This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#557259
Hi, gang. It's my week to post a First Edition Friday Question, which means, yes, it's time to get weird and esoteric with the Rules Committee once again!

As we have previously announced, the Rules Committee is spending this summer taking a long, hard look at the game's action rules.

The ten (!) Glossary entries that describe how to perform "one operation in the game" (you can read them starting here) are notoriously confusing, obscure, and difficult to resolve. These rules were never designed. Instead, the core concepts evolved out of an ad hoc set of rulings between 1994 and 1998. Everything that came after that had to be bolted into the superstructure created by those early rulings, which is held together with duct tape and prayer. No one, Decipher or CC, has ever attempted an overhaul -- until now.

Our current plan is to rewrite all ten Glossary entries as a single, concise Rulebook section. But how drastic of a rewrite will that be? On a scale from "let's just restate the current action rules, but more clearly" to "welcome to 6th Edition; 1E has a stack now"... we don't know, because the Rules Committee is only just starting to discuss the problems we see in the action rules.

Figuring out actual solutions to those problems is still a few months down the line -- and, if our solutions have significant gameplay impacts, then our solutions will have to run through the buzzsaw of playtesting before they see the light of day. For right now, we're just trying to get a handle on the scope of the issue. And I'd like to involve the public in that discussion.

What problems do you see in the action/response rules?

What confuses you about them? What frustrates you about them? What are some situations where you've had to read actions - step 1: initiation (or whatever) and come away more confused than ever?

On the other hand, there's no need to be entirely negative. What do you think works well in the current action rules? Are you your local playgroup's expert on "cards played as a cost" and "valid response"?

Alright, that's both esoteric and vague, so it's a perfect 1EFQ from the Rules Manager, and I'll leave it there. We look forward to reading your responses!
User avatar
 
By Takket
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#557274
when i returned to play, I played a game with QTR. It was face down and my opponent did something that was Ref card vulnerable, so I flipped QTR and was informed it is not a valid response to whatever action they did, and i had to already have it face up to use it to DL a Ref card.

Like... why the HELL does this card even have a HA icon if i can't spring it on my opponent when they do something worthy of being refereed?

i guess my beef is more with HA timing rules than anything else. I also don't understand why you have to immediately activate a HA and target with it if you get it with a [DL] ? That must solve something being broken i don't know about.
User avatar
 
By nobthehobbit (Daniel Pareja)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Moderator
#557275
To be quite honest, I would like to know what would break (horribly) if the valid response rules were more or less eliminated entirely, and you could just fire off Interrupts at each other.

For instance, if you could use He Will Make an Excellent Drone in response to having Kevin Uxbridge played targeting A Willing Companion (when you have a maximum number of counterparts in play). (I was assured by Allen some years ago that this is currently not possible, since HWMaED is not a valid response to Kevin blowing up AWC, since, if I recall correctly, HWMaED doesn't do anything about Kevin.)
User avatar
 
By Enabran
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
2E Austrian National Second Runner-Up 2022
#557284
Takket wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 10:57 pm when i returned to play, I played a game with QTR. It was face down and my opponent did something that was Ref card vulnerable, so I flipped QTR and was informed it is not a valid response to whatever action they did, and i had to already have it face up to use it to DL a Ref card.

Like... why the HELL does this card even have a HA icon if i can't spring it on my opponent when they do something worthy of being refereed?

i guess my beef is more with HA timing rules than anything else. I also don't understand why you have to immediately activate a HA and target with it if you get it with a [DL] ? That must solve something being broken i don't know about.
Exactly that I wanted to write yesterday.
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#557374
Please rewrite everything so that anyone new to the game would be able to read it once and then be able to play with just referencing the same text once or twice but that's it!
Make things consistent!
Because now I have no clue how to teach people the game as the game is just to confusing and complex to be taught.
it needs clarity.
User avatar
 
By winterflames (Derek Marlar)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#557382
I think we need a stack. The more I think about, Valid responses are rules nightmares. Sort out the [1E-Int] s and [Door] s which would be a problem on the stack, change their text, and institute a stack. You may have to change action designators on cards to Order and (off the top of my head) Instant or Reaction, but it is probably time to seperate out "Actions on the Table" anyway.

What is mandatory when played? Ala AMS What is a conditional subaction of playing the card that can'tbe revisited later? Ala Sherman's peak What is an order and cannot be activated until the playing is completed? Ala ASP or Defend Homeworld's security download.

Note: yes, I know Ala isn't the word I was looking for, but autocorrect has officially defeated me and you know what I mean.
User avatar
 
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#557388
It's time to stop treating an entire mission attempt as one big action. I'm not sure how that will affect other cards but it's a journey worth taking.

Then institute a stack rule.

Then eliminate the entire valid responses entry. It's a mess full of openings for misinterpretation and disagreement.

Then bolster and flesh out the "need a valid target" part of the process.

For all of MTG's flaws, the stack and priority rules are not one of them and make a lot of sense to new and old players alike.
User avatar
 
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#557392
Takket wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 3:59 pm for someone who doesn't play any CCGs other that trek... what is a stack rule?
Players play cards alternating with the option to pass. Once both players pass, then the cards are resolved in reverse of the order played...commonly referred to last in, first out. But basically picture in your mind cards being played on top of each other in a pile then going down the pile or stack processing them.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#557396
Takket wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 3:59 pm for someone who doesn't play any CCGs other that trek... what is a stack rule?
Basically what we have now, except that the interrupt you play doesn't have to have *anything* to do with the card you're responding to.

So, opponent attacks your ship? Play Parallax Arguers in response to play Kivas to draw three cards, then play the Space-Time Portal you just drew to table, then pop it to return the ship to hand, before the attack resolves. :)
User avatar
 
By nobthehobbit (Daniel Pareja)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Moderator
#557406
Hoss-Drone wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 4:05 pm
Takket wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 3:59 pm for someone who doesn't play any CCGs other that trek... what is a stack rule?
Players play cards alternating with the option to pass. Once both players pass, then the cards are resolved in reverse of the order played...commonly referred to last in, first out. But basically picture in your mind cards being played on top of each other in a pile then going down the pile or stack processing them.
More precisely, resolve the last card to be played, then both players have a chance to do stuff, and once both players pass, resolve what is then the most recently played card, and so on.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#557411
nobthehobbit wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:04 pm
More precisely, resolve the last card to be played, then both players have a chance to do stuff, and once both players pass, resolve what is then the most recently played card, and so on.
That's the MTG version - I'm blanking on the game, but I know I have seen a version where once people stop responding the entire stack resolves before anyone takes another action.
User avatar
 
By nobthehobbit (Daniel Pareja)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Moderator
#557415
AllenGould wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:47 pm
nobthehobbit wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:04 pm
More precisely, resolve the last card to be played, then both players have a chance to do stuff, and once both players pass, resolve what is then the most recently played card, and so on.
That's the MTG version - I'm blanking on the game, but I know I have seen a version where once people stop responding the entire stack resolves before anyone takes another action.
That was (mostly) the pre-6th Edition MtG version.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#557417
nobthehobbit wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 8:25 pm
AllenGould wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:47 pm That's the MTG version - I'm blanking on the game, but I know I have seen a version where once people stop responding the entire stack resolves before anyone takes another action.
That was (mostly) the pre-6th Edition MtG version.
Pre-6th was a whole other weird mish-mash. There is a game that lets you respond, but once things resolve the entire stack resolves.
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

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

Opponents turn

Remodulation

It started in mid-2013. At that time it became sta[…]