[Faithful Reader]

As you may have heard, the other week, I was playing Khan and ran into a bit of a problem. To Rule in Hell got taken out.

How can something that can’t be prevented or destroyed be out of the picture? It was top decked and then the top card of my deck was removed from the game. Yes, I called over the TD, really didn’t have too many options, and it was ruled to be something that could be done. Not being able to report anyone (or at least anyone not named Arik Soong) proved to be something I really couldn’t overcome. This is somewhat unique to Khan since both Relativity and Voyager allow reporting directly to the ships and their respective missions.

Another player heard of my trials and mentioned that this would be a great candidate for errata. With all due respect, it doesn’t have to go that far. It was a pretty horrible experience, but there are ways around it.

More Event prevention. I had Moment of Triumph, three copies as a matter of fact. I just didn’t have them in my hand. There are other prevention cards I can stock if I’m especially concerned about this happening.

Stock more copies. Since To Rule in Hell is integral to the deck, putting another copy in there for insurance isn’t a bad idea. The deck is event heavy enough so that I can go a turn without reporting someone, but I’ll need to replenish my stock eventually and having another copy of a card allowing me to do so would go a long way.

A real headquarters. Worst case, I could have stocked an actual headquarters. Yes, it would have defeated the purpose of playing Khan, but if this becomes something huge, a headquarters can’t be top decked and removed from the game just like any other mission.

It was a huge setback, but there were ways around it. They all required a bit of preparation, but are certainly viable ways around this extremely rare occurrence. That being said, if there’s another No headquarters Faction created, it will probably have “This card may not leave play” or something like that on it.

[Marquetry]

By "top decked," guessing you mean "put back on top of my deck by Kalita".. Just to clarify for others

[prylardurden]

It was a huge setback, but there were ways around it. They all required a bit of preparation, but are certainly viable ways around this extremely rare occurrence. That being said, if there’s another No headquarters Faction created, it will probably have “This card may not leave play” or something like that on it.

1. That phrase wouldn't habe changed your situation.
2. There are potential drawbacks to playing certain decks.

I have seen this a lot on the boards over the years. They play a deck that has certain drawbacks. Then, something bad happens in a game. Then they want cards changed instead of making changes to their deck or the way they play.

I have also seen it go the other way. Something happened to the deck they play (oh no I can't just download everything I want or it's now harder to do this turn 1- go look at the Crippling Strike thread). Then they complain about those cards getting changed for "power level" (the buzzword that a lot of Aussies use).

The tone of these boards anymore is not positive. No one wants to adjust anything in a customizable card game. They just want to play in their bubble.

[Latok]

Then they complain about those cards getting changed for "power level" (the buzzword that a lot of Aussies use).

The buzzword? What other term is there, Navaar is 'cultural enforcement' errata? The Viceroy is 'I don't like this card' errata? They're power level errata because the cards weren't broken so it's not errata to fix a broken card or combo.

[Broshak]

I have seen this a lot on the boards over the years. They play a deck that has certain drawbacks. Then, something bad happens in a game. Then they want cards changed instead of making changes to their deck or the way they play.

Having to change your deck because it's weak against another deck = Good.

I have also seen it go the other way. Something happened to the deck they play (oh no I can't just download everything I want or it's now harder to do this turn 1- go look at the Crippling Strike thread). Then they complain about those cards getting changed for "power level" (the buzzword that a lot of Aussies use).

Having to change your deck because someone decided to break your cards because they didn't want to change their deck = Bad.

[prylardurden]

I have seen this a lot on the boards over the years. They play a deck that has certain drawbacks. Then, something bad happens in a game. Then they want cards changed instead of making changes to their deck or the way they play.

Having to change your deck because it's weak against another deck = Good.

I have also seen it go the other way. Something happened to the deck they play (oh no I can't just download everything I want or it's now harder to do this turn 1- go look at the Crippling Strike thread). Then they complain about those cards getting changed for "power level" (the buzzword that a lot of Aussies use).

