This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
 
By jrch5618
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#447853
I was looking at Crewman D'Vela, Crewman Gham, and Crewman Terev. And wondering why they were not made [SF] [NA]. I guess Chief Surgeon Phlox too.

I mean, they didn't really act like they belonged at the end, and Commander T'Pol and Crewman Soval are dual-affiliation [SF] [Vul]. Wondering if there's anyone who might know if it was even considered for those three 'alien' Terran Empire personnel.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#447859
As a general rule, dissidents retain their affiliation.

This seems right and good to me. Affiliations are very strong pieces of character. It's not just whether you're currently taking orders from the affiliation's military (although that's part of it); affiliation is, for many characters, the culture they were raised in, everything they know, to a large extent who they are. Even rebels like Soval didn't really know how to live outside the Imperial system; they just wanted to reform the system to be kinder to people like themselves. Likewise the Romulan Underground: they're very Romulan, but just want to replace the current Romulan system with another (more open but still distinctively) Romulan system.

Indeed, dual-affiliation personnel are, I think, a trifle overused in general. But that's another post.
User avatar
Director of First Edition
By MidnightLich (Charlie Plaine)
 - Director of First Edition
 -  
Prophet
#447892
There is also a soft restriction, internally, against dual affiliation personnel where [NA] is one of the affiliations. There are exceptions, but a personnel is far more likely to be dual affiliation if neither is [NA].
User avatar
Director of Communications
By OKCoyote (Daniel Matteson)
 - Director of Communications
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#447969
MidnightLich wrote:There is also a soft restriction, internally, against dual affiliation personnel where [NA] is one of the affiliations. There are exceptions, but a personnel is far more likely to be dual affiliation if neither is [NA].
And before you say "but the Voyager/Equinox guys...!" I think we're learning from the mistakes of previous releases.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#447976
OKCoyote wrote:
MidnightLich wrote:There is also a soft restriction, internally, against dual affiliation personnel where [NA] is one of the affiliations. There are exceptions, but a personnel is far more likely to be dual affiliation if neither is [NA].
And before you say "but the Voyager/Equinox guys...!" I think we're learning from the mistakes of previous releases.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
 
By Se7enofMine (ChadC)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
#447985
OKCoyote wrote:
MidnightLich wrote:There is also a soft restriction, internally, against dual affiliation personnel where [NA] is one of the affiliations. There are exceptions, but a personnel is far more likely to be dual affiliation if neither is [NA].
And before you say "but the Voyager/Equinox guys...!" I think we're learning from the mistakes of previous releases.
Yeah I think the Voy personnel are an example of what not to do.

Jared Hoffman FW Mathew McCalpin 100-12

Card of the Day: Dumb Waiter

Does Dumb Waiter still work if you don't comma[…]

I just booked my flight for Thursday afternoon arr[…]

solved, thanks :thumbsup: