Jump to content



Photo

Few questions - regarding new pack and Home One/Trench Run


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 Jedi_Knight

Jedi_Knight

    Member

  • Members
  • 54 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:32 PM

Hello, another few questions for the player ruling committee (may seems obvious, I just want a confirmation for these):

1) Trench Run and Home One - according to the FAQ, Trench Run cannot be damaged any other way than blast icons and frameworks effects. So if Home One is attacking another objective, Trench run does NOT receive the extra 1 damage. Correct?

2) Fear - does this card return the "Force card" to the enemy player to use on another unit? According to the rules, this "Force card" is only ever returned to the player when a commited unit leaves play - so Fear should not make the "card" available. Correct?

3) Icetromper - can this unit target another non-vehicle unit that is NOT participating in an engagement? Or can it only target units that ARE participating in an engagement?

As always, thanks for any and all replies.



#2 dbmeboy

dbmeboy

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,388 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:43 PM

Jedi_Knight said:

 

Hello, another few questions for the player ruling committee (may seems obvious, I just want a confirmation for these):

1) Trench Run and Home One - according to the FAQ, Trench Run cannot be damaged any other way than blast icons and frameworks effects. So if Home One is attacking another objective, Trench run does NOT receive the extra 1 damage. Correct?

2) Fear - does this card return the "Force card" to the enemy player to use on another unit? According to the rules, this "Force card" is only ever returned to the player when a commited unit leaves play - so Fear should not make the "card" available. Correct?

3) Icetromper - can this unit target another non-vehicle unit that is NOT participating in an engagement? Or can it only target units that ARE participating in an engagement?

As always, thanks for any and all replies.

 

 

1) This is correct.  The reverse works though (Home One striking against the Trench Run will damage the 3 DS objectives)

2) I think it will return the Force Card, though I will go ahead and submit a rules question on this one.  I will agree that it is not entirely clear what "remove from the Force struggle" means.

3) Only units that are participating, because it specifies that it must target an attacking non-vehicle unit.  Note that Icetromper itself does not need to be participating.



#3 TGO

TGO

    Member

  • Members
  • 323 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:44 PM

Jedi_Knight said:

 

Hello, another few questions for the player ruling committee (may seems obvious, I just want a confirmation for these):

1) Trench Run and Home One - according to the FAQ, Trench Run cannot be damaged any other way than blast icons and frameworks effects. So if Home One is attacking another objective, Trench run does NOT receive the extra 1 damage. Correct?

2) Fear - does this card return the "Force card" to the enemy player to use on another unit? According to the rules, this "Force card" is only ever returned to the player when a commited unit leaves play - so Fear should not make the "card" available. Correct?

3) Icetromper - can this unit target another non-vehicle unit that is NOT participating in an engagement? Or can it only target units that ARE participating in an engagement?

As always, thanks for any and all replies.

 

 

 

1.  You answered your own question in your question.  Trench Run can only be damaged by blast icons and unopposed damage and nothing else. If an ability deals damage to an objective it will not be able to damage trench run. ever. 

2.  It removes the unit from the force struggle and cant commit to the force, so if a unit is removed from the force struggle and cant commit to the force then the card should be removed from that unit.  I think this one is worth an email. 

3.  Im gonna say no. The text says to remove a unit from an engagement and if that unit isnt in the engagement I dont think its a valid target.   



#4 dbmeboy

dbmeboy

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,388 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:49 PM

TGO said:

3.  Im gonna say no. The text says to remove a unit from an engagement and if that unit isnt in the engagement I dont think its a valid target.   

My ninja-fu is strong tonight :-)  On this question though, look a little closer at the Icetromper card and all will become clear:

Action: Sacrifice this unit to remove a target attacking non-Vehicle unit from an engagement. Then, deal 1 damage to that unit.

 

It most definitely must be in the engagement, otherwise it isn't an attacking unit.



#5 just Logan

just Logan

    Member

  • Members
  • 144 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 04:33 PM

About fear. From the rules- " To commit a unit…places one of his force cards…to indicate THIS UNIT IS COMMITED TO THE FORCE"  emphasis theirs

"Force cards are not considered cards… THEY ACT ONLY TO IDENTIFY WHICH UNITS ARE COMMITED TO THE FORCE" emphasis mine. 

