User avatar
 
By tksolway (Thomas Solway)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#261479
I ask the guy sitting next to me at the tournament, only because its usually Allen Gould :-)
User avatar
Ambassador
By T-Ricks (Rick Kinney)
 - Ambassador
 -  
#378819
Let's say I want to try a 1E tournament and we'll be playing OTSD as printed. What rule book or current rulings or glossary documents do I need to familiarize myself with to not be a total burden to the TD and other players?
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#378857
You're playing as-printed. Do you also want to use the rules that were in force at the time? If so, then:

http://stccg.germes.org/files/rules/premiererules.pdf
http://stccg.germes.org/files/rules/alt ... erules.pdf
http://stccg.germes.org/files/rules/qcontinuumrules.pdf
https://ldp.home.xs4all.nl/STCCG/stfaq.html

Main thing to remember is there was no 30/30 rule, but there was a 60-card overall limit (and missions were included in that). Also, Androids couldn't be killed by cards that only affect biological organisms, like Barclay's Protomorphosis Disease.

If, instead, you are playing the cards as-printed using modern rules, then this should be fine:

http://starshipexcelsior.com/othersites ... eamlined=y
http://starshipexcelsior.com/othersites ... 160926.pdf (PDF version)

Just make sure to explain Artifacts, because Artifacts are not discussed in the Basic Rulebook.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#378876
T-Ricks wrote:Okay, thanks for the heads-up. BTW, I'm about a third of the way into your beginner's rulebook. Well done so far. :thumbsup:
Thanks! Let me know if there's anything you think could be improved!
User avatar
Ambassador
By T-Ricks (Rick Kinney)
 - Ambassador
 -  
#378947
BCSWowbagger wrote:
T-Ricks wrote:Okay, thanks for the heads-up. BTW, I'm about a third of the way into your beginner's rulebook. Well done so far. :thumbsup:
Thanks! Let me know if there's anything you think could be improved!
Well, right off the bat I'd say stopping by my place to explain it all in person would be pretty helpful. :D
User avatar
Ambassador
By T-Ricks (Rick Kinney)
 - Ambassador
 -  
#379022
I'm a little confused by this: "if one card has the exact name of the other card written in bold in its lore, they are the same persona (e.g. Falcon and Miles O'Brien)"

So Falcon, by taking on the appearance of Miles O'Brien, becomes a persona of Miles O'Brien even though it isn't him? I don't know the Trek story line, so if it actually is Miles, then I retract the question.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#379028
T-Ricks wrote:I'm a little confused by this: "if one card has the exact name of the other card written in bold in its lore, they are the same persona (e.g. Falcon and Miles O'Brien)"

So Falcon, by taking on the appearance of Miles O'Brien, becomes a persona of Miles O'Brien even though it isn't him? I don't know the Trek story line, so if it actually is Miles, then I retract the question.
The Trek storyline was that Miles' transporter pattern got trapped in the holodeck, effectively merging the holo-character of Falcon with the real character of Miles O'Brien. If Falcon died in the holodeck, then Miles died in real life. (So Secret Agent Julian Bashir had to then fight all the bad guys and "win" the holoprogram without actually killing anybody. Fun episode.)

In Decipher's opinion, this was enough to make them "count" as the same person for purposes of duplication.

Normally, a holographic re-creation of a personnel doesn't qualify as a version of the persona. For example, the Romulan hologram Chief O'Brien is not a version of Miles O'Brien. But, in the case of Falcon and the other Secret Agent Bashir holograms, there was enough of a connection between the real character and the hologram to "count."

This is one of the stranger persona versions in the game, but O'Brien is one of the few personnel in the game to have multiple versions and a mirror opposite and an infiltrator (don't worry about the second two things - they aren't in the basic rulebook and for good reason) so I used him for the example anyway.

The IMO strangest persona in the game is Jadzia Dax, because Ezri Dax is considered a version of her.
User avatar
 
By Iron Prime (Dan Van Kampen)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
#379033
BCSWowbagger wrote:The IMO strangest persona in the game is Jadzia Dax, because Ezri Dax is considered a version of her.
Really? They're both Dax - or both host Dax.
So they are both a persona of the Dax symbiont- they are not saying Jadzia and Ezri are same...
I always liked this one personally.

