Do you have to summon Ikiryo second?

[Maniacal_cackle]

When you summon Ikiryo with Kirai, it ignores her 'once per turn' restriction. However, does that mean if you summon Ikiryo first, you can't summon something else with the second action (as the second action doesn't ignore 'once per turn')?

[Paddywhack]

Once per Turn - A model can only take an Action or Ability that is once per Turn once on any given Turn.

Kirai's Soul: "... and the Action ignores its Once per Turn restriction."

I read that as when you use Blood and Wind to summon Ikiryo the italics that say Once per Turn aren't there. It shouldn't matter when you use it. Nor should it stop you from summoning something else after summoning Ikiryo as when you used it then it was not a Once per Turn Action. You haven't used your Once per Turn yet. When you summon Ikiryo you simply read the action as if that restriction wasn't there. 

That seems to be the intent of the rule to me - Kirai can always try and summon Ikiryo and it doesn't interfere with her other summon for the turn. 

Does Seamus care if he has already fired his gun or Charged or Concentrated in order to use Cause for Celebration? 

[santaclaws01]

Other way, you have to summon her first.

[Scoffer]

5 hours ago, Paddywhack said:

Once per Turn - A model can only take an Action or Ability that is once per Turn once on any given Turn.

Kirai's Soul: "... and the Action ignores its Once per Turn restriction."

I read that as when you use Blood and Wind to summon Ikiryo the italics that say Once per Turn aren't there. It shouldn't matter when you use it. Nor should it stop you from summoning something else after summoning Ikiryo as when you used it then it was not a Once per Turn Action. You haven't used your Once per Turn yet. When you summon Ikiryo you simply read the action as if that restriction wasn't there. 

That seems to be the intent of the rule to me - Kirai can always try and summon Ikiryo and it doesn't interfere with her other summon for the turn. 

Does Seamus care if he has already fired his gun or Charged or Concentrated in order to use Cause for Celebration? 

When you declare a once per turn action, you must check if this model has already taken this action this turn. It doesn't matter if it ignored once per turn restriction the first time - it is still Blood and Wind and has been taken this turn.

So my answer is yes: Kirai can't take a "normal" summon action after she used this action to summon Ikyrio.

The same works for Seamus. 

[santaclaws01]

19 minutes ago, Scoffer said:

When you declare a once per turn action, you must check if this model has already taken this action this turn. It doesn't matter if it ignored once per turn restriction the first time - it is still Blood and Wind and has been taken this turn.

So my answer is yes: Kirai can't take a "normal" summon action after she used this action to summon Ikyrio.

The same works for Seamus. 

Kirai can't summon Ikiryo if she's already summoned a model with blood and wind. Ikiryo's ability doesn't affect the action until after she gets summoned, which is hard to do when the action can't even be declared.

[Maniacal_cackle]

5 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Kirai can't summon Ikiryo if she's already summoned a model with blood and wind. Ikiryo's ability doesn't affect the action until after she gets summoned, which is hard to do when the action can't even be declared.

Ikiryo's abiity has to affect it at the start of the ability (when you're doing the italics). Otherwise you're not allowed to name Ikiryo (you can only name a Minion).

[santaclaws01]

55 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Ikiryo's abiity has to affect it at the start of the ability (when you're doing the italics). Otherwise you're not allowed to name Ikiryo (you can only name a Minion).

It's not that she has to be on the board for her ability to work, it's that the ability says she needs to have been summoned by the action for the restriction to be ignored.

[Maniacal_cackle]

1 minute ago, santaclaws01 said:

It's not that she has to be on the board for her ability to work, it's that the ability says she needs to have been summoned by the action for the restriction to be ignored.

Oh, bizarre. So technically if you black joker it you lose both of them.

[santaclaws01]

1 minute ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Oh, bizarre. So technically if you black joker it you lose both of them.

Yup. Granted Kirai should always have The Whisper, so it's sort of moot.

[Scoffer]

5 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

It's not that she has to be on the board for her ability to work, it's that the ability says she needs to have been summoned by the action for the restriction to be ignored.

English is not my native language and I may be missing some nuances, but I read "if it is summoned in this way" as "if this model is named to be summoned", not as "if this model is successfully summoned and placed on the table". Ignoring action's restrictions after the action is successful makes no sense. 

[Maniacal_cackle]

3 minutes ago, Scoffer said:

English is not my native language and I may be missing some nuances, but I read "if it is summoned in this way" as "if this model is named to be summoned", not as "if this model is successfully summoned and placed on the table". Ignoring action's restrictions after the action is successful makes no sense. 

That's probably a reasonable interpretation as well!

[santaclaws01]

2 hours ago, Scoffer said:

English is not my native language and I may be missing some nuances, but I read "if it is summoned in this way" as "if this model is named to be summoned", not as "if this model is successfully summoned and placed on the table". Ignoring action's restrictions after the action is successful makes no sense. 

For a model to be summoned, it would have to be, well, summoned by a summon effect.

