Dear all,
Please find below the full analysis of the topics added by Frizzler about errata to include in the v1.8 of the official file. Thanks to those who have helped in this process.
I’m working now on the integration of all topics in the official file v1.8.
Warning 1: the text is very long, so be patient and courageous if you want to read it all.
Warning 2: this thread is more aimed at expert players, so it might be felt as difficult, or even a bit boring (and not boring bit ;-) ), for casual players or beginners.
Warning 3: it is important to have those points settled in order for me to be able to include them in the official errata file v1.8. So thanks at least to Wormhole and Frizzler to validate those topics (or correct if something is wrong). Comments from other expert players are of course also welcome.
Rgds and good reading
Playful_EE
Wormhole remarks
------------------------
D4a, D4b (Pattel counter)
It’s just to avoid any theorical misinterpretation. In other words, if the game was to be programmed, you would use 2 variables.
D14a (icons on special sentry breakers)
Your interpretation may be right (about the green icon understood as NON dedicated icebreaker), but icebreakers that are in fact “subcategories” of dedicated icebreakers (code gate, wall, sentry) must belong to the mother category. This is the case of the described icebreakers, which are only breaking sentry subroutines.
And when we consider the three ice types, we can see that two of them are less “intelligent” than the third one: code gates and walls are essentially not sentient (they are just algorithms simulating “locks” or “walls (!)”), but sentries are more “self-conscious” programs (some of them being even AIs), capable of detecting alien and forbidden elements, “tracing” back the coordinates of the hacker, and “attacking” his system (programs, hardware, ...) or his body (damage).
In terms of rule principle, this translates immediately into several ice specifications that are specific to ice types (unfortunately not said explicitely in the rulebook, but still valid for the cards, and logical):
- brain damage = sentries (black ice)
- trashing a program or hardware = sentries
- making a trace = sentries
- AI = sentries
- complex and multi-subroutines or effect = sentries (Fatal Attractor, Cerberus, Colonel Failure, ...)
D17 (Haunting 6 actions)
Haunting forbids to do something for a certain time (the 6 actions). So, THE VERY NATURE of what you are doing during this time is irrelevant. The only thing that counts is the time elapsed. The logical consequence is that any card that makes you GAIN time (actions) is counting toward that.
700TT remarks
-------------------
D17 (Haunting 6 actions)
You’re right. Valu-Pak “uses up” one action by itself, of course. It was implicit in my explanation, but I’ll correct to be perfectly clear.
D18 (Death from Above and face down cards)
The problem (with or without New Galveston City Grid effect) is that Death from Above makes the Runner “unable” to access cards, opposed to any “normal” run. In a normal run, accessing cards means that you actually have the possibility to “look” at them, and therefore “know” their trash costs.
How do you manage the “unknown” trash costs ? Theorically, you could ask a third party to check face down cards and tell you the costs ? “On the Fast Track” has a clarification like that, but I fear that it would become really ugly with DfA.
D19 (gaining actions)
Of course, you can use an additional action after your last action of the turn, or before your first action in the turn. I’ll add this comment.
D18 (paying costs)
Your wording looks theorically good, but is, from my point of view, too complex and may appear unclear to most players. Furthermore, it could lead to interpretation problems for “generic effect” or “not generated by a card”.
I prefer to keep the previous proposed one by Frizzler, which is maybe not 100% perfect, but gives clearly the rational behind the ruling.
Frizzler remarks
---------------------
You brought out 16 new topics, and I’ve renumbered them from D20 to D35 for the sake of continuity and easiness of reference in the future. See my answers and synthesis below.
D20 Ice strength modifiers and order in which they apply
I fully agree, and it is described in that sense in the official errata file v1.62, though not as clearly as below and not specifically about this topic (this is why I’ll keep this new clarification). The official errata file says that “If a player has multiple effects to process at any given time (e.g., start of turn, end of turn, start of run, end of run), that player chooses the order in which the effects are processed.”
Concerning your new clarification, your sentence has to be slightly reworded. Hence below:
Clarification: In the Rulebook page 32, replace the sentence:
“If multiple events take place at the same time, the player whose turn it is chooses the order of those events.”
by the sentence:
“If multiple events take place at the same time, the player owning the elements (cards, decisions, or effects) concerning those events chooses the order of those events.”
