This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.

How should future cards from Yesterday's Enterprise be named?

Stick with Decipher precedent, so we'll have Jean-Luc Picard - Alternate.
10
32%
Keep Tasha Yar - Alternate, but give new cards more traditional names, i.e. Battleship Enterprise.
1
3%
Errata Tasha Yar - Alternate to match the new naming style, whatever it ends up being.
18
58%
Other (explain in a reply to this thread.)
2
6%
User avatar
 
By stressedoutatumc (stressedoutatumc)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#561283
1) What’s the “colon rule”?

2) I think using the word “alternate” in the title is clumsy in the same way “revised” was used. Instead, I think you should use the already established precedent of using a version of the name (like the Mirror Universe personnel) or set a new precedent of putting a unique symbol next to their name or use the text of the alternate timeline. The alternate belongs to a specific event, so why not use it in the name?

So that universe’s Picard could just be called “Captain Picard” or “Cpt. Picard”

Or

Neandra Picard

Or

Wartime Picard

Or

[insert temporal rift symbol] Picard

Same for the revised voyager crew.

Instead of Revised Janeway could be called “Kyrian Janeway”

…….

Or Insaneway
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Retired Moderator
#561285
stressedoutatumc wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 6:54 pm 1) What’s the “colon rule”?
From the Rulebook (All Praise Be To Its Name):
The Rulebook (All Praise Be To Its Name) wrote:THE COLON RULE

Normally, when a card specifies another card by title, only a card with that exact title may be used. For example, only a Scan can be used to initiate battle at Nebula, not a Full-Planet Scan or a Tactical Scan.

The exception to this is the "colon rule": when a card references a particlar card title, cards that have that exact title followed by a colon, dash, or the numeral "II" are equivalent to that card title.

For example, Calamarain is immune to both Kevin Uxbridge and Kevin Uxbridge: Convergence. Launch Portal may download either Engage Shuttle Operations or Engage Shuttle Operations: Dominion. Subspace Interference nullifies Incoming Message: Attack Authorization, Incoming Message - Federation, and any other card whose title begins with "Incoming Message" followed by a colon or a dash.

On the other hand, Weyoun's Warship can download only Engage Shuttle Operations: Dominion, not Engage Shuttle Operations or Engage Shuttle Operations: Starfleet, because the card making the reference (the Warship) specifies that specific card, not the card group.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#561293
stressedoutatumc wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 6:54 pm Same for the revised voyager crew.

Instead of Revised Janeway could be called “Kyrian Janeway”
Blame 2E for "Revised". :D
 
By Borg King
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#561339
Armus wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 4:09 pm We already have a use case for this: Revised [Holo] [1E-DQ] [Fed]

They're good. Probably tier one.

I'm not so sure they're so good that [22] , [OS] , [Bor] ,or several other things can't beat them.

There's a lot of strong options right now. Tier one is a reasonably diverse place these days.

And I'm guessing there's a way to cap their utility even if they're allowed to coexist with main timeline bridge crew.

You only get so many card plays... don't allow both crews to play for free in the same deck and I'm guessing you can get there.
This!

:borg:
User avatar
 
By nobthehobbit (Daniel Pareja)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Moderator
#561429
If it weren't for the existence of cards Captain Picard (and a few others, like Commander Data or that reference on the U.S.S. Sutherland), that's how I'd handle it: rank and last name.
User avatar
 
By nobthehobbit (Daniel Pareja)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Moderator
#561666
aabecame wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 4:38 pm What is the difference between:
Yesterdays Enterprise & Living Witness?
Yesterday's Enterprise is an alternate timeline; Living Witness is a holographic simulation.
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#561671
I think the "-Alternate" system works just fine. If you need to shorten names to make it fit, then do it. Picard - Alternate, Riker - Alternate, Wesley - Alternate, etc. Then you could make a card that works with personnel and ships with "-Alternate" in title. Give them a bonus for fighting Klingons and doing [Fed] missions that also have [Kli] on them.

I was actually toying around with some cards that would also give Enterprise-C personnel and the Enterprise-C it's own special icon. One was for the Klingons, the other for everyone else. Both played on Narendra III.

The Klingon Objective allowed you to seed the USS Enterprise-C with crew under the mission and changed the mission requirements to [Kli] [1E-AU] personnel x5. Upon completing the mission your opponent controls the USS Enterprise-C, which you may now attack and earn points by destroying it.

For non-Klingons the other objective doubled the mission requirements and you seed the USS Enterprise-C with crew under Narendra III. Upon completing the mission you may claim the USS Enterprise-C and the card transfers to the ship. Personnel with USS Enterprise-C in title and lore gain the Enterprise-C icon. Ent-C icon personnel may play onto your Ent-C icon ship and all Ent-C icon cards are now compatible with your ships and personnel, and you may download a card I didn't get to (Make Sure History Never Forgets) that lets you place the Ent-C with crew out of play to score points, but there has to be a countdown and opponent can attack the Ent-C to try and stop you.

Just some ideas I was working on. I know it's more complication than we need in first edition, but it was one of the best TNG episodes and for me really still ranks as one of the best Star Trek episodes from all the series. Why not let us waste time and turns playing it all out? :wink:
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#561688
nobthehobbit wrote: Fri Sep 10, 2021 12:54 am Yesterday's Enterprise is an alternate timeline;
I'll argue this.

The Kelvin universe is an alternate timeline. What effects one doesn't effect the other.

The mirror universe is an alternate timeline, same thing.

Same with all the timelines that Worf visited in Parallels.

YE is our same timeline, but altered. It's the same people. Guinan isn't an alternate version of her that could coexist with "our" Guinen. It's the same person but with different memories because things happened different in her past.

Same with the rest of the crew.

Yesterday's Enterprise isn't a "what if this was different", it's a closed loop where it always happened that way. (We aren't told of anything that happened different to the Ent-C back in their time, so the episode implies that the Ent-C was always thrown forward in time, then taken back. Sela always existed.).



(The crew should all be personas of their main version, but with AU icons. This also has the mechanical benefit of not allowing the decks to have 2 bridge crew.)
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
1E Deep Space 9 Regional Champion 2023
#561691
@boromirofborg I think I agree with what you've said. What's your outlook on Yar and Alt-Yar coexisting, though? Technically, they both existed in the same universe. (Possibly even overlapped. I don't remember if that was specified on-screen.)
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#561699
I'd be fine with them being either/or.

In favor of them being personas: my reasoning for the rest of the crew. The games are already a alternate retelling where she didn't have to die to armus, but can help Piard fight the Son'a at the Armagosa Observatory, for example.

In favor of not: "Our" Tasha (Tasha1) was dead during the events, TashaA was "wrong" enough that that's what set off Guinan's senses, and if you really want to hand wave it, it's Tasha from the moments after she goes back in time (I know it isn't), so that's a far enough difference it justifies not being a persona anymore.


I think the one I would really feel strongest about would be Guinan, since she above all else is clearly meant to be the same persona in the story.
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

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

Opponents turn

Remodulation