Hey folks! So I got my own compilation of rulings. This is what I'm going to post in individual card entries on fiveringdb, once Alsciende finishes it. I will also add source links to relevant RRG entries and/or cardgamedb posts with official rulings.
Please feel free to comment if you would like me me to add, change, clarify, or remove any entries.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MSIQHAJmfSMKk1RJmzuF_3Mtmav8ZRy8-LDXSbXCQAE

Why is Shiba Peacekeeper mentioned in the entry for Captive Audience? Am I missing a subtle interaction? Why would changing the battle to military have any effect on the Peacekeeper?

What Gohei said, Shiba Peacemaker's ability is that he cannot participate as an attacker, he has no restrictions regarding type of conflict.

I also had not seen the rulings regarding Shiba Yojimbo and Court Games before now. While I have no doubt that this interaction is correct, it is incredibly non-intuitive and strikes me as the sort of thing that is going to tick people off when it comes up in games.

I hate rulings like that.

Thanks folks, I've removed the references to Shiba Peacekeeper from the entries for changing the type of conflict.

Shiba Yojimbo was discussed at length yesterday, the RRG entry for Triggered Abilities is quite explicit in thet everything after the dash ("-") is the effect of the ability. And the RRG entry for Initiating abilities states that effects initiate in step 6, and resolve in step 7. Post-initiation targeting is quite rare.

28 minutes ago, Yogo Gohei said:

I also had not seen the rulings regarding Shiba Yojimbo and Court Games before now. While I have no doubt that this interaction is correct, it is incredibly non-intuitive and strikes me as the sort of thing that is going to tick people off when it comes up in games.

I hate rulings like that.

There may be other cards that are a bigger thorn than Court Games, but at least Court Games, if your opponent chooses to dishonor one of your characters, you're the one deciding which character is dishonored. So there isn't as big a need to protect the shugenja since you can select someone else to take the dishonor. Still kinda bummed that Yojimbo can't cancel it, but it WAS kinda sneaky to be choosing a shugenja as the target just so Yojimbo could cancel the effect. Such tactics are better suited to our Scorpion cousins.

32 minutes ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

There may be other cards that are a bigger thorn than Court Games, but at least Court Games, if your opponent chooses to dishonor one of your characters, you're the one deciding which character is dishonored. So there isn't as big a need to protect the shugenja since you can select someone else to take the dishonor. Still kinda bummed that Yojimbo can't cancel it, but it WAS kinda sneaky to be choosing a shugenja as the target just so Yojimbo could cancel the effect. Such tactics are better suited to our Scorpion cousins.

Two things:

The issue is that it is profoundly counter intuitive. Shiba Yojimbo says that it can (paraphrase) negate the effects of an action that targeted your shugenja. Court Games targeted your shugenja. The only reason it doesn't work is due to some pretty nuanced timing rules. The more I read the cards in question, the less I understand why any of this is a problem. It seems like Yojimbo is reacting to "the targetting" not "the targetting step". But, if that's the ruling, that's the ruling. I am not here to call it wrong. Just nonintuitive and problematic.

Also, the primary scenario I am thinking of here is you have an army consisting of a single shugenja, with the Yojimbo sitting at home ready to protect that shug at a moment's notice. If your opponent plays court games, and the Phoenix player isn't aware of this ruling, the conversation that follows will likely end in a lot of anger.

The Shiba Yojimbo / Court Games interaction was discussed at length on Facebook, and while I agree with @Yogo Gohei in that it is terribly counter intuitive, the arguments for why it doesn't work seem pretty solid. But all of the weird rulings that have cropped up lately (including Toturi and Hotaru, for example) are making me think that while FFG is great at the big brushstrokes when it comes to game design (because the game as a whole works great), they are not as good at the nitty gritty details (or at least making those details intuitive.)

But I will concede that I might be the problem here; if I had played a bunch of LCGs before now (as opposed to just a bunch of the CCG) these timing rules and dash placements and what-have-you might be more intuitive for me. And the game did just get released, so I think it's fair for FFG to need time to iron out the ways we players are breaking things.

