Hi there,

I attended an EC yesterday and had a generally great experience. Having recently got back into L5R though I would consider myself a 'new player'. Even though I have a lot of experience with old5R and other systems, new5R is something i'm still building experience with.

That being said in the preamble we were advised that (paraphrasing) 'if a card is played illegally //in the wrong window, conflict, framework, whatever// then you forfeit the cost, and also the card is discarded'.

So to me, this seems like a really bizarre direction for the game to go for a couple of reasons.

The first is that it is really punishing to new players and more so creates a really negative play sensation when insisted upon.

Secondly and this ties into the first it enables a community to prey upon 'gotcha' style interactions.

Now I understand that this is a tournament and all the blah blah that goes with that.

Also though we're not talking about situations where you play a card and realize that there are no positive outcomes - like using way of the Scorpion vs. student of law for example.

Because - as I understand, if a situation occurs that would lead to either an illegal game state or is attempted in the wrong way, then the game simply corrects back to the last legal play state.

I don't understand though why it is necessary to dupe people, and punish the error further by taxing the experience differential.

There shouldn't be some sort of magical player veto/counter spell. If an action can't be taken - then it can't be taken, and the current framework which allows the action to go on the (imaginary because l5r doesn't have one) stack, then check legality and either proceed or punish; rather than check legality before allowing the action to be processed in my opinion is bad.

From the more experienced of you here, what is the logic for this and what positive arguments support that?

Thanks

This isn't how the game is run at most events.

3 hours ago, Desertspiral said:

If an action can't be taken - then it can't be taken, and the current framework which allows the action to go on the (imaginary because l5r doesn't have one) stack, then check legality and either proceed or punish; rather than check legality before allowing the action to be processed in my opinion is bad.

This is how we do it with my group

3 hours ago, Evilgm said:

This isn't how the game is run at most events.

@Desertspiral And it's not what the rules say, either. Here's the sequence for initiating an ability or playing a card:

Quote

1. Check play restrictions and verify the existence of eligible targets: can the card be played, or the ability initiated, at this time? If the play restrictions are not met, or there are not enough eligible targets for the ability, the process cannot proceed.
2. Determine the cost (or costs, if multiple costs are required) to play the card or initiate the ability. If it is established that the cost (taking modifiers into account) can be paid, proceed with the remaining steps of this sequence.

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 card enters play, or the effects of the ability (if not canceled in step 6) complete their initiation, and resolve.
8. At this time the card is considered "played" or the ability "triggered."

Checking legality comes at the very start and failure aborts the whole process.

So if step one or two

fails on an action card, the card returns to you hand (or point of origin)?

1 hour ago, Desertspiral said:

So if step one or two

fails on an action card, the card returns to you hand (or point of origin)?

Correct