Ok, if there are no objections, this will be the behavior of the ImitatorRule in ChessV
No objections from me
as I said, this whole issue is a moot point. You could probably play hundreds of games before you encounter a situation where a Joker check would or would not make castling illegal or would checkmate or stalemate depending on this.
In general I don't think much of rules or rule complications that have next to zero effect on actual game play. I would always go for simplicity when it does not matter.
It's effectively moot in the Apothecary games, sure. Nevertheless it's not so difficult to contrive games where the issue would carry greater importance: consider a game featuring both a joker and an orphan. Such a game would have an equivalent problem with determining under which conditions the joker threatens — and thus relays moves to — the orphan, which one would imagine would have a substantially greater effect on gameplay (especially if it's a gimmick game with several of a few different imitators).
The latter case is (much like the orphan itself, and perhaps even the joker) ofc of even greater interest to problemists than variantists, and they don't really tend to have much of a presence here
No objections from me
It's effectively moot in the Apothecary games, sure. Nevertheless it's not so difficult to contrive games where the issue would carry greater importance: consider a game featuring both a joker and an orphan. Such a game would have an equivalent problem with determining under which conditions the joker threatens — and thus relays moves to — the orphan, which one would imagine would have a substantially greater effect on gameplay (especially if it's a gimmick game with several of a few different imitators).
The latter case is (much like the orphan itself, and perhaps even the joker) ofc of even greater interest to problemists than variantists, and they don't really tend to have much of a presence here