[The Prefect]

I have Lethal Wound in play.

I am about to stop 6 personnel commanded by a Cardassian-playing opponent with An Issue of Trust. She plays Central Command to prevent the stops.

How many of her personnel that would have been stopped are killed by Lethal Wound?

[GooeyChewie]

One, because it is a “when” effect. Whoever commands Lethal Wound chooses which personnel. If both players command a Lethal Wound, each would trigger and both players would choose a personnel to be killed, starting with the player whose turn it is (so, the Cardassian player in this case).

[SudenKapala]

Don't you mean Mortal Wound? I have that in my deck, too.

(Sorry I don't have an additional answer for you. I'm only here to flog dead horses pretend I am on my way to understanding 1e.)

[T-Ricks]

One, because it is a “when” effect. Whoever commands Lethal Wound chooses which personnel. If both players command a Lethal Wound, each would trigger and both players would choose a personnel to be killed, starting with the player whose turn it is (so, the Cardassian player in this case).

I'm still a little confused by this answer. I understand 'when' vs. 'while' but if the all personnel are being killed/stopped as one action, then why is only one of them subject to the final result? They are not being selected one at a time, but as a group triggering off the same requirement at the same time.

[Latok]

One, because it is a “when” effect. Whoever commands Lethal Wound chooses which personnel. If both players command a Lethal Wound, each would trigger and both players would choose a personnel to be killed, starting with the player whose turn it is (so, the Cardassian player in this case).

I'm still a little confused by this answer. I understand 'when' vs. 'while' but if the all personnel are being killed/stopped as one action, then why is only one of them subject to the final result? They are not being selected one at a time, but as a group triggering off the same requirement at the same time.

It's the same rule that makes Escape Pod confusing and I think you might have it reversed, if they were being selected separately one at a time a 'When' trigger could respond to every selection.

Some dilemmas cause more than one personnel to be killed, stopped, or
placed in a brig. A dilemma that does this will kill, stop, or place those
personnel in a brig as one action, unless they are listed as separate actions.
Any response actions will only trigger once when multiple personnel are
affected by a single action during a mission attempt. For example: if Tragic
Turn is on a mission and three personnel are selected to be killed by one
action, only one additional personnel will be killed.

Lethal Wound is a response action to the dilemma's stop so it can only trigger once. Just think of it as an anti-Chakotay, he can't get a whole crew through a wall and Lethal Wound can't kill everyone avoiding a wall.

[Cmdr Xym]

I have to agree with Rick on this one. The intent of the card is just not clear. If a card requires this much debate and rules lawyering, then there's something wrong with it.

My understanding is that the term "When" means "When a trigger occurs." The trigger on Lethal Wound is "When a personnel is about to be stopped by a dilemma." There's nothing specifying if they are killed one at a time or all at once. Just, when "a personnel" is stopped.

Tragic Turn is a bad example because the errata'd version makes it clear that only one extra personnel is stopped or killed.

I would argue that LW (as it's worded now) works similarly to Revised Chakotay. If three personnel present with RC are about to be killed by a dilemma, and I discard three copies of Chakotay, all three are saved. Sure, it's the same dilemma, but it's three separate kills. Each kill is what triggers RC's "When" statement. LW's "When" also triggers per stop not "per dilemma".

Now clearly, the designers meant for LW to work only once per dilemma. But the wording and the rules don't clearly support that, thus all of the questions.

How to fix it? Add this line to LW: "You may do this only once each dilemma." Problem solved.

[GooeyChewie]

I would argue that LW (as it's worded now) works similarly to Revised Chakotay. If three personnel present with RC are about to be killed by a dilemma, and I discard three copies of Chakotay, all three are saved.

That's not how Revised Chakotay works. If three personnel are about to be killed, he can only save one of them. The same goes for non-Revised Chakotay when multiple personnel are about to be stopped.

Decipher made the "when vs while" rule specifically to curb both Tragic Turn and Chakotay, who both happened to use "when" instead of "while." I wish they had just issued errata instead, because now we're stuck with a terrible rule that causes a ton of confusion and well over a decade's worth of cards which were designed with the rule in mind. It's pretty high on my list of things I'd change about the game if I had a time machine.

[Mogor]

I would argue that LW (as it's worded now) works similarly to Revised Chakotay. If three personnel present with RC are about to be killed by a dilemma, and I discard three copies of Chakotay, all three are saved.

That's not how Revised Chakotay works. If three personnel are about to be killed, he can only save one of them. The same goes for non-Revised Chakotay when multiple personnel are about to be stopped.

Decipher made the "when vs while" rule specifically to curb both Tragic Turn and Chakotay, who both happened to use "when" instead of "while." I wish they had just issued errata instead, because now we're stuck with a terrible rule that causes a ton of confusion and well over a decade's worth of cards which were designed with the rule in mind. It's pretty high on my list of things I'd change about the game if I had a time machine.

I would be a fan of going back and doing that now

[Cmdr Xym]

I'm still not buying it.

Chakotay (BBTC)'s text says "When your personnel present is about to be stopped by a dilemma...".

This is being interpreted by most as meaning the same thing as "When a dilemma is about to stop your personnel..."

In the first case, the trigger is "personnel is about to be stopped". In the second case, the trigger is "dilemma is about to stop". These are two different things. If Chakotay was worded the second way, then a single-only prevention makes sense.

However, nothing about Chakotay indicates that "When" means you can only save one person. What it does say is that "When" someone is stopped, you destroy an event to prevent that. "When" means "one time per", or in Chakotay case, "one destroyed event per stop".

If the problem is the implementation of "When", then maybe Rules should clarify/revise/simplify how "When" works. As in, it should follow the rules of English grammar. Players should be able to take it at face value instead of asking questions and looking for rulings.

Tragic Turn isn't a "When" issue anymore; Chakotay could get errata if he's still deemed too broken.