D21 Field Reporter for Ice and Data multiple effects
The text does not instruct to count the number of pieces of ice that are rezzed at the end of the turn, but to count the number of time the Corp rezzed a piece of ice. In other words, FRID triggers (ie “stocks” [1] bit) each time the Corp rezzes a piece of ice. If that ice is derezzed (with Superglue, for example), then rezzed again during the same turn, FRID triggers again and will stock one more bit. After all, the Corp has also to pay again to rez it the second time. Hence the clarification below:
Clarification: “The triggering event of Field Reporter for Ice and Data is the rezzing event, not the number of rezzed ice at the end of a turn. Thus, if during a turn, a piece of ice is derezzed and rezzed again, Field Reporter for Ice and Data will trigger for each “new” rezzing. In other words, an ice derezzed X times by Disintegrator (or Disgruntled Ice Technician, Superglue, ...) and rezzed again X times the same turn, will make Runner gain X times the [1] bit of the resource.”
D22 Data Fort Reclamation and timing of cards rez
I’m not sure I agree with that.
If you mean that “previously” represents any upgrade or node that has been installed “before” processing the effect of DFR, then it is incorrect (and even meaningless as the fort created has to be new, ie empty of any card). The effect applies only on the cards chosen via the DFR process.
If you mean that “previously” represents any upgrade or node that has been installed during the DFR process, but not rezzed when just installed, it could be correct, but...
Let’s explain what happens, and in which order.
a. You score DFR (gaining immediately 2 AP in that process)
b. You gain [10] (temporarily, so you put those bits aside your bit pool to identify them)
c. You choose up to 4 cards stored in HQ
d1. You install one of those cards in the NEW fort (creating it when you process your first card). You may use any of the [10] of step #b to pay for installing that card (if an effect would make you pay an additional cost for example).
Note that if Precision Bribery forbids you to create the fort, you cannot process AT ALL the effect of DFR.
d2. You may choose to rez that card. If you do so, you may use any of the [10] of step #b to pay. If the card costs more than [10], you can pay the rest from your bit pool.
d3. You repeat steps #d1 and #d2 up to 4 times (depending on the number of cards you have chosen with DFR).
e. You return to the bank any of the [10] not spent.
It is important to note that step #d2 occurs essentially AFTER step #d1 because the card instructs to process the installation “one at a time”. So your decision of rezzing a card has to be taken just after that installation. Once you’ve installed the next card, you cannot “come back” to any previous one, ie one that has been installed before (but still within the process of DFR).
It could be possible to take your remark into account (with the restriction that the word “previously” concerns only one of the four cards chosen), which means we would allow the Corp to decide the rezzing at the end (after all installation are made).
But then it’s an errata on DFR. We could then take the opportunity to also fine tune it. It could read then:
ERRATA: “Gain [10] and choose up to four cards stored in HQ when you score Data Fort Reclamation. Create a new data fort using the cards chosen in this way. Install those cards one at a time, rezzing immediately the ones which have to be rezzed when installed. When all those cards have been installed, you may rez any of them not already rezzed and rez them. Then, return to the bank any of the [10] not spent.”
The card without the errata (ie you cannot decide to rez at the end of the process) changes only the fact that you have to “think” at all rezzing possibilities “before” installing each card, because when the next card is installed, it’s over for the previous one. Now, in terms of gameplay, as there is only 4 cards max, the difference is minimal between the two options (decision one after the other, or all at the end).
D23 Joan of Arc when MU is full
Let’s summarize the situation described and try to process it step by step. The answer will come by itself (actually, this situation is an old case already treated).
To simplify the explanation, we suppose that all programs installed are 1 MU programs, and that the Runner has no card providing him or her more MUs.
a1. MUs available: 4
a2. programs installed: #1, #2, #3, and Joan of Arc. All MUs are therefore fully used up.
a3. the Runner wants to install a program: #5. The process of installation begins ...
b. program #5 is taken out of Runner’s hand, and begins its “trip” from the hand to the playing area.
c0. Program #5 is about to overwrite one of the other programs (other than Joan of Arc, of course). Let’s say that program #1 is the overwritten program.
c1. You place the program #5 card on the program #1 card. By the simple fact of doing that, the program #1 card LEAVES PLAY immediately (it is exactly like overwriting a node in a fort: the fort DOES NOT disappear, as the new node replaces the previous one immediately).