Where did this ruling of Court Games and Shiba Yojimbo come from? This is frustrating, as I keep getting 'official' responses that are different with many other answers on these forums. I can't speak to the specifics of the conversation, but the layout of Court Games was discussed with a designer, and the response was that the targeting of court games is still considered targeting and not part of the effect. The placement of the dash was made for simplicity of the flow of reading the card, and was not meant to change the inherent structure of card cost/targeting/effect. It was decided this was easier to read than the following:

During a political conflict, select one: choose a participating character you control - honor that charactor, or choose a participating character your opponent controls - dishonor that character.

I'm frustrated with you, not at you

Also, Ide Trader is still in question.

1 hour ago, LuceLineGames said:

Where did this ruling of Court Games and Shiba Yojimbo come from? This is frustrating, as I keep getting 'official' responses that are different with many other answers on these forums. I can't speak to the specifics of the conversation, but the layout of Court Games was discussed with a designer, and the response was that the targeting of court games is still considered targeting and not part of the effect. The placement of the dash was made for simplicity of the flow of reading the card, and was not meant to change the inherent structure of card cost/targeting/effect. It was decided this was easier to read than the following:

During a political conflict, select one: choose a participating character you control - honor that charactor, or choose a participating character your opponent controls - dishonor that character.

I'm frustrated with you, not at you

It it was a response from Brad directly by email. Here's my Q and his A:

"If player 1 uses Court Games to force Player 2 to choose and dishonor one of their characters, can player 2 use Shiba Yojimbo to cancel the effects of court games?"

And Brad responded:

"In this case player 2 will not be able to cancel the court games using the Shiva Yojimbo. This is due to the fact that the targeting of the effect is found after the dash. By the time this effect gets around to choosing the target (which is necessary both to have an actual target for the effect and verify that the target is a shugenja) the opportunity to use the Shiba Yojimbo’s ability has passed. Hope this helps!"

Just a reminder to everyone that what is "intuitive" to one person is often "counter-intuitive" to others. The champions are a prime example of that where some people believe they should work one way (mostly those that read the preview article) and others believe they should work another (mostly those that didn't read the preview article). So arguments based on it is "counter-intuitive" should be kept to a minimum

12 minutes ago, chiller087 said:

It it was a response from Brad directly by email. Here's my Q and his A:

"If player 1 uses Court Games to force Player 2 to choose and dishonor one of their characters, can player 2 use Shiba Yojimbo to cancel the effects of court games?"

And Brad responded:

"In this case player 2 will not be able to cancel the court games using the Shiva Yojimbo. This is due to the fact that the targeting of the effect is found after the dash. By the time this effect gets around to choosing the target (which is necessary both to have an actual target for the effect and verify that the target is a shugenja) the opportunity to use the Shiba Yojimbo’s ability has passed. Hope this helps!"

I do believe this to be incorrect information you received, which has happened, but I think this is worth additional clarification by the development team. The targeting requirements are not considered an effect. And the instructions clearly have any targeting happening prior to the effect initiating, which gives Shiva time to react.

Quote

Rules Reference: Card effects might be preceded by costs, triggering conditions, play restrictions or permissions, and/or targeting requirements. Such elements are not considered effects.

Quote

Rules Reference:

Once each of the preliminary confirmations has been made,
follow these steps, in order:
3. Apply any modifiers to the cost(s).
4. Pay the cost(s).
5. Choose target(s), if applicable. Any pre-effect instructions to
“select” among multiple options in the ability are made at
this time as well.
6. The card attempts to enter play, or the effects of the ability
attempt to initiate. An interrupt ability that cancels this
initiation may be used at this time.
7. The effects of the ability (if not canceled in step 6) complete
their initiation, and resolve.

Do you have a reference to back that up other than an uncited, unnamed conversation with someone?

What a dev answered by email/pm is more relevant than what a devs said on a closed playtester forum, I believe

LuceLineGames, if you get a different answer from the devs, one that you can share, please provide it here. Until then, all we know is what Brad told us, imirite?

2 hours ago, LuceLineGames said:

Where did this ruling of Court Games and Shiba Yojimbo come from? This is frustrating, as I keep getting 'official' responses that are different with many other answers on these forums. I can't speak to the specifics of the conversation, but the layout of Court Games was discussed with a designer, and the response was that the targeting of court games is still considered targeting and not part of the effect. The placement of the dash was made for simplicity of the flow of reading the card, and was not meant to change the inherent structure of card cost/targeting/effect. It was decided this was easier to read than the following:

During a political conflict, select one: choose a participating character you control - honor that charactor, or choose a participating character your opponent controls - dishonor that character.