Hence why Ezri is a persona of Ezri Dax but not Jadzia Dax. No symbiont.
User avatar
 
By Maelwys (Chris Lobban)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Community Contributor
#379034
BCSWowbagger wrote:The IMO strangest persona in the game is Jadzia Dax, because Ezri Dax is considered a version of her.
Yeah, I remember hoping that they would errata Jadzia Dax to be a persona of both "Jadzia" and "Dax" separately, and make Ezri Dax a persona of both "Ezri Tigan" and "Dax". That way you could have a non-joined Ezri Tigan present with Jadzia Dax, but couldn't have a joined Ezri Dax present with either of them. It would reflect the storyline better, but possibly also be a bit too confusing (especially if there was no card actually named "Dax", or even worse, if there eventually was).

It's okay, I don't think they handled it any better in 2E, with that awkward game text that needs to go on every version of Ezri to make it work. Would've been cleaner if they'd made "Host: Dax" a loaded keyword, that means you can only have one personnel with each unique version of that Host keyword in play (so you'd have Host: Odan or Host: Dax, and pick whether to use Kareel Odan vs William Odan, or Jadzia Dax vs Ezri Dax, for example).
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#379057
Maelwys wrote: It's okay, I don't think they handled it any better in 2E, with that awkward game text that needs to go on every version of Ezri to make it work. Would've been cleaner if they'd made "Host: Dax" a loaded keyword, that means you can only have one personnel with each unique version of that Host keyword in play (so you'd have Host: Odan or Host: Dax, and pick whether to use Kareel Odan vs William Odan, or Jadzia Dax vs Ezri Dax, for example).
It would have required foresight they may not have had, but the character should have just been "Dax (Jadzia)" or some such, since that's the 'character' we're following in a sense.

No sense making a new keyword when the existing rule already does it. :)
User avatar
 
By PantsOfTheTalShiar (Jason Tang)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#379839
Maelwys wrote:
BCSWowbagger wrote:The IMO strangest persona in the game is Jadzia Dax, because Ezri Dax is considered a version of her.
Yeah, I remember hoping that they would errata Jadzia Dax to be a persona of both "Jadzia" and "Dax" separately, and make Ezri Dax a persona of both "Ezri Tigan" and "Dax". That way you could have a non-joined Ezri Tigan present with Jadzia Dax, but couldn't have a joined Ezri Dax present with either of them. It would reflect the storyline better, but possibly also be a bit too confusing (especially if there was no card actually named "Dax", or even worse, if there eventually was).
Yeah, the game already has two personae on the same card with dual personnel, so I had been thinking it would be possible to generalize that rule to handle cases like Tuvix and William Odan.
User avatar
Ambassador
By T-Ricks (Rick Kinney)
 - Ambassador
 -  
#379935
As I was reading through some of the 1E rules, I came across this information:

A card with a Special Download icon allows you to suspend play at any point during the game (including during a seed phase or an opponent's turn), interrupting other actions as necessary, while you download the target card and immediately play it.

If the target card is location-based, it must be downloaded to the location of the icon. For example, Arandis may download Jamaharon to nullify a Horga'hn, because that effect is not location-specific. Arandis may also download Jamaharon to relocate a male at her location to Risa. But she may not download Jamaharon to relocate a male at another location to Risa.

Bold emphasis is mine.
Question: If Arandis is at the location of the male to be relocated, then he isn't alone, is he?. How does Jamaharon work with Arandis there? If Arandis is on a ship at the planet, is that considered being at the male's location?
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#379943
T-Ricks wrote:If Arandis is on a ship at the planet, is that considered being at the male's location?
And you answered your own question. :)

Yes. Here means "anywhere at this location," not just "present" (except on facilities; details here). This trick is used for all sorts of stuff. For instance, Starship Enterprise (in orbit) can download a personnel to an Away Team on the planet... during a mission attempt!

As I get older, I more and more think that special download timings should be adjusted, but this would affect so many cards it is unlikely ever to happen.
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Or maybe keep your unsolicited snark to yo[…]

Vulcan Lander and its ability

What constrains this strategy is the number of c[…]

Ignoring point losses & Timing

I would be interested in the answer to this as wel[…]

Greetings 'trek fans! As discussed in our Februar[…]