If a unit is commited to the force it has a force card, if it is not it does not. So if it makes them no longer commited to the force the card goes away. "Remove enhanced unit from the force struggle, if able"  seems like a one time effect, that should be an action.  As an ongoing effect (enhancement) the character is still commited to the force but cannot participate in the force struggle. Card stays. The force struggle is a framework that happens every turn. (p15) the player is removed from that, just like exhausted characters are, but they are still commited and still get the negitives. very gross card



#6 Budgernaut

Budgernaut

    The Uncanny One

  • Members
  • 1,565 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 04:41 PM

Fear: My interpretation is that the Force card stays on the unit. They are still commited to the Force, but they can't partticipate in the Force struggle. Basically, you've removed one of your opponent's Force cards from the game because it's tied up and can't be used. Also, since the unit stays commited to the Force, it would keep taking double Focus tokens when striking. It's like a new-and-improved version of Intimidated.

I can't wait to hear what the official word is.


"There is a fine line between neutral and amoral. In fact, there may be no line there at all."

--Count Dooku


#7 just Logan

just Logan

    Member

  • Members
  • 144 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 04:57 PM

It should be one or the other-  "remove" is active and has no place on an enhancement- the card could just say "this unit cannot participate in force struggles" the cannot commit to the force would be silly at that point. or it could say "this unit is no longer commited to the force and cannot be commited to the force". two different cards, both good the 1st could trap a charcter to staying commited the 2nd couldn't. 

As written - if they are currently in a force struggle when you play the card they are removed (it's an enhancement , so that's dumb) then you can't commit to the force. if they already are it has no effect. As a combo enhance/action that could be cool but that's not this card. this card is a mess



#8 BD Flory

BD Flory

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 08:42 PM

> Rule Question:
> The card "Fear" (from Desolation of Hoth) removes a unit from the force struggle, if able. Does this mean that if he is currently committed to the force, his force card is detached from him and returned to his controller's pool of available force cards?

 

From Nate: "Yes, the Force card is removed and returned to the pool."



#9 The Gas

The Gas

    Member

  • Members
  • 205 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 09:55 PM

Glad to have that cleard up in the direction of reason, can't believe anyone was advocating for such an OP interpretation.



#10 Jedi_Knight

Jedi_Knight

    Member

  • Members
  • 54 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 12:42 AM

 

Oh well, that seriously diminishes the usefulness of Fear, but the again rules are rules. As always thanks for the answers.



#11 dbmeboy

dbmeboy

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,388 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 01:38 AM

Jedi_Knight said:

 

Oh well, that seriously diminishes the usefulness of Fear, but the again rules are rules. As always thanks for the answers.

Keep in mind that Sith has excellent units to commit themselves. If you can manage to kick the big LS unit out of the struggle, you'll have a much easier time winning the force struggle even with the LS having access to all 3 force cards.

#12 TGO

TGO

    Member

  • Members
  • 323 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 02:32 AM

Putting fear on Yoda or Obi wan is a win in my book. 



#13 Rogue 4

Rogue 4

    Member

  • Members
  • 343 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 02:52 AM

I agree that Fear now has lost a little of its luster. It is not as good as I hoped. Tying up a Force Card and making them focus twice would be awesome for the DS.


Millennium Falcon, Rebel Transport, Tantive IV, A-Wing x2, B-wing, E-Wing, X-wing x4, Y-wing, Z95 Headhunter x2, HWK-290, TIE Fighter x 5, TIE Advanced x1, TIE Bomber, x1, TIE Interceptor x1, TIE Defender, TIE Phantom,  Imperial Aces, Slave I, Lambda Shuttle

 


#14 Darik

Darik

    Member

  • Members
  • 189 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 06:07 AM

Tying up a force card would be horrendous. It'd be like something telling you to scoop out three of the focus tokens and have them not available as markers any more from the bank. The force cards "are not cards" just as the rulebook says. They are essentially markers. I shudder to think how much more confusing and convaluted the game could become if things start messing with the tokens.

 

I'm so relieved that Fear works the way it does.



#15 just Logan

just Logan

    Member

  • Members
  • 144 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 07:07 AM

Card idea: "All Too Easy- Sith- unit does not contribute it's force icons to the force struggle"  Maybe a 1 cost action or 3 cost enhancement. I don't think that would break the game. Especially when we see non unit cards that contribute force to the struggle already. there's bound to be a play enhancement that gives 3 for LS at some point. 



