20 hours ago, Daigotsu Bakunin said:

I did get a reply from Nate as well, stating that both answers were yes. Court Mask is an effect, not a cost and can be used while dishonored, and Shameful Display is valid as long as at least one of the targets will change status.

Using Shameful Display with three characters present, one honored, two not, and trying to honor the honored and dishonor one of the others seems iffy though. Feels a bit gamey.

That's cool, except his answer on Shameful Display directly contradicts the rules. You cannot chose a target that will not be effected, and you MUST have all eligible targets for the effect, according to the rules reference. (Targeting, pg 15-16).

7th Bullet - A card is not an eligible target for an ability if the resolution
of that ability’s effect could not affect the target at all. (For
example, a bowed character cannot be chosen as the target
for an ability that reads “Action: Choose a character —
bow that character.”)

2nd Bullet - If an ability requires the choosing of one or more targets,
and there are not enough valid targets to meet all of its
targeting requirements, the ability cannot be initiated. This
initiation check is made at the same time the ability’s play
restrictions are checked.

Note that the 2nd bullet states "one or MORE targets" and "meet ALL of its targeting requirements" (emphasis mine). If you don't have 2 targets both of which are capable of being honored/dishonored, then you cannot use Shameful Display. This isn't my personal interpretation, they laid it out in black and white put it in the rules and posted it on their site. Coming from X-Wing, I can state that getting answers from people that directly contradict the written rules is unfortunately not an uncommon occurrence.

Having said all that, returning the mask works just fine. It does change the board state, and the dishonor effect is not targeted.

1 hour ago, KineticOperator said:

That's cool, except his answer on Shameful Display directly contradicts the rules. You cannot chose a target that will not be effected, and you MUST have all eligible targets for the effect, according to the rules reference. (Targeting, pg 15-16).

7th Bullet - A card is not an eligible target for an ability if the resolution
of that ability’s effect could not affect the target at all. (For
example, a bowed character cannot be chosen as the target
for an ability that reads “Action: Choose a character —
bow that character.”)

2nd Bullet - If an ability requires the choosing of one or more targets,
and there are not enough valid targets to meet all of its
targeting requirements, the ability cannot be initiated. This
initiation check is made at the same time the ability’s play
restrictions are checked.

Note that the 2nd bullet states "one or MORE targets" and "meet ALL of its targeting requirements" (emphasis mine). If you don't have 2 targets both of which are capable of being honored/dishonored, then you cannot use Shameful Display. This isn't my personal interpretation, they laid it out in black and white put it in the rules and posted it on their site. Coming from X-Wing, I can state that getting answers from people that directly contradict the written rules is unfortunately not an uncommon occurrence.

Having said all that, returning the mask works just fine. It does change the board state, and the dishonor effect is not targeted.

"You cannot choose a target that will not be affected" - the rules state you cannot choose a target that could not be affected.

"meet ALL of its targeting requirements" - Let's look at shameful display. The 'targeting requirements' are that 1) there are two characters to choose, 2) those characters are participating, and the third targeting requirement from the rules are that 3) the card is not an eligible target for an ability if the resolution of the ability's effect could not affect the target at all.

What's in question is if you check targeting requirements for each target individually, or a holistic approach? If I target two participating honored characters (and look at the targeting individually), there are 1) two characters, 2) they are both participating, and 3) each one could be affected by the ability. What I think you're saying is that if you look at the targets all together, then 3) the resolution could not affect all the targets, therefore those two are not valid targets.

We do know that you can back yourself into part of the effect failing, if you chose one honored and one no-status. Either way you look at it, individually or as a whole, they could both be affected. But when carrying out the effect, you are able to dishonor the no-status and fail to honor the honored.

14 minutes ago, LuceLineGames said:

"You cannot choose a target that will not be affected" - the rules state you cannot choose a target that could not be affected.

"meet ALL of its targeting requirements" - Let's look at shameful display. The 'targeting requirements' are that 1) there are two characters to choose, 2) those characters are participating, and the third targeting requirement from the rules are that 3) the card is not an eligible target for an ability if the resolution of the ability's effect could not affect the target at all.