Rem: Your MU number has not changed during that phase: it is always 4. Which means that at NO MOMENT you have (for a micro-instant) 5 MUs, of which you would have to cancel one immediately.
c2. The additional program being NOT in play, cannot be saved by JoA (which prevents a trash from an “installed” program).
In other words, if JoA prevents #1 to be trashed, it means that #1 IS installed, which means in turn that it has not YET been overwritten.
And by the time you overwrote #1 with #5, the installed program is #5 and NO MORE #1 (which is already on its way to the trash).
This implies a more general case, even if MUs are not filled at 100%: overwriting a program makes the saving of the overwritten program impossible with Joan of Arc.
In conclusion, the combo does not work. Hence the clarification below:
Clarification: “You cannot overwrite a program P by a new program N, and save the program P at the same time with Joan of Arc, because as soon as the program P is overwritten, it is no more installed (it has already left play and started its way towards the trash).”
D24 City Surveillance and timing of decisions when Runner draws more than one card
The clarification on Hunt Cub BBS (all the choices are made before processing the exposing phase) and one of the clarifications of City Surveillance (“if the Runner plays Jack 'n' Joe, we may rez City Surveillance to force the Runner to either take three tags or pay three bits or any combination thereof. (Sparky, Netrunner-L, 5/17/96)”) suggest that when a card like Jack ’n’ Joe or Bodyweight Synthetic Blood is played, all the choices about paying or being tagged should be made before processing the draws.
On the contrary, the card text itself, by instructing that “for each card Runner draws”, he or she has to “make the choice”, suggests that you could draw each card, and decide just after that draw if you pay or receive the tag. So what happens really ??
The right answer is the first one (you decide all, and then you draw all) because the effect of cards like Jack ’n’ Joe is to be understood as ONE TRIPLE effect, opposed to THREE TIMES ONE effect. In that sense, the effect cannot be divided nor splitted into more “basic elements”. It is well described in the errata file in the paragraph “card effects”: “If an effect targets multiple cards, all decisions are made regarding those targets before the effect is resolved (e.g., if the Runner plays Hunt Club BBS, all of the cards to be exposed are chosen before they are exposed) (Netrunner FAQ v1.0, 5/23/96)”.
Hence the clarification below:
Clarification“When a card instructs the Runner to draw, as one effect, several cards, he or she has to make ALL decisions concerning the bit/tag effect before drawing the cards.”
D25 Self-Destruct and timing of trashing
A statement exists already: “The Runner has to survive the effect before he or she can trash any card in the fort or score any agenda. If a card is trashed by Self Destruct it goes to the Archives before the Runner can trash or score it. (Holger Janssen, 03/11/00)”.
So the cards remaining to be accessed are included in that.
D26 Edited Shipping Manifests
I don’t understand the issue about ESM.
Of course, ESM does NOT expose nor reveal anything. Not accessing cards does not mean in any way that you can look at them!
For the generic clarification, I don’t see really the need for such an addition, but if everybody wants me to add that clarification, I’ll add the topic below in the “card effects” paragraph of the official errata file.
Card effects:
“Installed Corp cards are turned face up only when they are scored (agendas), rezzed (ice, upgrades, nodes), revealed or exposed by a game effect, or accessed (by Runner).”
D27 Forgoing actions to remove virus counters: timing
The “at any time” refers implicitely to any time belonging to the “special card effects” timing. Any moment different from that MUST be explicitely written (like “at the start of a run”, etc.).
That point has been already answered in the “Viruses and forgoing actions” paragraph of the official errata file:
“You can remove virus counters (and be forced to forgo your next three actions) any time you can rez a card. (Sparky, Netrunner-L, 7/17/96)”
You can see also in my Run Flow Chart all moments of a run when you can use those “special card effects”.
D28 Silver Lining Recovery Protocol
Actually, if the agendas have been trashed without having been accessed (Death from Above effect, Synchronized Attack on HQ after an attack with Priority Wreck, etc.), they are NOT “stolen”, so SLRP will not trigger in that case. If the Runner makes a successful run on the Archives afterwards the same turn to access agendas there, then SLRP can give the bits.
