Aramasu's Vigilance

Legend of the Five Rings card from The Dead of Winter

Card Type

Stronghold

Province Strength

7

Gold Production

4

Starting Family Honor

2

Clan

Mantis

Keywords

Port

Card Text

Tireless Reaction: When paying a Gold cost of a non-Equip, non-Recruit action, produce 4 Gold.

Legality

Destroyer War (Celestial)

Deck

Pre-Game

Printings

Rules Q&A

• Q: Will an opponent's Nio Sensei affect my Aramasu's Vigilance reaction to produce only 3 gold? Or just the "normal" 4G production?
  What if I'm playing The Sacred Temple of the Phoenix instead? How much gold does it produce for a holding vs. for a spell/shugenja?
  A: Gold Production is a stat on a stronghold. Nio Sensei will only affect that, not abilities that produce gold as well. Jon Palmer, "Aramasu's Vigilance and Nio Sensei", 2 Apr 2013
• Q: The Question. If multiple battles take place at the same province at different times during a given turn is it considered to be a new Battlefield?
  A: Each different Attack Phase creates its own battlefields at its beginning and removes them at its end. Though they may be at the same provinces, each battlefield is a new, unique entity when created. Brook Cunningham, "Wyrmbone Katana and Aramasu's Vigilance", 24 Oct 2012
• Q: Fires of War Battle/Open: You may use each ability on your Stronghold a second time this turn.
  Stronghold(s) in question Library of Rebirth Reaction: Even if this card is bowed, when paying for a Spell during the Combat Segment: Produce 4 Gold.
  Aramasu's Vigilance Reaction: Even if this card is bowed, when paying a Gold cost of an action: Produce 4 Gold.
  Can a player that has already played fires of war use the reactions from these strongholds twice on the same action? For example, can he attach Channeling the Fallen, use library of rebirth's reaction, (other players reaction) use library of rebirth's reaction to virtually attach the spell for free?
  A: Edit: Due to the change in rules going into Emperor Edition, yes, this is now legal. You may use the same gold-producing reaction multiple times in response to the same trigger if you may use it more than once per turn. Jon Palmer, "The fires of war + Gold producing reaction", 23 Jan 2012
• Q: Aramasu's Vigilance: I feel like this means AV CAN pay for I Carry Two Blades(.)
  A: It cannot.
  The action has no cost. Anything you're paying for is the cost of the Weapon. Zen Faulkes, "Aramasu's Vigilance Clarification", 26 Mar 2011
• Q: but CANNOT pay for Obfuscation
  A: It cannot. Zen Faulkes, "Aramasu's Vigilance Clarification", 26 Mar 2011
• Q: How about Will?
  A: It cannot.
  Aramasu's Vigilance cannot pay for any card you are bringing into play as the effect of an action. Zen Faulkes, "Aramasu's Vigilance Clarification", 26 Mar 2011
• Q: Does "The Fires of War" get around the "Can only use the same printed reaction once per trigger" rule?
  A: No.
  http://rules.l5r.com/CE_Costs_and_restr ... ermissions: "A permission does not break rules that it doesn't specifically refer to." Zen Faulkes, "The Fires of War + Aramasu's Vigilance", 20 Mar 2011
• Q: Just out of curiosity. I'm wondering why the oracle wording on Aramasu's Vigilance is nerfed to not allow recruit actions (understandably bc that wasn't the original design) but on luxurious silk you let it ride. Silk is the most played holding in OBH bc of this. I love the holding but maybe should get the same treatment considering this also isn't intended to be used for recruit and all that.
  A: Yeah, I've been reluctant to make a similar fix since LS in its broken form is so ubiquitous. Maybe one day when the Oracle is fully converted to 20F oriented wordings, rather than the partially 20F partially Emperor state it's in now. Brook Cunningham, "Sun and Moon #rules-questions", 3 Feb 2025
• Q: Hiya! Is Aramasu's Vigilance oracle wording for its tireless ability only limited to the player ability for equip and recruit? Or does this also cover actions that will result to equipping or recruiting?
  A: When AV was legal, actions that Equipped or Recruited didn't have their own Gold Cost; the paying for the attachment or Personality was a rulebook process, not a cost of the action itself, therefore it wouldn't have paid for them contemporarily and therefore does not. I should probably have added this clause to Luxurious Silk as well, but I was focused at the time on converting Holdings to only paying for just paying for a single cost because of Gold pooling, and now everyone is used to abusing the Holding at this point that it might be a bit late. Although, now that I'm looking at that, I should also probably add a similar non-pooling clause to AV. Eh, nobody's perfect. 😦 Brook Cunningham, "Oracle of the Void #rules", 12 Dec 2023