#16 Jedi_Knight

Jedi_Knight

    Member

  • Members
  • 54 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:19 AM

We're messing with the tokens every single game - there is nothing gamebreaking about tying up the Force "card" on character. The Fear as it is is sitiatonal at best, since most of the time the Force will be held by some 1-2 icon douches. There is nothing confusing on it either - you just wouldn't count the icons, yet the units would receive the 2 focus tokens - now THAT is an answer to LS holding the Force. Not to mention, as was said, cards like Ancient Monument and Jedi Training lessen the usefulness of Fear even more.

As it stands currently, Intimidation is much more useful in my book. But … rules are rules. Another reason to put the new Sith Hoth objective into the waiting line for General Veers and the fourth Hoth pack.



#17 Jedi_Knight

Jedi_Knight

    Member

  • Members
  • 54 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 11:37 AM

Since I am the TO for your tourney tommorrow, I am once again in need of confirmation of some of our interpretations. Again, many may seems obvious - I am really looking for confirmation mainly on these to prevent possible disputes over the rules (even though I will be absolute authority, I want my rulings to be correct and based also on the opinions of others).

Trench Run and Hit and Run - does not work together, no extra damage placed on Trench Run. Correct?

Force Choke Stih Vader - Reactions happens AFTER the triggering condition. So the player who played Choke would choose a legal target, that action will FULLY resolve (barring any interrupts) and then he may choose the target for Vader's Reaction (as based on the resolvement of the prior Force Choke). So if the Choke was canceled by any means, that cancel happens BEFORE the target for Vader's Reaction is chosen. Correct?



#18 just Logan

just Logan

    Member

  • Members
  • 144 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 06:12 PM

Looks right Trench is not an objective-

vaders reaction could only be canceled by an interrupt that  stopped the event from being played. Counter strike would not stop vader and eventcard was played- reaction conditions are met- (3.31) of the faq.

Also note that the player whose turn it is get 1st chance to react regardless of who took an action so on DS turn LS can play nothing but interrupts between Choke and Vader 



#19 HappyDD

HappyDD

    Member

  • Members
  • 322 posts

Posted 13 April 2013 - 10:18 AM

Ok, since Trench Run is in the title of this thread I'm going to resurect it to ask a procedural question. The word on the street is that Trench Run cannot be engaged more than once, in a different thread the eternal battle of "This is not an objective" versus "This can be engaged as an objective" was settled by a ruling from the developer.

… Now, let's say you're playing in a tournament. There is no FAQ ruling that Trench Run cannot be engaged more than once, correct? If you were evil you could swear up and down that Trench Run can be engaged more than once and invoke the logic that the "Yes" side invoked in this debate before the ruling was handed down from the developer. Your opponent might know the forum ruling and argue against you. It then rests on the judge to either (a) be up on all the informal forums rulings that people ask and post, or (b) reach the correct conclusion on their own, which isn't always a guarantee.

So my question is: How official do we treat any of these rulings? Obviously the developer telling you something is pretty official, but at the same time there is no real proof if you need to show someone, you know?To me it just made sense that Trench Run couldn't be engaged more than once in terms of the game, but other people had what could be considered convincing arguments as to why it could be engaged more than once. The short answer would be "You need good judges", but in a tournament with 10 or so players it isn't a guarantee you will have a world class judge on hand all the time. Thoughts?



#20 just Logan

just Logan

    Member

  • Members
  • 144 posts

Posted 13 April 2013 - 12:50 PM

- "You may engage the Death Star dial as though it were a dark side objective" In my mind- when you engage it you treat it like an objective- an objective can only be engaged once- so (IT IS NOT AN OBJECTIVE) doesn't apply here. The FAQ states that it can only be damaged by framework effects, and clearly staes that unopposed damage hits it. So if unopposed (framework) hits it, I would assume only once (framework) applies. I think the point is that cards that target objectives do not effect the dial but framework stuff does. I have not seen an official ruling on ths.

When it comes to player disagreeing with you; just  show them these rules- The Tournament Organizer (“TO”) is the final authority for

all card interpretations,- 

I would expect a TO to be up on rulings or to be willing to check- but even with proof, if it's not in the faq it's up to the TO 






© 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