Remember that “to steal” (Corp word, the Runner word being “liberate”) essentially means that the Runner has ACCESSED that agenda and is about to SCORE the corresponding agenda points. “Moving” an agenda from one place to another (from HQ to the Archives for example) has nothing to do with the fact of stealing it (or scoring for the Corp).
There is no need to make an errata on this card.
D29 Hidden Resource that generate bits: timing
The clarification already exists.
Chiba Bank Account, Liberated Savings Account, Swiss Bank Account have been already clarified in the official errata file. See below for Chiba Bank Account only (as other cards are similar).
The “you may” does NOT prevent from the normal timing; it is just adding an additional timing possibility.
Official errata file v1.62:
“You can use Chiba Bank Account to pay for installation costs. (Sparky, Netrunner-L, 11/11/96)
When using Chiba Bank Account to install a card or pay for an effect, follow this sequence: 1) announce the card/effect; 2) pay the price (this is when you trash Chiba Bank Account); 3) place the card in the trash/archives; 4) perform the effect. (Sparky, Netrunner-L, 11/11/96)
‘You may use this ability whenever ..’ means you can use Chiba Bank Account at the specified times in addition to the normal times that special effects can be used. (Tom Wylie via JD Wiker, Netrunner-L, 3/11/96)”
D30 Street Enforcer : timing of rez
I’ll add the clarification below in the “card effects” paragraph of the errata file, because it is a generic issue, not something specific to Street Enforcer (or any node or upgrade).
Clarification: “The ‘start of a run’ is NOT a normal time when you can use ‘special card effects’. Thus you cannot, unless specified otherwise, use a node or upgrade effect if that node or upgrade is not already rezzed at the start of a run. The only case when you can rez a node or upgrade “at the start of a run” is when the card text allows explicitely that possibility (Obfuscated Fortress). The normal timing for rezzing cards does not include start of runs. See my Run Flow Chart.”
D32 Disinfectant Inc and Socket/Pipe counters of Viral Pipeline
First, it is necessary to remind that Disinfectant “IS” a prevention card, ie a card that triggers when you are about to suffer from the effect to be prevented (“a prevention effect essentially occurs "before" the effect it is preventing. (Sparky, Netrunner-L, 6/17/96).”)
Technically speaking, Disinfectant does not prevent the “transformation” of virus counters. What it prevents is the fact of “receiving” a virus counter.
When the Socket counters are transformed into a Pipe counter (no event can be “inserted” there), the Runner follows the text and attempts to give that Pipe counter to the Corp.
Then, as a reaction (“prevention” effect), the Corp activates Disinfectant and avoids receiving that Pipe counter (the fact that this Pipe counter does not come from a successful run but from a special card effect is irrelevant: the only thing that counts is that this counter IS a virus counter).
By the way, technically speaking, the Corp could also have chosen to avoid the third Socket counter in the first place.
A remark is necessary here: giving the Pipe counter is a “special card effect”, ie usable only at certain times (typically when a rezzing is possible). That means there is a difference between giving the Socket counter (virus counter given when a run is successful) and the Pipe counter (special card effect). This is why the Runner cannot transform immediately (the run is not over) the 3 Sockets during the last run.
I’ll add the clarification below for Disinfectant and Viral Pipeline:
Clarification: “When the Runner is about to make a successful run, and is about to give the last necessary Socket counter to be able to give a Pipe counter to the Corp, the Corp cannot stop the “transformation” of the 3 Socket counters into a Pipe, but can still use Disinfectant Inc effect, as it is a prevention effect, to avoid receiving that Pipe counter, or the third Socket counter in the first place.”
D33 Back Door to Netwatch with Crash Space
Let’s review first what are the effects of the cards.
- Back Door to Netwatch essentially cancels (ie prevents, as it generates a prevention effect), not a trace, but the effect of a successful trace. It gives also 1 BP point if the trace has an effect other than or in addition to giving any tags.
- Crash Space “transforms” (=modifies) the effect of a trace (the trace gives a tag, in addition to its other effects) and makes it also automatically successful.