[solkan]

7 hours ago, Scoffer said:

English is not my native language and I may be missing some nuances, but I read "if it is summoned in this way" as "if this model is named to be summoned", not as "if this model is successfully summoned and placed on the table". Ignoring action's restrictions after the action is successful makes no sense. 

 

7 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

That's probably a reasonable interpretation as well!

I think you're both currently conflating "What would be a reasonable FAQ for this text?" with "What does it say?"

But, to be frank, if you're going to do that, why would you stop there and not also include a resolution that it should not matter whether Ikiryo is being summoned first or second?  

[Paddywhack]

I really don't buy this line of thought as I feel it goes against the intent of the rule. Even if the wording on Ikiryo makes this the correct interpretation, the wording on Seamus is not the same and we still have the same argument. 

It's an easy enough work around most of the time, so whatever. But I would prefer to have a FAQ about ignoring restrictions and timing as I still disagree that it should matter. Though the weird wording on Ikiryo does lend weight to that, though still leaves Seamus who is worded differently. 

12 hours ago, Scoffer said:

When you declare a once per turn action, you must check if this model has already taken this action this turn. It doesn't matter if it ignored once per turn restriction the first time - it is still Blood and Wind and has been taken this turn.

I disagree. It was not a 'Once per Activation' action when you took it the first time, but I've been wrong lots of times and it's not worth arguing about.   

[Ogid]

I'm with the reading that you have to summon her second because the restriction is tied to the ability. If you summon her first, the "ignore the once per turn" part is just not doing anything, but you are using that ability.

Another example: Self-loathing and Seamus gun. Pandora get all restrictions on the ability when copying it with self-loathing; that means that she can only attack Seamus with his own gun the first time she uses Self-Loathing each activation, even if the first use was against another model copying an ability without that restriction. The second that ability gets the "Once per activation", you have to check if you used it already in that activation; not if when you used it, it had that limitation or not.

Also a very simmilar case:

[Paddywhack]

14 minutes ago, Ogid said:

Also a very simmilar case:

But even in that case, there is a call for FAQ as it also interacts with Bonus Actions and getting extra Bonus Actions. So I would say there is still some confusion about this type of rule interaction. I feel that the intent is that if you ignore something, you ignore it for all purposes and it shouldn't matter the order. It's seems that more people feel its the other way and I'm fine with that until a FAQ. If that is the decision though, then the argument about Bonus Actions does cause issue. Would you rule the same way for those cases? That a regular Bonus Action has to be taken before you can take a 'free' Bonus Action? Or if you take a 'free' Bonus Action does it negates being able to take another Bonus Action? That is in line with the above argument about Once per Turn, but seems not to be the intent at all. 

[Ogid]

41 minutes ago, Paddywhack said:

But even in that case, there is a call for FAQ as it also interacts with Bonus Actions and getting extra Bonus Actions. So I would say there is still some confusion about this type of rule interaction. I feel that the intent is that if you ignore something, you ignore it for all purposes and it shouldn't matter the order. It's seems that more people feel its the other way and I'm fine with that until a FAQ. If that is the decision though, then the argument about Bonus Actions does cause issue. Would you rule the same way for those cases? That a regular Bonus Action has to be taken before you can take a 'free' Bonus Action? Or if you take a 'free' Bonus Action does it negates being able to take another Bonus Action? That is in line with the above argument about Once per Turn, but seems not to be the intent at all.

I guess it depends on the wording. I'm having a hard time recalling those... which models gets extra bonus actions?

[Paddywhack]

1 hour ago, Ogid said:

I guess it depends on the wording. I'm having a hard time recalling those... which models gets extra bonus actions?

The rule for extra Bonus actions is a Core rule. They are referring mostly to models that get to take a bonus Action after a Trigger. The wording is a bit different I think, but the end result seems to be same. 

From a play perspective it just seems easier not to have to worry about did I do this first before I can do that, when 'that' ignores the restriction anyway. It's a minor quibble and doesn't break the game to play it that way, just seems to me to be against the intent. Love to have it added to the FAQ for future proofing as well. I'll admit Ikiryo's wording is quite a bit different than the others (Seamus, Bonus). 

[Ogid]

7 minutes ago, Paddywhack said:

The rule for extra Bonus actions is a Core rule. They are referring mostly to models that get to take a bonus Action after a Trigger. The wording is a bit different I think, but the end result seems to be same. 

I see, I don't play with models able to do that, so It's not something I've looked into that much... the wording is a bit ambiguous in this case (I think the relevant rules are in the pg 12 and pg 22); it's clear you can take one after you have taken the normal one, but the oposite isn't that clear; I'd say no, but not 100% sure tbh.

10 minutes ago, Paddywhack said:

From a play perspective it just seems easier not to have to worry about did I do this first before I can do that, when 'that' ignores the restriction anyway. It's a minor quibble and doesn't break the game to play it that way, just seems to me to be against the intent. Love to have it added to the FAQ for future proofing as well. I'll admit Ikiryo's wording is quite a bit different than the others (Seamus, Bonus). 

