[stressedoutatumc]

Ok, so I believe that it was ruled a while back that "Espionage" cards allowed you to attempt, but not complete a mission it was on. So, for example, Espionage - Dominion on Romulan allows my personnel to run through the dilemma, but I couldn't complete the mission without present. Do I have that correct or am I remembering that incorrectly?

In the case that the above is accurate, does that also extend to something like Collect Metaphasic Particles? It seems like it does but I am just wanting to be sure.

Thanks!

[Enabran]

How ridiculous would it be if it just let you attempt and not complete it?

I am 100% sure you can complete the mission, if a card allows you to attempt it.

[BCSWowbagger]

You're thinking of a specific ruling about the interaction between the anti-mission-stealing rule and espionage cards, and (mistakenly) generalizing that ruling to other cases. That ruling is correct, but only in the specific situation where an Espionage or similar card is interacting with an opponent's protected mission.

Permission to attempt a mission granted by a card implies permission to complete that mission as well, unless another card or rule specifically prevents you from "completing" that mission.*

Thus the Espionage cards ruling:

These events allow you to attempt a mission with personnel of a different affiliation from that printed on the Mission card. (Normally, a personnel of matching affiliation must be in the crew or Away Team.) They do not override a card or rule that prevents you from solving an opponent's mission (see Fair Play), or a more specific card that prevents you from attempting an opponent's mission.

And this Fair Play ruling:

Espionage cards or other cards that allow you to attempt missions of other affiliations will still allow you to attempt an opponent's unique mission, but, if this event is in play, you will not be able to solve the mission or score its points.

So here is how it works:

1. Espionage cards and similar cards like Collect Metaphasic Particles allow you to attempt a mission.

2. Permission to attempt = permission to complete.

3. ...unless a more specific card or rule specifically prevents "completion". The relevant card is Fair Play, and the relevant rule is OTF Rule #4, which protects some missions from mission theft.

4. So you can use Espionage/CMP/etc. to attempt and complete a mission, unless it is a mission protected by OTF Rule #4 or Fair Play. If it is a protected mission, then you will be able to attempt it but not complete it.

5. So basically whether or not you can use CMP to solve Insurrection boils down to whether you seeded Insurrection or not. If you did, CMP allows you to attempt & complete it. If you did not seed it, then CMP allows you to attempt it, but OTF's anti-mission-theft rule prevents you from completing it.

*The Glossary used to have that exact paragraph in it, but it was removed during housekeeping. I'm now second-guessing whether that was a good removal.

Here's the original article on this topic: https://www.trekcc.org/articles/index.p ... ticle=2796

[The Ninja Scot]

So, just to be clear -

My opponent has a [rom] [fed] icon mission that's protected by OTF rules.
I'm playing Romulans.

1) I can attempt their mission with an Espionage? - From how I'm reading this, that is correct, I'm just not allowed to solve it. Isn't that against the OTF rules however? "Players may not attempt, scout, target for scouting, or complete missions they did not seed unless that mission shows at least 40 points or more than one copy is in play."

2) I can attempt their mission without an Espionage? - Based on reading this thread, does this mean that I can attempt without the need for an Espionage if I'm able to based on the mission icons?

Michael,
confused

[DISCO Rox No More]

How ridiculous would it be if it just let you attempt and not complete it?

I am 100% sure you can complete the mission, if a card allows you to attempt it.

Prepare to have your mind blown.

The way people here play Star Trek CCG has completely changed from its original intention, because people would rather play Star Trek Solitaire than worry about defending their corner of the spaceline. So they resorted to nitpicky, legal jiu jitsu to make it so a card lets you attempt, but not complete, missions.

It is indeed well and truly ridiculous.

[BCSWowbagger]

How ridiculous would it be if it just let you attempt and not complete it?

I am 100% sure you can complete the mission, if a card allows you to attempt it.

Prepare to have your mind blown.

The way people here play Star Trek CCG has completely changed from its original intention, because people would rather play Star Trek Solitaire than worry about defending their corner of the spaceline. So they resorted to nitpicky, legal jiu jitsu to make it so a card lets you attempt, but not complete, missions.

It is indeed well and truly ridiculous.

Point of order: this interaction between Fair Play and Espionage cards was originally ruled by Decipher, not the CC.