I'm frustrated with you, not at you

Do you remember who you talked to or when?

9 minutes ago, Steinerp said:

Just a reminder to everyone that what is "intuitive" to one person is often "counter-intuitive" to others. The champions are a prime example of that where some people believe they should work one way (mostly those that read the preview article) and others believe they should work another (mostly those that didn't read the preview article). So arguments based on it is "counter-intuitive" should be kept to a minimum

I'm responding based on direct conversations with developers, and also quoting rules reference. I'm limited by NDA to quote those discussions, so I'd recommend getting additional confirmation through the question form.

I do believe what is "intuitive" is a great place to start for rules. Often people "read" too much into the rules, and don't step back to see the big picture. A best practice for judging tournaments is to rule on what is intuitive, unless proven otherwise (mistakes will happen though).

Additional confirmation? After just getting an answer from Brad? Are you trying to discredit him or what?.. oO

9 minutes ago, mplain said:

What a dev answered by email/pm is more relevant than what a devs said on a closed playtester forum, I believe

LuceLineGames, if you get a different answer from the devs, one that you can share, please provide it here. Until then, all we know is what Brad told us, imirite?

Until it's on the FAQ or RR, no I wouldn't consider a developer personal email any more credible than another email, especially when it's in direct contradiction to rules reference. I can reach out and see if we can get confirmation though, as I completely understand how you would expect an email from Brad to be reliable, though I'm still questioning if they thought through the facts on that guidance.

14 minutes ago, LuceLineGames said:

I do believe this to be incorrect information you received, which has happened, but I think this is worth additional clarification by the development team. The targeting requirements are not considered an effect. And the instructions clearly have any targeting happening prior to the effect initiating, which gives Shiva time to react.

Unfortunately the portions of the RRG which you cite do not support your argument. The quotes you provide clarify that things before the dash are not effects, but in the case of Court Games the targeting portion of the card is after the dash and is therefore part of the effect. On page 16 the third bullet under Triggered Abilities the RRG lays out the guidelines for targeting being part of an effect:

Quote

Triggered abilities are written in a “triggering condition
(and/or) cost (and/or) targeting requirements – effect”
template. Ability text before the dash consists of triggering
conditions (and/or) costs (and/or) targeting requirements.
Ability text after the dash consists of effects. and may
sometimes include targeting requirements that come into
play as the effect is being resolved.

Per this, it becomes quite clear that Court Game's targeting is part of the effect, and therefore comes into play in step 7 of resolving an ability, which is too late for Shiba Yojimbo to counter.

I understand that you were a playtester and that you discussed with a dev a way to word the card such that this interaction would play out differently, but unfortunately the final word must be based on the final version of the card.

" A best practice for judging tournaments is to rule on what is intuitive, unless proven otherwise"

Sounds like a good way to get rules wrong. I judged the Game of Thrones championship at Gencon. In the first cut, I was asked a simple question and for some reason I gave a very quick answer based on my intuition which I rarely do. I was wrong and absolutely cost the player the game and very nearly his spot in the second cut (luckily for me his SoS would had stopped him anyways). My intuition was correct because the answer I gave was based on how it worked in 1.0 so felt 100% right to me. But it was just flat out wrong in 2.0.

19 minutes ago, LuceLineGames said:

I do believe this to be incorrect information you received, which has happened, but I think this is worth additional clarification by the development team. The targeting requirements are not considered an effect. And the instructions clearly have any targeting happening prior to the effect initiating, which gives Shiva time to react.

I suspect that Brad was referring to this part of the RRG:

2 minutes ago, chiller087 said:

I suspect that Brad was referring to this part of the RRG:

• The resolution of some effects (such as post-then effects, or delayed effects) requires that targets are chosen after the initiation of the effect. Such targets need not be verified when checking play restrictions and determining whether or not the entire ability may initiate. If there are no valid targets at the time such targets would be chosen, that aspect of the effect fails to resolve.

Ok, this fits nicely with Court Games, and explains why Shiba would not work.

EDIT: Incorrectly answered this one. See two posts below where I corrected this.

Guidance of the Ancestors: Should be able to be initiated once per copy in the discard pile. There is no "Max [X]" nor "Limit [X]" on it, so it only has the normal once per round, which applies once per round per copy of the card (if I understand correctly).

Quote

Unless otherwise specified by the ability itself, each triggered ability may be triggered once per round.