Having to change your deck because someone decided to break your cards because they didn't want to change their deck = Bad.

I get it. You don't think there should have been some of the Errata. I'm guessing you won't change your mind. No real point in continuing.

[Marquetry]

FWIW, I agree with Greg and Ben on several of the errata... I've just given up on bringing it up...

And although they annoy me, it's not as bad as the You Are a Monument rule in 1E.

To get back onto Khan.. I wish something could help it, having an affiliation rely on one event to be playable is rough - like why 5-space Voyager wasn't really a thing when you had to use The Long Journey Home, it was too easy to get locked out. At least TRIH has to be shuffled in/put on top of deck, but it's still one more kick in the pants that the deck doesn't need.

[Armus]

FWIW, I agree with Greg and Ben on several of the errata... I've just given up on bringing it up...

And although they annoy me, it's not as bad as the You Are a Monument rule in 1E.

To get back onto Khan.. I wish something could help it, having an affiliation rely on one event to be playable is rough - like why 5-space Voyager wasn't really a thing when you had to use The Long Journey Home, it was too easy to get locked out. At least TRIH has to be shuffled in/put on top of deck, but it's still one more kick in the pants that the deck doesn't need.

Given how many dilemmas turn into blanks against no-HQ decks, I have very limited sympathy for this. Khan doesn't have to face an entire dilemma type to win with 3 missions. That's a huge advantage. If every now and then it catches a bad matchup that's life.

It's not like Sonchi is running rampant.

EDIT: Nevermind, that's not even relevant. I think Kalita is one of the very few ways to get TRIH off the table once it's down.

Khan player can always run discard pile retrieval. Sounds like a great use case for the rarely packed A Second Chance at Life.

[prylardurden]

Counterpoint: I don't necessarily think that Khan and Relativity should have been made. But it's now a thing and I've moved on with life.

[monty42]

Simple solution: Don't play fucking Khan!

[Armus]

Simple solution: Don't play fucking Khan!

The one time I played Khan, Benhosp triple stacked Chula: The Game on Ceti Alpha V with a Limited Welcome to boot.

I didn't even feel bad because I got what I deserved for playing Khan.

That was over 3 years ago and I haven't revisited it since.

[Latok]

FWIW, I agree with Greg and Ben on several of the errata... I've just given up on bringing it up...

And although they annoy me, it's not as bad as the You Are a Monument rule in 1E.

To get back onto Khan.. I wish something could help it, having an affiliation rely on one event to be playable is rough - like why 5-space Voyager wasn't really a thing when you had to use The Long Journey Home, it was too easy to get locked out. At least TRIH has to be shuffled in/put on top of deck, but it's still one more kick in the pants that the deck doesn't need.

Given how many dilemmas turn into blanks against no-HQ decks, I have very limited sympathy for this. Khan doesn't have to face an entire dilemma type to win with 3 missions. That's a huge advantage. If every now and then it catches a bad matchup that's life.

Except it's not an advantage at all, pretty much any affiliation can solve the same 3 missions and win. TRiH has a stupid clause of needing 4 planets and 120 points to win, Khan is just using Genesis to have a space mission done which anyone CAN do but Khan basically HAS to do. Which is why you can play with a HQ in a 'Khan' deck and it'd generally be better, prior to the newest Khan any way.

[eberlems]

A Joaquin being placed from the top of deck into the Brig can also ruin the game.

[Jono]

A Joaquin being placed from the top of deck into the Brig can also ruin the game.

At least there are ways to deal with that... but the same could be said about any deck depending on one personnel.

[T-Ricks]

If a card you own can't be destroyed, wouldn't it just go back on top of the deck? You own TRiH, so why wouldn't Ceti Alpha V, Forge Settlement's text keep it from being destroyed? Is removing a card from the top of the deck not "being destroyed?" If that's the case, semantics are really getting in the way of the spirit of the game.