One item the Legacy Council may want to address is the copying of a copy ability that has been removed from CE rules.

Cheers
UK Ronin

Meh.

There are plenty of cases where the rules and interactions of cards produce bazaar effects (see also, Shikibu no Oni Exp and lots and lots of cards... in Celestial no less).

Are you concerned about powerful interactions with Pan Ku and infinite combo stuff?

Making rules just to undermine a specific card combination or two seems to run contradictory to the intent of the format.

Paul Ashman

Well, it's not "making" a rule so much as preserving one that got dropped for space. In the rare but possible instance that a card is made in the future that copies an ability, it will likely have a proviso in it that it can't copy an ability that itself copies abilities.

So, it's really more of a "by the way, old duels kill by default"-type thing.

I said may want to. Personally I would be happy to see the infinite decks back.

Well, it's not "making" a rule so much as preserving one that got dropped for space. In the rare but possible instance that a card is made in the future that copies an ability, it will likely have a proviso in it that it can't copy an ability that itself copies abilities.

So, it's really more of a "by the way, old duels kill by default"-type thing.[/quote]

Dropped for space?

I just got an image Michael Scott demanding, "get rid of that rule about copying over there because it will cost us a whole megabyte in a pdf file!"

Dropping things for space is an anachronistic concept. The rules now exist only as an online entity. The rule was dropped (presumably) because it is just confusing having so many gosh darn rules. See also, Yu, Enlightenment trait, giving gifts for the Favor, etc.

There exists a difference between rules that enable game play and hinder it. The old duels addendum exists because otherwise a large cabal of cards instantly lose all worth.

I propose that having a rule about not being able to copy a copy is not the same mechanically or thematically and therefore it isn't necessary to preserve such a rule.

In terms of play experience, I don't, off the top of my head, recall exactly how the infinite combos work.

The only that jumps to mind was Yajireru no Oni getting limitless copies of another Yojireru's ability and then using that to get limitless copies of some other ability? In an environment as fast and lethal as Legacy, if someone builds to that point, and wins, I say more power to them.

Anyway, I also worry about precedent. If we keep the copy rule, are we then obligated to keep the Share rule, or whatever rule changes when the next core set rotates in.

Paul Ashman

Dropped for space?

I just got an image Michael Scott demanding, "get rid of that rule about copying over there because it will cost us a whole megabyte in a pdf file!"

Dropping things for space is an anachronistic concept. The rules now exist only as an online entity. The rule was dropped (presumably) because it is just confusing having so many gosh darn rules. See also, Yu, Enlightenment trait, giving gifts for the Favor, etc.

There exists a difference between rules that enable game play and hinder it. The old duels addendum exists because otherwise a large cabal of cards instantly lose all worth.

I propose that having a rule about not being able to copy a copy is not the same mechanically or thematically and therefore it isn't necessary to preserve such a rule.

A much better example would be cards returning from your discard pile/play to your hand come back now face down. There was a time in when cards returned to your hand face up, so as to retain card memory and prevent specific abusive interactions. That rule got dropped from Legacy, right?

In terms of play experience, I don't, off the top of my head, recall exactly how the infinite combos work.

The only that jumps to mind was Yajireru no Oni getting limitless copies of another Yojireru's ability and then using that to get limitless copies of some other ability? In an environment as fast and lethal as Legacy, if someone builds to that point, and wins, I say more power to them.

Anyway, I also worry about precedent. If we keep the copy rule, are we then obligated to keep the Share rule, or whatever rule changes when the next core set rotates in.

Paul Ashman[/quote]

Uh-oh, Paul is quoting himself, and incoherently at that.

To the best of my memory, the only actions that copy an action permanently are P'an Ku, Shahai, and Yojireru no Oni. When a copy efffect only lasts until the end of the turn, there is much less chance of abuse of it, and I don't think that these three personalities warrant rules being made about their power level.

The ability to make stacks of abilites may cause some rules confusion, but so does a lot of stuff in legacy. When this sort of interaction was legal back in Diamond, it neither caused (IMO) undue confusion nor caused any concern over power level. Legacy, being more confusing and more powerful, should be fine.

I was just looking at the comp rules and found mention of a copied ability itself cannot copy. (I was looking for the exact rules on celestials and found out that they are not in the comp rules.) I was wondering when this showed up personally.

here is the passage from http://rules.l5r.com/CE_Glossary_C

Copying abilities

Effects that copy an ability create a new copy of the ability in question, including any changes to the ability in effect. The new ability will be referred to as the copied ability, and the original ability will be referred to as the source.

Because the copied ability is new, it does not count as having been used even if its source ability has.

References to a source card's own title in the source ability become references, in the copied ability, to the title of the copied ability's own card.
Example: If Bayushi Ni copies the ability "Bow San: Ranged 4 Attack" from Yoritomo San, the ability on him is "Bow Ni: Ranged 4 Attack."

A copied ability cannot itself copy an ability.

I'm pretty sure it first appeared in Lotus Edition.

Blame Pan'ku.

I knew it was in lotus edition. But it was removed from the CE rulebook per this thread. It then showed up again.

Newer sets are always removing older rules to streamline the rulebook. Design only takes the current rules into account (barring transitional periods just before a new base set). Just because the newer sets aren't designed with copying of abilities in mind, it doesn't mean that a lot of cards in the Open/Legacy selection aren't.

And in Open/Legacy there's a lot more options available.

I understand this. My thought process was, per this thread for a while copying a copy ability was legal. Then I was looking through the comp rules for celestial (for the celestial mechanic none the less) and found that they are not. I just wondered when the comp rules were updated to add that fact in after this thread was created because I was working on a deck with Yojireju no oni for legacy.

Judging by the dates on this thread before you performed necromancy on it, looks like it would have been about August 2009.

So, a while back now.

It may be a little dated however Aug 2009 is post CE release. This thread was created to note the fact that the copy a copy rule was no longer in the rule book.

I recently found it in the comp rules and was wondering when that was clarified that that rule carried over from the old rules as it was never printed in a rule book other than the comp rules or an insert sheet.

I just have a curiosity for this as this rule has no effect on the current celestial format as all of the copy effects specify the not copy a copy rule. It more of a when did this get re-clarified. The rule exists and I do not argue that. I just want to know when it appeared in the rules during celestial.