This is exactly the same problem as the “original and printed” strength on ice: do we speak about “original and printed” effects of traces or current (=modified) effects ?
If we consider that what counts is what the trace is “currently” doing (I think it’s logical here), we could understand, that with these two cards installed, any trace attempted by the Corp:
- is successful (Crash Space drawback)
- generates an additional effect : the tag (Crash Space drawback)
In other words, the global modified effect of the each trace would be made of 3 possible parts:
1) to give X tags, where X is the number of tags given without Crash Space.
2) to have any other effect (if any), different from giving a tag. This effect is optional (depending on the tracing card text).
3) to give 1 tag, due to Crash Space
Then, triggering Back Door to Netwatch :
- is always possible with Crash Space (successful trace)
- would prevent the global modified effect: #1 and #3, and #2 if there is a #2
- about the BP, it’s more tricky... see below.
Now there’s a problem with how to interpret effect #3.
A. Do we consider that effect #3 is “merged” with effect #1, making it a “modified” effect #1 ? In that case, the BP is given only if effect #2 exists, and then depends only on the tracing card, not Crash Space.
B. Do we consider that effect #3 is separate ? In that case, the BP is always given because of Crash Space.
This is really a problem, because with a standalone card (ie without Crash Space) the sentence “other than or in addition to” means that you just ask yourself if the card effect :
- is tags only (Manhunt),
- something different from giving tags (Homewrecker subroutine)
- tags + something different from giving tag (Underworld Mole)
In other words, the tags are ONE part of the effect. The sentence “other than or in addition to giving any tags” is clear there.
But with Crash Space, the “in addition to giving any tags” is not so clear. We don’t know if we refer to the original tags given by the tracing card or the modified number with the Crash Space effect.
The “in addition to giving any tags” is a problem. Does it means that the additional effect of that trace must be something “different” from giving tags (the “any” word), or it has just to be anything “additional” (ie also giving a tag) ?
Hence the two possible clarifications below on Back Door to Netwatch.
The first one, that always gives the BP, supposes that you never merge the effect #3 with the original tags, and that the “in addition to” effect can be tags.
The second one supposes that you merge the effect #3 with the effect #1, triggering then the BP only if the tracing card has an effect #2 (ie something different from giving tags).
Clarification 1: “If Crash Space is installed, it modifies the effect of all traces. These traces are considered then to have “an effect other than or in addition to giving any tags”. It means that the use of Back Door to Netwatch will cancel all effects of the trace, including the additional tag due to Crash Space, and will give 1 Bad Publicity point to the Corp.”
Clarification 2: “If Crash Space is installed, it modifies the effect of all traces by adding 1 to the number of tags those trace would give. It means that the use of Back Door to Netwatch will cancel all effects of the trace, including the additional tag due to Crash Space, but will give 1 Bad Publicity point to the Corp only if the tracing card has an additional effect different from giving those tags.”
D34 Corruption played several times
The fact that the “lose” word indicates normally a penalty is tricky, because it could be interpreted stupidly like for NETO (to bring cards without paying), and in this case, Corruption would be stupidly broken and at the same time dangerous to play.
There is a fundamental problem here, because the “broken” interpretation can be considered valid. I explain:
- what counts is the number X of agenda points you HAVE scored this turn. What you have done with those AP before playing Corruption is irrelevant (Databroker, ...). So that number X is fixed and defined once and for all.
- As the card instructs to “lose” X, you fulfill that PENALTY up to what you can do. In other words, if you play a first Corruption, you lose X AP, the Corp scores X AP, you gain X times [10] bits, and the Corp gives you a tag. No problem here.
- now if you play a second Corruption, you lose 0 (no more AP left, so you fulfill the penalty), the Corp scores X AP (it’s not a penalty for the Corp, it is just referring to X, not 0), you gain X times [10] (it is not a penalty, so it refers to X, not 0 !!), and the Corp gives you a tag.
With this card, you have a monstruous bit generator on one side, and a mega risk of making the Corp win on the other side.
We can still interpret the wording to link what the Runner can lose to what the Corp can gain. In other words, if all agenda points have already been lost, you cannot lose more (with the second Corruption), but in that case the Corp would gain 0 agenda points.
