Discuss all of your questions, concerns, comments and ideas about Second Edition.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#559397
Here's a rules question straight out of 2007 Continentals:

If a Cadet (say, Tim Watters for example), is selected by Unbelievable Emergency, is he stopped or killed?

Assume that the UE player named a skill that Watters can have (say, Officer).

He gets "selected to be stopped" - at that point does he still gain skills from his ability or does the stop "turn off" the ability and he has blank text for purposes of determining the stop vs. kill?

Does the "instead" come into play at all?

Thanks! :cheersL:
User avatar
 
By Danny (Daniel Giddings)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
2E British National Runner-Up 2021
#559402
My take: he's just stopped.

He's selected to be stopped, and it turns off his text (losing his gained skills as "You cannot use the game text, attributes, icons, or any other characteristic of any of your personnel or ships that are stopped").

The dilemmas then looks to see if he has the skill (for the kill). He doesn't, so remains stopped.

The instead doesn't come into it, as per the "instead" rule:
“Instead” dilemma effects do not prevent the effect they replace; replaced dilemma effects still occurred in the past. Only the word “prevent” will prevent a dilemma effect from occurring in the first place. For example, “Stop a personnel. If that personnel has Leadership, kill him or her instead.” The personnel being killed “instead” does not prevent that personnel from having been previously stopped.
So the stop isn't prevented and his game text remains turned off.

The one sticky issue that comes from this take is that no one should really ever be killed by Unbelievable Emergency. As it stops the personnel first, "you cannot use their game text" (which includes skills) to check that final sentence of the dilemma...
User avatar
Second Edition Design Manager
By The Guardian (Richard New)
 - Second Edition Design Manager
 -  
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#559442
Danny wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 2:18 am The one sticky issue that comes from this take is that no one should really ever be killed by Unbelievable Emergency. As it stops the personnel first, "you cannot use their game text" (which includes skills) to check that final sentence of the dilemma...
I think you're right with the rest, but perhaps there's a distinction between "have" and "use." Similar effects include Casualties, Charged-Particle Precipitation, Security Weapons.
User avatar
 
By GooeyChewie (Nathan Miracle)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Architect
#559443
Danny wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 2:18 am The one sticky issue that comes from this take is that no one should really ever be killed by Unbelievable Emergency. As it stops the personnel first, "you cannot use their game text" (which includes skills) to check that final sentence of the dilemma...
There's a few cards in the game which shouldn't technically work but do. Kira Nerys (Resourceful Prisoner), for example, has been ruled to work when not in play on the basis that her text wouldn't do anything otherwise. Technically she should have a qualifier similar to the one on Tuvok (Coldly Logical Soldier).

Sometimes it really is best just to go with the obvious intent of the card and not think about the rules too hard.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#559448
GooeyChewie wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 1:03 pm
Danny wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 2:18 am The one sticky issue that comes from this take is that no one should really ever be killed by Unbelievable Emergency. As it stops the personnel first, "you cannot use their game text" (which includes skills) to check that final sentence of the dilemma...
There's a few cards in the game which shouldn't technically work but do. Kira Nerys (Resourceful Prisoner), for example, has been ruled to work when not in play on the basis that her text wouldn't do anything otherwise. Technically she should have a qualifier similar to the one on Tuvok (Coldly Logical Soldier).

Sometimes it really is best just to go with the obvious intent of the card and not think about the rules too hard.
That's a fair point for a personnel with (using my above example) printed [SD] Officer getting selected by UE, but it doesn't really answer the question as it pertains to Cadets.

Is Danny's take the correct one?
User avatar
 
By GooeyChewie (Nathan Miracle)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Architect
#559453
Armus wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 1:47 pm That's a fair point for a personnel with (using my above example) printed [SD] Officer getting selected by UE, but it doesn't really answer the question as it pertains to Cadets.

Is Danny's take the correct one?
I would agree with Danny. The personnel can use Officer because the dilemma only works if they can use that skill. But they can't use other abilities, including ones which result in them gaining Officer.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#559672
The Guardian wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 4:45 pm Don't you only "use" a skill against a dilemma when it's in bold?
Correct, and I think your "Have" vs. "Use" dichotomy is correct which is why people with the printed named skill get killed - they have the skill.

However, I don't think there's any card in the game that references "having" an ability, just "using" one, and since Tim Watters would have to USE his ability to HAVE Officer, and since he can't USE his ability due to being stopped, it logically follows to me that he doesn't HAVE Officer when UE goes looking for it, thus he isn't killed.

I think that's where this lands unless I missed something or my reasoning is somehow mistaken. If that's the case please correct me, otherwise I'll consider this answered.

Thanks All! :cheersL:
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

Happy birthday to @Takket ! :D :thumbsup: […]

Opponents turn

Remodulation