess would be that it's because it was never ruled that way (regarding Yoga Mastery).

Where did you read/hear that Lin? It's never been that way to my knowledge.

Stamps for MG, aslum, and ROTBI.

PS - You've got squirrels

KawaiiMistress said:

...what? lol

Sorry for the confusing sentence, I guess I've played Yoga Mastery wrong a few times then. I thought if I canceled an enhance with Yoga Mastery, they got to play another one since their first one didn't go through. Hence why this question came up. Now I know better.

Alright sorry to post twice but now I'm even more confused.

I heard that the ruling for Akuma's control hacking abilities is: If its cancelled or if it fails for whatever reason, you may play it again. Because in that case, he would technically be playing that same ability twice...

So how does that equate to the ruling that I just got for Pull of the Tides?

KawaiiMistress said:

Sorry... it's 6am... I can't sleep... I should be sleeping... but I read this and you broke my brain.

1) How was Akuma's ability cancelled?

2) which one of Akuma's ability was cancelled?

3) Are they trying to either respond against the same reponse window, or enhance against the same enhance window?

4) Where did you hear this ruling?

Antigoth said:

1) Say with Inhuman Perception.

2) The control check hacking -4 once per turn ability

3) They would be trying to respond in a completely different response window on a completely different card but still during the same turn.

4) From a friend who played Akuma at regionals. This was how it was done then.

KawaiiMistress said:

1) Becomes relevant, because if it was with Tag Along or a similar effect, it would be an illegal play.

2,3,4 - Legal play. Here's why:

The ability says "Once per turn, before a control check is made, that control check gets -4."

If Inhuman Perception Cancel's it, then there is no effect. a -4 has not been applied. So until Akuma applies that -4 he can keep attempting to hax checks. IE if he declares it, and checks a 1, and chooses not to commit to pass, then he can choose to try to Hax at the next available window.

Also, while you are citing 2.9.0.9.1, you are not citing 2.9.0.9 which frames and gives reference to what 2.9.0.9.1 is referring to:

2.9.0.9 Some cards have the words “Only playable” written in the last line of text in their effect. This line of text is to be regarded as an additional restriction and not part of the card effect.

This is for cards like Starter Abyss, Promo Ukyo, and other similarly worded cards. Because otherwise that last line of text would be considered part of the effects text, and would be cancelled if the effect was cancelled. So 2.9.0.9.1 is there specifically to provide clarity on how to hand those specific situations.

I'm still not sure I fully understand.

If Akuma somehow fails / gets cancelled up to 3 times would that trigger Pull of the Tides?

KawaiiMistress said:

yeah you could respond with pull of the tides and you wouldnt have to cancel it the 3rd time just the first 2

it doesnt matter if the react was canceled it only matters if it was actually played

Da_ghetto_gamer said:

*Stamp*