So I dunno whose "original intent" you have in mind, exactly.

[DISCO Rox No More]

So I dunno whose "original intent" you have in mind, exactly.

The people who designed the "Espionage" cards?

You do realize that the Decipher didn't use the same designers from beginning to end, right?

[stressedoutatumc]

You're thinking of a specific ruling about the interaction between the anti-mission-stealing rule and espionage cards, and (mistakenly) generalizing that ruling to other cases. That ruling is correct, but only in the specific situation where an Espionage or similar card is interacting with an opponent's protected mission.

Permission to attempt a mission granted by a card implies permission to complete that mission as well, unless another card or rule specifically prevents you from "completing" that mission.*

Thus the Espionage cards ruling:

These events allow you to attempt a mission with personnel of a different affiliation from that printed on the Mission card. (Normally, a personnel of matching affiliation must be in the crew or Away Team.) They do not override a card or rule that prevents you from solving an opponent's mission (see Fair Play), or a more specific card that prevents you from attempting an opponent's mission.

And this Fair Play ruling:

Espionage cards or other cards that allow you to attempt missions of other affiliations will still allow you to attempt an opponent's unique mission, but, if this event is in play, you will not be able to solve the mission or score its points.

So here is how it works:

1. Espionage cards and similar cards like Collect Metaphasic Particles allow you to attempt a mission.

2. Permission to attempt = permission to complete.

3. ...unless a more specific card or rule specifically prevents "completion". The relevant card is Fair Play, and the relevant rule is OTF Rule #4, which protects some missions from mission theft.

4. So you can use Espionage/CMP/etc. to attempt and complete a mission, unless it is a mission protected by OTF Rule #4 or Fair Play. If it is a protected mission, then you will be able to attempt it but not complete it.

5. So basically whether or not you can use CMP to solve Insurrection boils down to whether you seeded Insurrection or not. If you did, CMP allows you to attempt & complete it. If you did not seed it, then CMP allows you to attempt it, but OTF's anti-mission-theft rule prevents you from completing it.

*The Glossary used to have that exact paragraph in it, but it was removed during housekeeping. I'm now second-guessing whether that was a good removal.

Here's the original article on this topic: https://www.trekcc.org/articles/index.p ... ticle=2796

Awesome, appreciate it. So just so I have it clear, the Collect Metaphasic Particles also allows me to "override" the affiliations as well? So, IOW, I don't need Fed anymore? That seems to follow, but I'd like to confirm. Thanks in advance.

[BCSWowbagger]

So, just to be clear -

My opponent has a [rom] [fed] icon mission that's protected by OTF rules.
I'm playing Romulans.

1) I can attempt their mission with an Espionage? - From how I'm reading this, that is correct, I'm just not allowed to solve it. Isn't that against the OTF rules however? "Players may not attempt, scout, target for scouting, or complete missions they did not seed unless that mission shows at least 40 points or more than one copy is in play."

2) I can attempt their mission without an Espionage? - Based on reading this thread, does this mean that I can attempt without the need for an Espionage if I'm able to based on the mission icons?

Michael,
confused

The thing to remember here is the Golden Rule: a card's text overrides a more general rule. That includes OTF rules. (See also Homestead!) So, to answer your questions (assuming OTF):

(1) You can attempt opponent's protected missions with an appropriate Espionage. This is because the Espionage overrides the "you may not attempt" part of the OTF rule. However, the Espionage does not override the "you may not solve" part of the OTF rule, so you can attempt but not solve it.

(2) You may not attempt opponent's protected missions without an appropriate Espionage, because the OTF rule prevents it and no specific card or rule is overriding it.

(If playing Open, just replace "OTF rule" with "Fair Play" to get similar answers. Of course, if Fair Play is not in play, all's fair! )

I'm the first to admit that this is a tricky set of interactions, which is why I pounced to answer OP's question so fast. I'm not sure if there's any plausible long-term way of simplifying it (no matter how you rule it, core attempt rules + Fair Play / OTF rules + Espionage cards is going to be confusing), so for now I just accept that I'll be re-explaining this every twelve months or so forever. Let me know if there's anything else I can expand on, though!

