Jump to content



Photo

Remote Hideout Ruling - A Major Precedent?


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 GongShowHost

GongShowHost

    Member

  • Members
  • 114 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 12:58 PM

So I think I'm not alone when I say I'm confused by what the recent ruling on the card Remote Hideout means for other cards. Based on my understanding, with this change things like Hoth Operations and the upcoming Hoth Gambit won't stack much like the Hideout because they each feature the same type of absolute value in their effects. I saw a few other cards that would be affected by this ruling, but I can't remember them off hand. What do you guys think? If the other cards aren't changed, how is Hideout any different? I was going to put this in the Rules forum but I think the implications are fairly far reaching so the more people who are aware of it, the better.

#2 Raahk

Raahk

    Member

  • Members
  • 51 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 01:31 PM

I think that Hoth Operations still works since it is reading that participating units 'gain' Edge(1). In my opinion that is still stackable since a unit could gain the same value 2 times whereas Remote Hideout tells you an exact value on how much focus to place, that is one.

When i first saw Remote Hideout i thought thats how this card worked. I was quite baffled when i found out, due to the old rulding, that you had to put 2 focus on the first unit.



#3 Toqtamish

Toqtamish

    Toqtamish

  • Members
  • 3,331 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 02:42 PM

FAQ page 4, 2.12.

Hoth still stack.

#4 PBrennan

PBrennan

    Member

  • Members
  • 259 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 05:37 PM

The difference between Remote Hideout and other cards is the word "with". None of the other effects use "with", meaning there are no ramifications for any card other than ... Remote Hideout.

 

The effect was originally written with the intent that it stack using a new short format (ie using "with"). Problem was that (unknown to the designer, in the way that assumptions are) the playtesters assumed that the "with" format defined a condition, not a stack. So when the ruling came out, there was much surprise and much debate. The winning argument on why it needed to be a condition was ... if a baseline existed where units entered play with 2 damage on them, then how does Remote Hideout stack? It can't, so it had to be a condition. Hence the updated ruling.



#5 chiller087

chiller087

    Member

  • Members
  • 121 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 06:01 PM

The winning argument on why it needed to be a condition was ... if a baseline existed where units entered play with 2 damage on them, then how does Remote Hideout stack? It can't, so it had to be a condition. Hence the updated ruling.

 

Could you expand on this a little bit?  Not sure I follow.

 

Also, should I take this to mean that the upcoming Rebel objective The Hoth Gambit will stack with each other if there are 2 of them in play?



#6 dbmeboy

dbmeboy

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,411 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 06:27 PM

I think I followed:

 

If there was a baseline that units entered play with 2 focus tokens (say as part of a challenge deck), then Remote Hideout's wording would clearly be reducing the number of focus tokens they entered with to 1, not increasing it to 3.  That's because Remote Hideout is worded such that it sets a specific number of focus tokens that that unit enters with, instead of placing a focus token on it after it enters.



#7 PBrennan

PBrennan

    Member

  • Members
  • 259 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 08:19 PM

Re Hoth Gambit, FFG have previously confirmed with me that this effect stacks, as do "contribute" effects in general (eg Jedi Training from core).



#8 dbmeboy

dbmeboy

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,411 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 08:53 PM

Which makes sense.  Contributing/gains are roughly synonymous with adding, which would stack.  The wording on Remote Hideout is more like setting a value equal to something.  In programming logic:

 

Two copies of Jedi Training or Hoth Gambit etc:

X = X + 1

X = X + 1

Final result is incrementing X by 2

 

Two copies of Remote Hidout:

X = 1

X = 1

Final result is that X = 1.



#9 Raahk

Raahk

    Member

  • Members
  • 51 posts

Posted 29 April 2014 - 04:43 AM

Which makes sense.  Contributing/gains are roughly synonymous with adding, which would stack.  The wording on Remote Hideout is more like setting a value equal to something.  In programming logic:

 

Two copies of Jedi Training or Hoth Gambit etc:

X = X + 1

X = X + 1

Final result is incrementing X by 2

 

Two copies of Remote Hidout:

X = 1

X = 1

Final result is that X = 1.

 

That sums it up pretty well i guess.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS