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
1E World Champion 2021
Community Contributor
1E North American Continental Runner-Up 2022
Good morning, Star Trek!

A little over a year ago, we asked you, "What rule can die in a fire?"

You answered, by a convincing margin, that the rule against looking at cards in your discard pile was stupid and should die in a fire. That particular rule was not really on our radar, but, about six months after you asked for a rule change, we changed it.

One year later, I'd like to know: what rule can die in a fire?

Now, just because this discussion ended in a rule change last year doesn't mean that it will end in a rule change this year. But it was a great discussion, and I look forward to seeing where it goes this year.
User avatar
By nobthehobbit (Daniel Pareja)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
The Guramba rule, just so you don't have to remember that the skill comes with anything else, but (shameless Dream Card plug warning) offload it to a card. (And then make more Nausicaans.)
By phaserihardlyknowher (Ben Daeuber)
 - Beta Quadrant
1E Andoria Regional Champion 2022
nobthehobbit wrote:The Guramba rule, just so you don't have to remember that the skill comes with anything else, but (shameless Dream Card plug warning) offload it to a card. (And then make more Nausicaans.)
I'd be 100% behind this. Guramba is the last of the "joke" skills that needs to be cleaned up, I think.

It's hard to separate a design decision from a card from a rule. I dislike the rules surrounding dual personnel, especially persona rules, but since there are dual personnel, there need to be rules. And it isn't "what 1e design decision can die in a fire".

Similarly, I'd like to see a reevaluation of the bonus point rule and possibly separate bonus points from objectives. It seems one of the wishlists for the game is more unique flavor and those are a built in tool. But it may be a design decision so take that for what it's worth.
User avatar
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
[DL] for sure! It has made so many designs impossible.

[1E-AU] It's built backwards! It should just go away.

Duplication - you should really only be allowed to have max 3-4 copies of a card in your deck.
User avatar
By Takket
 - Delta Quadrant
I've never seen any reason why persona replacement should be restricted to start of turn. It should be "at any time", so those willing to stock personas can be more flexible and creative in how they use them. Oh, you just beamed some Borg aboard my ship with TMP Mr. Scott to assimilate Counterpart? Well I'm swapping him out with TWT Mr. Scott, who is going to [DL] a phaser. Bring it!!!!!!
User avatar
By geraldkw
 - Beta Quadrant
1E The Neutral Zone Regional Participant 2022
All of the rules regarding dual-personnel cards should be removed and replaced with "These cards count as any personas in lore but are otherwise treated as a single personnel (add attributes together as needed".
User avatar
By Exon
 - Beta Quadrant
OTF Rule 5. Personnel Download Limit
"Players may download personnel into play only once every turn."
No, I don't actually want this rule to die. I think it has, overall, been a very healthy thing for the game. BUT I would really like an exception added to it: "(unless replacing another personnel)".

It seems to me that some fun, harmless cards like Holoprogram: Noah's Mountain Retreat and Transporter Mixup were collateral damage to a rule intended to prevent mass spamming of downloaded personnel, not 1:1 swaps.
User avatar
By ShipNerd
 - Beta Quadrant
Smiley wrote: Fri Aug 19, 2022 5:55 pm [DL] for sure! It has made so many designs impossible.
Reasons to change rules:
Rules should not be changed for the design department but for the player to have less rules to remember. Brutaly honest feedback: Please stop being a Lead designer for 1e expansions. Both Dogs of War and Live Long and prosper are very unbalanced, IMO. And if mods say i demand something, no i don´t, i simply state a preference/request, i am not in a position to demand that anyway. Just feedback.

What i like in your design and how it could work @Smiley and in general:
You, Similey are definitely a creative, having fun creating and the themes you introduced are very cool, at the same time, they would be better expansions if you let others take charge of the balance/card strength by letting them read through it and re-design it, regarding power, before it hits playtesting. When i was in playtest it was quite a demand for us to give tons of data to multiple cards that are obiously overpowered, as experienced player can tell immediately, yet that kind of feedback was ignored. That takes a LOT of unnessecary time, when i have to build and play many decks for multiply cards that are obiously Overpowered, which is why i stopped offering playtesting.
Also FYI, @Orbin, as you ask me this: why i am not availalbe for playtest anymore. I suggested "proofreading" and i did not mean just spelling/rules but doublechecking the power level of designed cards by an gameplay expert, before they hit the next deparmtent (playtesting).

Alternate Suggestionen @Smiley

Maybe you, Smiley like to design some 2e cards, the rules are already much more simple. I appreciate your wish for a simpler game and love to play casual 1e game with you, though.

Rules: to burn or change
Yeah guramba rule should burn in fire. as well as [NemL] [NemR] being put on a card. Inflitrator-Decipher rules are bad, because basicly you beam around all the time until the infiltrator is isolated. Also it's bad if opponents deck is in another quadrant playing borg, or plays an affiliation that has no infiltrators. there is much room for improvement, but it's not easy to create a better infiltration rule. Maybe you (WBC Wowbager) can handle it.

[BB] could be unloaded to a card, because people who see [BB] cards for the first time are pretty much: what? never heard of that rule, if people have a card ( [HA] ) that states the effect of encountering a [BB], no one needs to bring and search through the glossary/rulebook. Because that's good for play scenes outside of tournaments where no experience judge is present all the time.

Doublecheck internaly first before you make a complete new new rule like [BB]
Anytime the trekcc likes to indroduce new rules, ask yourselve before you release it, if it is realy nessecary, are there no other solutions? Because there are not just the player that post here, but many who simply play traditional at home, never giving feedback here and after they seen what the trekcc has done, they stay away from trekcc. (some of them, based on the talks i did in other social media.
Temporal Narcosis

I think it highlights the general design principle[…]

The Menagerie Roundtable

I know I don't have an hour long commute anymore s[…]

I just noticed that the Voyager Beginner Deck […]

In another EPIC game I manage to get a MW over T[…]