What's in question is if you check targeting requirements for each target individually, or a holistic approach? If I target two participating honored characters (and look at the targeting individually), there are 1) two characters, 2) they are both participating, and 3) each one could be affected by the ability. What I think you're saying is that if you look at the targets all together, then 3) the resolution could not affect all the targets, therefore those two are not valid targets.

We do know that you can back yourself into part of the effect failing, if you chose one honored and one no-status. Either way you look at it, individually or as a whole, they could both be affected. But when carrying out the effect, you are able to dishonor the no-status and fail to honor the honored.

Whether targeting looks at each target individually or as a whole, I don't have the answer.

That logic fails with the example given in the bullet, even if we accept your use of the word "could". A character "could" bow despite the fact that it cannot at the moment by that logic, and would be a valid target. But even in this example, since it cannot bow at the moment it is targeted it is not eligible as a target.

As far as ALL the targets, yes that is what they wrote. "All of its targeting requirements" as opposed to "any of its targeting requirements". If those requirements include choosing two targets, then both targets would have to be valid. The bullet point is quite clear in including all targets, "one or more", "enough valid targets", every bit of this bullet clearly makes the point that you must have enough valid targets to satisfy the condition. It doesn't say "at least one valid target" which would be the counterpoint. As far as "individually or as a whole, they could both be affected" is inaccurate, since a dishonored character can not be effected by a dishonor effect, neither can an honored character be effected by an honor effect. To use "Shameful Display" you must target in a way that BOTH targets are currently valid, following the example set. If "Shameful Display" read "bow two characters", and one of the only two characters in the conflict were already bowed, it would not work either.

Just saying the response is inconsistent with the rules as written, and that the rules as written are quite clear.

@KineticOperator A character is a valid target for Shameful Display if it can be honored or dishonored (one being possible is enough).

14 minutes ago, KineticOperator said:

That logic fails with the example given in the bullet, even if we accept your use of the word "could". A character "could" bow despite the fact that it cannot at the moment by that logic, and would be a valid target. But even in this example, since it cannot bow at the moment it is targeted it is not eligible as a target.

As far as ALL the targets, yes that is what they wrote. "All of its targeting requirements" as opposed to "any of its targeting requirements". If those requirements include choosing two targets, then both targets would have to be valid. The bullet point is quite clear in including all targets, "one or more", "enough valid targets", every bit of this bullet clearly makes the point that you must have enough valid targets to satisfy the condition. It doesn't say "at least one valid target" which would be the counterpoint. As far as "individually or as a whole, they could both be affected" is inaccurate, since a dishonored character can not be effected by a dishonor effect, neither can an honored character be effected by an honor effect. To use "Shameful Display" you must target in a way that BOTH targets are currently valid, following the example set. If "Shameful Display" read "bow two characters", and one of the only two characters in the conflict were already bowed, it would not work either.

Just saying the response is inconsistent with the rules as written, and that the rules as written are quite clear.

The problem is, the targeting requirement for shameful display is that the card be able to change state. It isn't a complex check, it's a simple, can this card be honored or dishonored, and that next card be honored or dishonored.

It doesn't check if this card can be honored and that next card be dishonored. (or the reverse)

It just asks can their state be changed.

21 minutes ago, KineticOperator said:

That logic fails with the example given in the bullet, even if we accept your use of the word "could". A character "could" bow despite the fact that it cannot at the moment by that logic, and would be a valid target. But even in this example, since it cannot bow at the moment it is targeted it is not eligible as a target.

As far as ALL the targets, yes that is what they wrote. "All of its targeting requirements" as opposed to "any of its targeting requirements". If those requirements include choosing two targets, then both targets would have to be valid. The bullet point is quite clear in including all targets, "one or more", "enough valid targets", every bit of this bullet clearly makes the point that you must have enough valid targets to satisfy the condition. It doesn't say "at least one valid target" which would be the counterpoint. As far as "individually or as a whole, they could both be affected" is inaccurate, since a dishonored character can not be effected by a dishonor effect, neither can an honored character be effected by an honor effect. To use "Shameful Display" you must target in a way that BOTH targets are currently valid, following the example set. If "Shameful Display" read "bow two characters", and one of the only two characters in the conflict were already bowed, it would not work either.

