[Enabran]

The Icon on Major Rakal and Stefan DeSeve bothers me since the cards came out in 1995.

The Glossary says to the icon: Cards with this icon are not from the latter half of 24th century... at least, not the one we're familiar with. cards may be from the past, possible futures, alternate timelines, illusions, or even dreams.

Are Major Rakal and Stefan DeSeve from the past, possible futures, alternate timelines, illusions, or even dreams? Clear answer: NO!

Maybe Decipher needed Romulans with icons in 1995 and that was the reason why they got them at that time.
But we have 2019 and with all that additional personnel that appeared since 1995 this couple has lost their legimitation to keep their icon. There is wether trek sense nor game sense that allows them to keep their icon.

I ask now to sign a petition for a simple ERRATA against their icon.








Thank you

[Armus]

It's a PAQ era relic. Leave em. Make non- personae if it's that important.

[JeBuS]

It's a PAQ era relic. Leave em. Make non- personae if it's that important.

That's a terrible reason not to do something. If Rakal's lore said it was a persona of Worf, would we leave it alone? No. It's obviously wrong and goes against the precepts of the game itself.

[Mogor]

In this case it would be errata for the sake of errata. There's nothing inherently game play broken with them having the even if its trek sense broken

[Armus]

It's a PAQ era relic. Leave em. Make non- personae if it's that important.

That's a terrible reason not to do something. If Rakal's lore said it was a persona of Worf, would we leave it alone? No. It's obviously wrong and goes against the precepts of the game itself.

Have you looked at the PAQ-era cards? There's all sorts of wrong in there. The worst have been fixed or banned, but even stuff like this is just quirky.

But leaving all of the aesthetic nerd debate aside, it's a question of resources and opportunity cost. Would you rather have the errata and playtest teams spend their time on this or, say, getting cards off the ban list, or testing the next set?

I know which way I would go.

Besides, how many Romulans are there in the game? Sometimes gameplay considerations have to take precedence.

[JeBuS]

Have you looked at the PAQ-era cards? There's all sorts of wrong in there. The worst have been fixed or banned, but even stuff like this is just quirky.

But leaving all of the aesthetic nerd debate aside, it's a question of resources and opportunity cost. Would you rather have the errata and playtest teams spend their time on this or, say, getting cards off the ban list, or testing the next set?

I know which way I would go.

Besides, how many Romulans are there in the game? Sometimes gameplay considerations have to take precedence.

Yes, I'd love for an errata pass over all of PAQ (all of Decipher) to fix weirdness like this, and lore, and names, and whatnot. A lot of the glossary could probably be eliminated if that happened, because silly edge cases could be removed.

Frankly, I'd rather the teams spend a year fixing the game rather than introducing new sets which break things further (that then have to be added to the queue to fix).

And to answer your question, there are 25 of them.

[Iron Prime]

I would love to have them "fixed" but there are more pressing concerns.

But if we ever get the game state to a point were we can work on all the 'nice to haves', I'd love these to happen...

[Armus]

And to answer your question, there are 25 of them.

Yup. And there's currently only 4 that qualify in decks. In a world where property logos matter, cutting that in half doesn't strike me as a great move.

[Enabran]

And there are 16 NA cards with icon AND your beloved property logo you can add to your Deck...
Thats no reason against an Errata.

And to say it woud take a lot of time to make the graphical change is something like blahblahblah. It would take me no longer than 2 Minutes to do that...

[Boffo97]

And to answer your question, there are 25 of them.

Yup. And there's currently only 4 that qualify in decks. In a world where property logos matter, cutting that in half doesn't strike me as a great move.

To be fair, at the same time you errata Rakal and DeSeve, you can errata Jera and Tomek to remove the and add icons.

Although this would leave Chief O'Brien as the only .

[Enabran]

To be fair, at the same time you errata Rakal and DeSeve, you can errata Jera and Tomek to remove the and add icons.

yey! Sounds lika a plan
Good point 1: TNG gets universal Romulans with (both could be played for free)
Good point 2: 4 non-Trek- and Gamsense cards are removed from the existence

[Armus]

To be fair, at the same time you errata Rakal and DeSeve, you can errata Jera and Tomek to remove the and add icons.

yey! Sounds lika a plan
Good point 1: TNG gets universal Romulans with (both could be played for free)
Good point 2: 4 non-Trek- and Gamsense cards are removed from the existence

So, 2 thoughts:

1.) In principle I can agree with all of this. If anything it makes all of these cards more playable

However:

2.) In practical terms this is still more of a "nice to have" vs. A "need", and even though I like the conclusion, unless we can do housekeeping errata in a way that doesn't involve major resource drains taking away from other areas - I'm thinking specifically art.

[Clerasil ToB]

As long as QI doesn't come back with another AU requirement - errata them. If AU comes back as a dilemma requirement it should stay there....

[edgeofhearing]

Good point 1: TNG gets universal Romulans with (both could be played for free)

I mean, they already play for free with Always a Chess Game, but Attention All Hands will still exclude them.

[DarkSabre]

It's a PAQ era relic. Leave em. Make non- personae if it's that important.