The powers of any board are activated at particular points in a players Yang phase, and are not directly connected to the ghosts on any particular board. Even if the green player is not Neutral, the green power is applied to the green players Yang phase activity, not to his board or the Yin phase activity of the ghosts on it.
If green begins the game as a neutral board, then it's power may be used by a player spending a power token to do so during his Yang phase. Neutral boards have no Yang phase, and board powers are not active during the Yin phase and so they have no effect on a ghosts left stone effects.

I'd really like to hear from the designer about this. It's clear that neutral powers which you pay a power token to use only apply in the Yang Phase, but I've never seen anything definitive that says Green's power doesn't work on its own board during the Yin Phase.

You're right. I've never seen it clarrified officially. But, the last time I asked about it here I seem to remember someone pointing me to a paragraph in the rules that did make it clear. Regardless, I play it this way because it seems logical.

From the English rules, under "Yin phase for a neutral board" (p. 9):

Step 1. Ghosts’ Actions
Presence of ghost(s) with the Haunter ability
For each of these ghosts on the board, adjust the position of the Haunting figurine according to the normal rules.
Presence of ghost(s) with the Tormentor ability
For each Tormentor, a player must roll the Curse die and apply its effect for the neutral board (the green Taoist’s power is ineffective for this die roll). The loss of Tao tokens has no effect on a neutral board.

But this still is not completely clear. It sounds to me like the clarification in the rules is referring to the case when the green Taoist player is the one actually rolling the die. Obviously, since it's the neutral board's Yin phase, the player's power would not be in effect.

But the question asked here is whether or not the board's power would prevent to rolling of the curse die. If the power doesn't apply to the neutral board itself, then there is a lot of strategy (of moving tormentors to the green board) that is not present in the solo (or at least green-absent) game. And, since you can't use a power token during your Yin phase, the no-curse-die part of the green "Strength of a Mountain" power is rendered way less effective.

Hm, I thought that was obvious, too, so I assumed the rules wouldn't bother to clarify that. And so I've been playing that a neutral Green's board power does not function (curses all around! whoo-hoo!).

But you're quite right, it is still unclear until we get an official answer.

Still effective for putting two curse ghosts in a corner and zapping them in one exorcism. Or is that not allowed per the "forbidden to use the same power several times in the turn" rule?

These rules....

I've thought about the power token rules quite a bit, and now think that the prohibition against using a power multiple times was simply intended to clarify that you can't use multiple power tokens to gain use of a purchased power beyond what you would have available if the power was your own.

So, for example, if you've got 3 power tokens, the rule stops you from buying blue 3 times and taking 6 actions, or taking 3 tao tokens with yellow. You can't use a power token to purchase your own power again, and you can't use one to buy a neutral power more than once per turn.

If you are green, multiple use of your power is inherent. You may get multiple dice roll opportunities in your turn, and your power gives you either a single re-roll or an extra die for each roll. That is true if your own power is green, and should be equally true if you use a power token to acquire green.

The limit on using power tokens for green several times just insures that nobody thinks they could buy green, kill a ghost with a curse 'reward', re-roll and get a 2nd bad result, then try to buy green again for an additional re-roll. For any roll, there is only one re-roll.

Thinking of it this way simplifies the whole power token business. When you use a power token, you get an additional power, and the powers you have work identically regardless of whether they are your own or ones you acquired.

The lingering gray area is use of green in the yin phase. My take is that a curse on a green board can be ignored or re-rolled, regardless of whether that green board is your own or neutral. If the board isn't green, it will always be rolled.

This is exactly what my assumption is, but I wonder if we could get some "official" word.

George, I think that's a great interpretation, and is the most streamlined, so there's no fussing with counting instances of use or having to parse your turn too finely.

But I don't know, using the neutral green to soak up curse dice will feel like cheating!

But it's no different than what you could do if there was a green player, so why would it feel like cheating?

I'd be suprised if I'm wrong about this, but more than that I'd be dissapointed because I suspect that the more powerful interpretation of the green power would probably make GS a worse game.

What I will do is give it a few goes with the green power working in the Yin phase and see how it affects things.

I was just kidding around. It would be easier, though, so that makes me suspicious. Also, the game with neutrals has an explicitly different Yin phase, so it didn't strike me as odd that this part would be different, too.

I'd be OK playing either way, with green working or not working in the Yin phase, but I'd strongly prefer having it work the same way regardless of whether it's a player board or a neutral board. Too many people are bagging the game because of loose rules, and I think consistency is crucial to keeping them simple and easily teachable.

Be serious. It is in the middle of the description of the Yin phase for neutral boards, and now you want to ruleslawyer your way out of that obvious situation?

There are 3 situations, two of which are obvious:
- during the yin phase of a neutral green board, the board's tormentor ability is ineffective---you must roll the die for that board;
- during your own yang phase (as neutral boards do not have a yang phase) you may borrow the green power by spending one power token, and then ignore or recast the tormentor die a single time. Even with ghosts on green's board.
- the question which really could stand clarification is what happens when a left stone-tormentor die is placed on a neutral green board. Since the special power is ignored during the board's yin phase, I see little reason why it should be different when a ghost makes its appearance there.

In other words, the power of the green board is lessened considerably. But you have to kick less ass too.

I'm sure we're all serious, cymric, and would like to understand the designer's intent. Ruleslawyer is an unpleasant term, and I don't think it helps move the discussion forward. You may have no doubt what was intended, but surely you can accept that some of us see ambiguity?

The rule in question says "the green Taoist’s power is ineffective for this die roll", which isn't quite the same as "the green board's power is ineffective for this die roll".

I'm terribly sorry, but I stick with what I said because it simply reflects the truth. I have more than a passing acquaintance with rules translations and the like---having written quite a few myself, some of which made it to print---and in this case, apart from the issue I brought up, there is no ambiguity. The choice of words is stylistic; 'green taoist' and 'green board' in this case are synomyous.

I will ask the author of this game shortly (just to get this non-sensical issue out of the way) as I'm compiling a list of things which really do need clarification, but as for 'moving forward', it is with increasing distress and anxiety that I have noticed that people are far from moving forward with this game. Instead, discussions are devolving. The first review where a gamer mentions two issues which really have been settled by now, does not inspire confidence at all. If anything, it promotes more discussions of this type. 'Moving forward' means that we take measures to end this unregulated mess, and that is exactly what I'm intending to do.

Why the tone of animosity? You appear to be attributing nefarious motives to me asking these questions, but I assure you that I just want to know the "right" way to play the game.

But to me, the specific wording and (as George put it) internal consistency of the game seem to indicate a different interpretation of this situation. I'm not trying to be rules-lawyery about this, and I have no desire to pull a fast one over on the game. Heck, it's a freaking coop game... and I mainly talking about playing it solo. Who am I trying to impress or get an advantage over? It just seems to me that the game rules do make a differentiation between neutral boards and actual players, which makes the passage you quoted less clear than you claim it is.

And you may be totally and completely right. If you are (as confirmed by the designer), then I'll thank you for your input and effort in clarifying this issue, and I'll gladly play the game that way in the future. But why the slam about questions like this "devolving" discussions about the game? If at least a few of us are confused about this and willing to post here about it, then I'm sure there are several more players out there with the same questions.

I have a small semi-related question then.

When scoring, would you lose 3 points when a neutral board has 0 Qi? (-3pts for a dead taoist)

I was wondering that yesterday.

Kyralia

Question answered in this thread.

Cymric was correct, I thank him, and I will play it this way from now on.