I agree it's not game breaking one way or the other; it's just something worth knowing how it works to not gotcha yourself XD. So yeah, one FAQ ruling it or making it crystal clear for everyone would be good.

[Nikshe]

On 9/15/2020 at 4:11 PM, santaclaws01 said:

For a model to be summoned, it would have to be, well, summoned by a summon effect.

So Kirai can't summon Ikiryo at all as she can't summon enforcers. And this makes no sense so I insist that Ikiryo's ability will work at the Declare Action stage.

 

[Maniacal_cackle]

3 minutes ago, Nikshe said:

So Kirai can't summon Ikiryo at all as she can't summon enforcers. And this makes no sense so I insist that Ikiryo's ability will work at the Declare Action stage.

 

The 'if it is summoned in this way' clause only applies to the second half of the paragraph (no attaching a vengeance upgrade  and ignore once per turn restriction).

Or so I assume is the reasoning.

[santaclaws01]

1 hour ago, Nikshe said:

So Kirai can't summon Ikiryo at all as she can't summon enforcers. And this makes no sense so I insist that Ikiryo's ability will work at the Declare Action stage.

 

This has already been addressed, but I'll spell it out. Ikiryo's ability does two things; 

The first thing it does is that it allows her to be considered a minion for Blood and Wind. This has no qualifications or restrictions to it, so it is always in effect.

The second thing it does is that, if Ikiryo was summoned by Blood and Wind, the action does not count against it's Once Per Turn restriction. Ikiryo is not summoned until the effects of Blood and Wind are being resolved. At any time before that, say declaring it or during the simple duel, she has no yet been summoned. If she is not yet summoned the action does not yet ignore the Once Per Turn for that use of it. If it doesn't ignore the Once Per Turn yet it can't be declared if it's already been declared.

[Maniacal_cackle]

As an interesting aside, 'summon' actually refers to the act of calling something (not necessarily to it arriving). So language could totally talk about something being 'summoned' before it arrives.

But within the rules, I don't see anything that refutes Santaclaws' position. Asura Roten is the only other card I can find where "summoned" may be talking about a time other than after arrival.

But those are just English semantics at that point.

[Maniacal_cackle]

On 9/15/2020 at 11:39 AM, Paddywhack said:

I read that as when you use Blood and Wind to summon Ikiryo the italics that say Once per Turn aren't there. It shouldn't matter when you use it. Nor should it stop you from summoning something else after summoning Ikiryo as when you used it then it was not a Once per Turn Action. You haven't used your Once per Turn yet. When you summon Ikiryo you simply read the action as if that restriction wasn't there. 

That seems to be the intent of the rule to me - Kirai can always try and summon Ikiryo and it doesn't interfere with her other summon for the turn. 

Does Seamus care if he has already fired his gun or Charged or Concentrated in order to use Cause for Celebration? 

I do think this is the most sensible way to play it as well. I mean, which is more likely: that the designers wanted this obscure timing restriction for it, or this was just the most convenient way to word it?

I'm not sure how else they would have worded it that wasn't excessively wordy ("When declaring the Blood and Wind action, this model may be named as if it were a minion. If this model is named in this way, it ignores the once per turn restriction and does not attach a Vengeance upgrade when summoned."

That wording is too long and would bleed over into the health of the model (it is about 20 characters longer).... And actually I think it is not quite correct still, and would need more words xD

[Ogid]

6 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

The first thing it does is that it allows her to be considered a minion for Blood and Wind. This has no qualifications or restrictions to it, so it is always in effect.

The second thing it does is that, if Ikiryo was summoned by Blood and Wind, the action does not count against it's Once Per Turn restriction. Ikiryo is not summoned until the effects of Blood and Wind are being resolved. At any time before that, say declaring it or during the simple duel, she has no yet been summoned. If she is not yet summoned the action does not yet ignore the Once Per Turn for that use of it. If it doesn't ignore the Once Per Turn yet it can't be declared if it's already been declared.

I don't agree with that timing. The ability doesn't say something like "after being summoned"; the "if it is summoned this way" is linking that second phrase with the first one, a.k.a modifying the summoning action so it may be declared even when it should be illegal (non-minion and using a "once per" twice).

Also the "Once per" rules (pg 33) says the limitations are per ability; declaring blood and wind a second time to summon a minion will make it fail as it won't ignore the once per turn that second use of the ability.

[Paddywhack]

On 9/15/2020 at 12:56 PM, Ogid said:

I see, I don't play with models able to do that, so It's not something I've looked into that much... the wording is a bit ambiguous in this case (I think the relevant rules are in the pg 12 and pg 22); it's clear you can take one after you have taken the normal one, but the opposite isn't that clear; I'd say no, but not 100% sure tbh.

And I definitely don't think that is the intent for extra Bonus actions. The timing is similar to Seamus' ability. Ikiryo does have different wording so may work differently (though why?). Sure would like a FAQ to avoid someone trying to pull a 'gotcha' at a tourney. Especially for the Bonus actions and Seamus.