Just saying the response is inconsistent with the rules as written, and that the rules as written are quite clear.

I think you are misinterpreting "All of its targeting requirements" as 'all of an effect/condition', when it's not, those are two separate things. Targeting requirements for shameful display are as follows:

1) Is the character participating

2) could the resolution of the ability affect the target

19 minutes ago, Khudzlin said:

@KineticOperator A character is a valid target for Shameful Display if it can be honored or dishonored (one being possible is enough).

Though you didn't directly address it, for whatever reason your post made me realize there is a logic train that I did not see here that may be at play. If so, I will need to walk back everything I said. :-)

You are welcome to chose two targets, as long as they both have the potential to be honored or dishonored. However, while your effect can initiate if it has the potential to change the game state, there is no actual requirement for it to do so. You would be able to target one honored and one dishonored character, because you could potentially remove the status from both of them and alter the game state. So the ability goes off. However, once it goes off you are under no obligation to do it that way, you could honor the honored character and dishonor the dishonored character if you wish.

If not, if you are obligated to change the game state, then they simply put that requirement in the wrong place/needed to put it in both "targeting/initiation" and "resolution". You need to potentially change the game state in order to target, and you must actually change the game state when you resolve. Just putting it in the "targeting/initiation" portion of the check you wouldn't be obligated to actually change anything as long as you were potentially able to change it when you initiated the effect.

JMO, and working to clarify my understanding. Not emotionally invested in any particular ruling.

I think that you all have a handle on the rules, and @KineticOperator is just misinterpreting that quote to something other than what it means. Nate doesn't mean that Shameful is fine as long as one of the targets is legal, just that only one of them needs to change state. In fact, it's currently impossible for a character to be an illegal target for shameful, there's no way to make it so a character simultaneously cannot be honored and cannot be dishonored since Steward of Law only prevents the normal -> dishonor transition.

1 minute ago, GoblinGuide said:

I think that you all have a handle on the rules, and @KineticOperator is just misinterpreting that quote to something other than what it means. Nate doesn't mean that Shameful is fine as long as one of the targets is legal, just that only one of them needs to change state. In fact, it's currently impossible for a character to be an illegal target for shameful, there's no way to make it so a character simultaneously cannot be honored and cannot be dishonored since Steward of Law only prevents the normal -> dishonor transition.

I agree, I may misunderstand which is the point of me posting. :-)

The only potential way is for "Steward of Law" to be in play, and have both characters lack status of any sort. You couldn't target two of them legally, but could target either one legally.

Target legality is checked independantly for each target, not for all targets as a group.

12 minutes ago, KineticOperator said:

Though you didn't directly address it, for whatever reason your post made me realize there is a logic train that I did not see here that may be at play. If so, I will need to walk back everything I said. :-)

You are welcome to chose two targets, as long as they both have the potential to be honored or dishonored. However, while your effect can initiate if it has the potential to change the game state, there is no actual requirement for it to do so. You would be able to target one honored and one dishonored character, because you could potentially remove the status from both of them and alter the game state. So the ability goes off. However, once it goes off you are under no obligation to do it that way, you could honor the honored character and dishonor the dishonored character if you wish.

If not, if you are obligated to change the game state, then they simply put that requirement in the wrong place/needed to put it in both "targeting/initiation" and "resolution". You need to potentially change the game state in order to target, and you must actually change the game state when you resolve. Just putting it in the "targeting/initiation" portion of the check you wouldn't be obligated to actually change anything as long as you were potentially able to change it when you initiated the effect.

JMO, and working to clarify my understanding. Not emotionally invested in any particular ruling.

IT actually does say under effects on the RR that something needs to occur.

23 minutes ago, KineticOperator said:

I agree, I may misunderstand which is the point of me posting. :-)

The only potential way is for "Steward of Law" to be in play, and have both characters lack status of any sort. You couldn't target two of them legally, but could target either one legally.

No, both characters are legal targets. (They can be honored)

While targets are being checked simultaneously, they are not being checked as a group. meaning, each card individually is being asked, can you be honored or dishonored.

27 minutes ago, KineticOperator said:

You need to potentially change the game state in order to target, and you must actually change the game state when you resolve.

This is exactly it.