[Ensign Q]

Mantle of the Empire

do all chancellors present get +1

or is this SJW speech? I wish the cc would use the plural forms correctly. (pre woke era) i havent seen a klingon that identifies as female yet.

MOD EDIT (nobthehobbit): User was warned for this post.

[OKCoyote]

Mantle of the Empire

do all chancellors present get +1 or is this SJW speech? I wish the cc would use the plural forms correctly. (pre woke era) i havent seen a klingon that identifies as female yet.

There are a lot of Klingons that identify as female. There's even a chancellor: Azetbur.

[BCSWowbagger]

Mantle of the Empire
I wish the cc would use the plural forms correctly. (pre woke era)

The Star Trek CCG has always used the singular gender-neutral "they". This dates back to the earliest days of the game. Second Edition made the decision to use "he or she" instead, but singular "they" is a deeply, deeply baked-in precedent in our game.

I think we can safely dismiss the explanation that Decipher in 1996 was being "woke." We can probably also presume that Thackeray was not being "woke" when he used singular "they" in Vanity Fair in 1848.

"They" wouldn't be my personal preference. I don't use singular "they" in personal conversation, because, despite its long pedigree, I find it unnecessarily confusing in too many contexts. Nouns and verbs should agree in number. I personally prefer gender-neutral "he" or gender-neutral "she," although I will occasionally stoop to "he/she" if the sentence is particularly ambiguous.

But we are only the game's stewards, and must be very careful about which ancient precedents we decide to reverse. Mantle of the Empire is correctly worded for 1E.

And, to answer your question: it refers only to chancellors present (of either gender).

[edgeofhearing]

Mantle of the Empire

do all chancellors present get +1 or is this SJW speech? I wish the cc would use the plural forms correctly. (pre woke era) i havent seen a klingon that identifies as female yet.

[Iron Prime]

Not the best wording IMHO. Couldn't it be "all Chancellors here are attributes +1" or something like that?

Not the worst either. I can live with it.

#LongLiveTheEmpire!

[Professor Scott]

Not the best wording IMHO. Couldn't it be "all Chancellors here are attributes +1" or something like that?

Not the worst either. I can live with it.

#LongLiveTheEmpire!

Agreed, I read this very differently....

If with your chancellor, they are attributes all +1 ....

I read the they as plural. So I read this as:

If with your chancellor, those present with are attributes all +1... meaning everyone one present with the Chancellor gets +1.

Apparently the they is supposed to be read as they singular meaning he or she so...

If with your chancellor, that chancellor is attributes all +1....

They really should be replaced with it is...

If with your chancellor, it is attributes all +1... but then according to English Language rules, that would infer that the equipment is +1 not the personnel.

How about:

While present, your chancellor, is attributes all +1 and your SECURITY present gain Leadership. May discard to prevent your chancellor present from being killed by a dilemma.

[AllenGould]

We can probably also presume that Thackeray was not being "woke" when he used singular "they" in Vanity Fair in 1848.

Thackeray is late to the party - singular they can be found all the way back to Canterbury Tales in 1400.

[Ensign Q]

so u guys want to use the grammar of the 15th century again? an era well defined by progressive policies

Whylom, as olde stories tellen us,

Ther was a duk that highte Theseus;

Of Athenes he was lord and governour,

And in his tyme swich a conquerour,

That gretter was ther noon under the sonne.

Ful many a riche contree hadde he wonne;

What with his wisdom and his chivalrye,

He conquered al the regne of Femenye,

That whylom was y-cleped Scithia;

And weddede the quene Ipolita,

And broghte hir hoom with him in his contree

With muchel glorie and greet solempnitee,

And eek hir yonge suster Emelye.

And thus with victorie and with melodye

Lete I this noble duk to Athenes ryde,

And al his hoost, in armes, him bisyde.

anyway its deciphers fault, as always and i still dont understand what the card does.

[Iron Prime]

If with your chancellor, they are attributes all +1 ....

I read the they as plural. So I read this as:

If with your chancellor, those present with are attributes all +1... meaning everyone one present with the Chancellor gets +1.

That's how I read it too. But not everyone did. Even if it can't be reworded I think we are good now as enough people in the community either a) read it as intended or, b) have seen the board discussion.

[Ensign Q]

just make a glossary entry lol

[AllenGould]

so u guys want to use the grammar of the 15th century again? an era well defined by progressive policies

You may want to do some research - singular they never went out of style. Just some guys in the 19th century decided that only dudes were important and that they'd be grammar gatekeepers.

[Boffo97]

If this debate can switch exclusively to the rules question at hand, that would be great. If it continues to be about alleged wokeness, this thread will be locked.

[Ensign Q]

u mean some dudes decided they want to have readable text lol

[BCSWowbagger]

While present, your chancellor is attributes all +1 and your SECURITY present gain Leadership. May discard to prevent your chancellor present from being killed by a dilemma.

This is getting warmer, but:

(1) The equipment should only activate the SECURITY skill if a chancellor is present, but this wording activates either way, and

(2) This wording runs onto four lines -- which can be tolerable but should be avoided wherever possible.

"Writing better wording for cards" is a bit of an academic exercise, but I welcome it, because there's always better wordings out there and the exercise improves us all.

@Ensign Q: If present with your chancellor, this equipment increases the attributes of that chancellor by 1 and adds Leadership to all personnel present with SECURITY classification or skill. If a dilemma targets a chancellor to die, the Mantle's controller may discard the Mantle (as a direct response) to prevent that death; the chancellor is not stopped.

[Data's Socks]

If the "May" in "May discard" could be left off without changing gameplay that'd free up some space. Likewise if the "and" could be replaced by a semicolon. Still can't tell though if these lines are overshooting:

If with your chancellor, that chancellor is attributes all +1;
your SECURITY present gain Leadership. Discard to prevent
your chancellor present from being killed by a dilemma.