Crisium Grid has a constant ability that, while active, changes the way the game state is recorded whenever a run is declared successful or unsuccessful. Even if the Crisium Grid is trashed during that same run, the result of that run is permanently modified and cannot be seen as successful nor unsuccessful for the purpose of any card ability.

If the Runner chooses a server for Security Testing that has a Crisium Grid installed rezzed in it, and then s/he runs on that server and trashes the Crisium Grid, the Runner can run on that server a second time and cash out on Security Testing because it will be the first successful run on that server that the Security Testing can see.


I just saw a troubling ruling contradiction that I thought I would bring to your attention.

In response to a question from Anton regarding Crisium Grid and Security Testing, you said that after running and trashing the Crisium Grid, a follow up run on the same server would not pay out for Security Testing. This implies that Crisium Grid is a sort of "lens" through which card abilities see successful runs as not successful, which is in line with my understanding of the rules. Crisium Grid has a constant ability that does not seem to prevent, replace, or otherwise modify any game state; it just has an effect that stops cards from knowing about successful runs as long as it is active.

However, from Eric's question regarding Crisium Grid and Tennin Institute, you said that running and trashing Crisium Grid as the only run on a turn would still allow Tennin Institute to place an advancement token on a card. This seems in direct contradiction with the other ruling and how the card is worded, implying that Crisium Grid's effect somehow alters the outcome of the run to "successful, but not for card abilities" for the remainder of the game.

So, long story short: how is Crisium Grid supposed to work? Does it:

1. affect run outcomes, modifying their state permanently; and if so, what part of the wording makes it this way considering it neither has a trigger nor has replacement text? Is the key word "considered" (this is the first card to ever use this word, so my understanding could be warped by not recognizing this as a game term)?


2. affect the capability of cards to see successful runs, as implied by its wording and the fact that it is a constant ability?

Answer[1] and Further Clarification[2]Edit

Tybb-sly After looking at both scenarios, I agree that the rulings are inconsistent. The Crisium Grid is a constant ability that, as long as it is active, modifies the game state whenever a run is made against that server. Once the game state is recorded, it cannot be retroactively changed and any card abilities in the future that try and see if the run is successful or unsuccessful will fail.

In the case of Security Testing, the Runner will gain the credits during the second run on that server if the Grid is trashed during the first run. I will make sure this is addressed in the next FAQ.

Further Clarification
Each card affects the game state, all abilities affect the game state, but it does not change the actual “recorded history” of what happened. When the Runner makes a run on a server with Crisium Grid, the run is still successful but it is seen as neither successful or unsuccessful for the purposes of card abilities. So Security Testing should see the “fake” record, just like Desperado or Emergency Shutdown, and gain credits the second time you run on the server. I will make sure this is addressed in the next FAQ.

For the record Crisium Grid itself creates this modified record in the game log only if it is active whenever the successful or unsuccessful run occurs. So even after it is trashed the history has been cemented, and it also cannot retroactively be applied.


This ruling is a partial reversal of the Crisium Grid Interactions Ruling. In that ruling, Lukas said that the second run on the Security Testing server would not pay out; here he is officially reversing that statement.


  1. Posted to BoardGameGeek by Jacob Morris on December 22, 2014
  2. Posted to BoardGameGeek by Bradley Galbraith on December 22, 2014
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.