Awesome, appreciate it. So just so I have it clear, the Collect Metaphasic Particles also allows me to "override" the affiliations as well? So, IOW, I don't need Fed anymore? That seems to follow, but I'd like to confirm. Thanks in advance.

Yes. I think the TMP-Remastered version of this card will use slightly clearer wording for it, but the current wording works.

[DISCO Rox No More]

If Collect Metaphasic Particles allows non-Fed to attempt it, then it should be errata'ed for clarification.

I think the phrase "You may attempt it using these requirements:" can be read either way: Either it lets you attempt it using different requirements, or it lets you attempt it and also changes the requirements for such an attempt. So either it lets you modify the mission requirements of the attempt, or it both modifies who you can attempt with (anyone) and also modifies the mission requirements of the attempt.

Certainly there's room on the card to change it to "Your personnel may attempt this mission. When doing so, they use these requirements:"

[Armus]

If Collect Metaphasic Particles allows non-Fed to attempt it, then it should be errata'ed for clarification.

I think the phrase "You may attempt it using these requirements:" can be read either way: Either it lets you attempt it using different requirements, or it lets you attempt it and also changes the requirements for such an attempt. So either it lets you modify the mission requirements of the attempt, or it both modifies who you can attempt with (anyone) and also modifies the mission requirements of the attempt.

Certainly there's room on the card to change it to "Your personnel may attempt this mission. When doing so, they use these requirements:"

Did you miss the part where James literally just said the remastered wording was clearer?

[BCSWowbagger]

So I dunno whose "original intent" you have in mind, exactly.

The people who designed the "Espionage" cards?

You do realize that the Decipher didn't use the same designers from beginning to end, right?

Oh, okay. So when you criticized "the way people here" play, you didn't actually mean "the way people here" play, like the Continuing Committee and its community are some kind of weird outliers.

You meant, "the direction Warren Holland and his team decided to take the game after the PAQ era," and the way every player has played the game since then (except PAQ-era traditionalists).

That's fine. If you want to criticize landmark game decisions from early 1999, that's your prerogative. I even think there's merit to the idea that the death of mission stealing perverted the game's design in important ways.

I bristled only because you were implying (or so it seemed to me) that this decision that was made when I was 9 years old was somehow my fault or the fault of my colleagues on the Rules team. I apologize if I inferred too much from that.

[DISCO Rox No More]

I'm not sure if there's any plausible long-term way of simplifying it

Change the OTF rule. Currently it reads:

Players may not attempt, scout, target for scouting, or complete missions they did not seed unless that mission shows at least 40 points or more than one copy is in play.

You treat that as four separate rules, but because it's one line, it's just as plausibly read as one rule.

So when "Espionage" breaks the rule (it allows you to attempt a mission), those who read the OTF rule as one rule believe the rule is broken, and since "a card's specific text overrides an otherwise applicable rule" (according to the rulebook), the whole set of rules in that one line goes out the window.

Change OTF rules to read:

Players may not attempt missions they did not seed unless that mission shows at least 40 points or more than one copy is in play.

Players may not scout missions they did not seed unless that mission shows at least 40 points or more than one copy is in play.

Players may not target for scouting missions they did not seed unless that mission shows at least 40 points or more than one copy is in play.

Players may not missions they did not seed unless that mission shows at least 40 points or more than one copy is in play.

I still think there would be some confusion, because it's bonkers that cards would allow you to attempt but not complete missions, but at least that's a marginal improvement.

[Armus]

So I dunno whose "original intent" you have in mind, exactly.

The people who designed the "Espionage" cards?

You do realize that the Decipher didn't use the same designers from beginning to end, right?

Sure do. And if you want to play Tom-and-Rollie Trek, you can... just limit yourself to PAQ Era cards and rules.

However if you like the richer, more expansive game that T&R Trek grew into, you have to take all of it, including the parts that don't line up with "Original Intent."

Hope you don't like , , , , , , , , , , , or cards, because none of those are part of the original intent of the original designers either...

[BCSWowbagger]

You treat that as four separate rules, but because it's one line, it's just as plausibly read as one rule.

^ That's not a terrible idea. It is a LOT of words for, as you say, marginal improvements on clarity, but worth at least mulling the cost/benefits. Thanks for the suggestion.