In fact it simulates that you are making a deal with the Corp: you give it valuable information you’ve hacked (“transfer” of AP from Runner to Corp), and in exchange, the Corp makes you a millionaire (bits). But as this is risky (the Corp traitor has emptied the bank account of the big boss), it cannot go unnoticed (tag).
If we stick to this explanation, it means that the “lose” should be in fact a cost. Errating the card in that way would clarify, but would change slightly the effect.
Now coming to the effects described by Frizzler:
Case 1
- Runner liberates Political Overthrow (takes 1 action; scores 6 AP),
- triggers an installed Databroker (takes 1 action; pays 1 AP out of the 6 gained; gains [10]),
- and plays Corruption (takes 1 action; should lose 6 AP because this is the number of AP scored this turn, but as 5 only are left, Runner loses 5 AP; the Corp gains 6 AP (yes 6, because the “that many AP” corresponds to the “all AP scored this turn”); Runner gains [50] because it is the “lost in this way” which means something like “succesfully” or “really” lost; and the Corp gives Runner a tag).
At then end, Runner has 0 AP, [60] = [10]+[50] bits, and a tag, and the Corp has 6 AP.
Case 2
- Runner liberates Hostile Takeover (takes 1 action; gains 1 AP),
- triggers Databroker (takes 1 action; pays the 1 AP gained from the agenda; gains [10]),
- CANNOT trigger the second Databroker (no AP left, so Runner cannot PAY the COST), unless he or she has scored AP during previous turns,
- and plays Corruption (takes 1 action; should lose the AP, but already gone with Databroker, so loses nothing; the Corp scores 1 AP; Runner gain [0], as no AP has been lost in this way; the Corp gives Runner a tag).
At the end, Runner has 0 AP, [0] bits, and a tag, and the Corp has 1 AP.
Case 3
- Runner scores at the start of his or her turn Fetal AI automatically because of Bizarre Encryption Scheme effect (no action; gains 3 AP if he or she can pay the [2] bits to score it, no damage),
- and plays Corruption (takes 1 action; loses 3 AP; the Corp scores 3 AP; Runner gains [30] bits; the Corp gives Runner a tag).
At the end, Runner has 0 AP, [30] bits, and a tag, and the Corp has 3 AP.
Finally two solutions there to interpret Corruption:
- Keeping the text, but clarifying the “link” between what Runner can lose and the other effects. Then in case of several Corruption played, Runner would lose no AP, gain no bits, and the Corp would still gain X AP and give Runner a tag.
- make an errata to show that it is a cost;
“Play only if you scored any agendas this turn. Pay X agenda points, where X is the number of agenda points you scored this turn. If you do so, the Corp scores that many agenda points, you gain [10] per agenda point lost in this way, and the Corp gives you a tag.”
D34 Dupré
You would pay the full [14] of course.
Counters are not lost “before” the encounter but at the moment you declare that you use one of Dupré’s subroutines.”
See clarification below.
Clarification: “If you start a run on another fort than the one which has permitted to put strength counters on Dupré, Dupré loses its strength counters as soon as you use it during this run, which means that the moment you declare that you are about to pay for using one of Dupré’s subroutines, all strength counters on Dupré’s are removed from play, which forces you to pay from 0 strength again.
On the opposite, as long as you don’t use Dupré during this ‘new’ run, it keeps all its strength counters.”
D35 Lifesaver Nanosurgeons: conditions of trigger
This is right. LN triggers on the fact that a damage has been done successfully (as explained by Skipper Pickle in the errata file: if you have been “damaged”, it means that the damage has been done successfully), not the fact that cards have been discarded. As a matter of fact, it may happen that damage does not always lead to card discard, as you said (Emergency Self-Construct).
Also, the three “previous” actions can overlap on several turns.
I’ll add the clarification below.
Clarification: “Lifesaver Nanosurgeons triggers on damage done successfully, not on the effect of discarding. Therefore, it may be used even if the damage suffered has not caused a discard (for example in case of a hand of 0 cards and an installed Emergeny Self Construct). It may be used even if the damage was done in the previous turn, as long as it has been done during the last three actions of the Runner: in other words, those three consecutive actions can spread on two turns.” |
