This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#547905
You always "see" the requirements on your side of the mission. So, if it's a Construct Depot, there's no requirements, and they probably have "nothing". :)
User avatar
 
By stressedoutatumc (stressedoutatumc)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#547915
AllenGould wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 12:14 pm You always "see" the requirements on your side of the mission. So, if it's a Construct Depot, there's no requirements, and they probably have "nothing". :)
So, that was one of my confusions. Glossary says:
Tricyanate Poisoning [link to card]
You may not substitute or ignore requirements for Tricyanate Poisoning, even requirements that are in principle impossible at the mission you are attempting. For example, if the nearest planet mission has a requirement that something be "in orbit" or that "Away Team" have certain attributes while you are at a space mission, or you are at a planet mission and must meet a requirement like "SHIELDS >8", you will fail to overcome the dilemma.
So does that mean they fail TP since there is no way for them to meet requirements that aren't present or is TP passed because there's no text? There seems to be and should be a difference between no text/cannot attempt vs "no requirements"
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#547921
The difference is that the Glossary entry says "hey, it don't matter that this doesn't make sense, that's a You Problem", while a blank requirement is "nope, nothing to do here".

In both cases, you're asking the mission next door what it's requirements are, and then putting it in front of your attempt. But Depot replies "", which is a really easy bar to cross. The flip side is that if you get handed "SHIELDS > 8" at a planet mission, it doesn't matter that it's impossible for Ensign Bob to have SHIELDS. But Ensign Bob does have at least nothing, so Construct Depot ain't a worry.

Or to put it simply, don't use this dilemma if you're planning to use Construct Depot.
User avatar
 
By stressedoutatumc (stressedoutatumc)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#547926
AllenGould wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 12:53 pm The difference is that the Glossary entry says "hey, it don't matter that this doesn't make sense, that's a You Problem", while a blank requirement is "nope, nothing to do here".

In both cases, you're asking the mission next door what it's requirements are, and then putting it in front of your attempt. But Depot replies "", which is a really easy bar to cross. The flip side is that if you get handed "SHIELDS > 8" at a planet mission, it doesn't matter that it's impossible for Ensign Bob to have SHIELDS. But Ensign Bob does have at least nothing, so Construct Depot ain't a worry.

Or to put it simply, don't use this dilemma if you're planning to use Construct Depot.
Ah, that makes sense, thanks!
Is Sedis a captain?

He's already a [Univ] fucking skill hoss (tm)... […]

I don't! Game ain't fun, IMO! But, you're rig[…]

Alpha Argratha

If I have Alpha 5 Approach plus Argratha as […]

Nelvana Trap

Wait ... what? Since when does battle during […]