User avatar
 
By Ensign Q
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#546647
If unoccupied, any non-Borg V.I.P. may report here regardless of affiliation. Once each turn, any player who has a V.I.P. unopposed here may, in place of one card draw, draw two cards and place one of them beneath draw deck. (Not cumulative.)

so i replace my 2 draws with dls ; ref cards or whatever. nothing to put back then, right?
User avatar
Director of First Edition
By MidnightLich (Charlie Plaine)
 - Director of First Edition
 -  
Prophet
#546668
I don't think so, because you've already replaced the draw. You can't replace it again with something else.

-crp
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#546673
Yeah. You can replace draw with download, or you can replace draw with GQ (Draw 2/ cycle 1) function. I'm not sure they're iterative.

That said I'm also not 100% sure you're wrong. I need to do some digging.
User avatar
 
By Iron Prime (Dan Van Kampen)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
#546674
That's how I read it as well. You can't replace a replacement. I'm sure there is a more eloquent and rulesy way of saying it... @BCSWowbagger ?
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
1E Deep Space 9 Regional Champion 2023
#546680
Where is it written that you can't replace a replacement?

This seems like it should work. But I had a similar question about this sort of oddity not too long ago and I don't think I ever got a definitive answer.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#546687
JeBuS wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:22 am Where is it written that you can't replace a replacement?

This seems like it should work. But I had a similar question about this sort of oddity not too long ago and I don't think I ever got a definitive answer.
Well you can't replace the same card draw with multiple "in place of card draw" actions.

The issue with this one specifically is the replacement action gives you *more card draws* and doesn't have the text that was popularized later of "cannot be converted to downloads"

But it also has the hook of "put one under" and I don't think you can just ignore that bit so while it feels (at least to me) like the answer is "No of COURSE that doesn't work" ... I actually am having difficulty justifying that instinct, but at the same time I don't think EQ's read is entirely correct either.
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
1E Deep Space 9 Regional Champion 2023
#546690
Armus wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:49 am
JeBuS wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:22 am Where is it written that you can't replace a replacement?

This seems like it should work. But I had a similar question about this sort of oddity not too long ago and I don't think I ever got a definitive answer.
Well you can't replace the same card draw with multiple "in place of card draw" actions.
I think I'm missing where that rule is written. Wouldn't be the first time I overlook something. But I do see this:
An action that is "in place of one card draw" may replace any card draw
Emphasis mine.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#546693
That rule is that you can't use multiples on the *same* draw. For example, a Borg player can't get a card draw, and replace it with Assimilation Table's "download an Implant" *and* replace that same card draw with Maturation Chamber's "download a universal drone".

This is a different kettle, because you're turning a draw into more draws, and then converting your new draws into something else.
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
1E Deep Space 9 Regional Champion 2023
#546695
AllenGould wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 11:02 am That rule is that you can't use multiples on the *same* draw. For example, a Borg player can't get a card draw, and replace it with Assimilation Table's "download an Implant" *and* replace that same card draw with Maturation Chamber's "download a universal drone".

This is a different kettle, because you're turning a draw into more draws, and then converting your new draws into something else.
Exactly. Sorry, I thought that was self-evident. But now I see where others might be arguing from. In that case...

The argument I have is that I replace 1 card draw, and now I have 2 new card draws. I can replace both of those. Point me to a rule that says otherwise.


If we don't want this to work, then Guest Quarters can get errata to say that in place of a card draw, you examine the top two cards of your deck, place one of them in your hand, and the other beneath the draw deck.
Last edited by JeBuS on Thu Mar 18, 2021 11:09 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#546696
JeBuS wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 11:04 am The argument I have is that I replace 1 card draw, and now I have 2 new card draws. I can replace both of those. Point me to a rule that says otherwise.
How do you resolve the rest of Guest Quarter's text, then?
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
1E Deep Space 9 Regional Champion 2023
#546697
AllenGould wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 11:07 am
JeBuS wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 11:04 am The argument I have is that I replace 1 card draw, and now I have 2 new card draws. I can replace both of those. Point me to a rule that says otherwise.
How do you resolve the rest of Guest Quarter's text, then?
That's a problem I had with some other scenario. What happens if that back end can't be performed any longer?

I never got an answer.

In this instance, I think there is an argument to be made that one of the downloaded cards should be placed beneath the draw deck. Since the download is "in place of" the draw, it could logically be presumed that any effects that should happen to the draw will happen to its replacement. As an example, there are personnel who put themselves "in place of" some other personnel for effects to happen to them instead.
User avatar
 
By Ensign Q
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#546718
putting back the replaced card seems weird and is definitely not backed up by the rules.
i still think it just fizzles. by replacing the card it becomes a " new item" no longer affected by the putting back trigger.

guest quarter would need to say " those draws can not be converted into a dl" to forbid such shenenigan
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#546739
Since the Guest Quarters "put back" is mandatory, if you can't perform it, wouldn't the entire action become illegal ab initio and you'd have to undo it, like when you play a card with a mandatory download but your opponent flips Computer Crash so you can't complete the mandatory download and the whole thing goes back to your hand?

After all, our game famously does not have a "do as much as you can" rule. (Unlike our cousins in Second Edition.)

I feel only about 43% confident of this answer, but nobody else has suggested it yet.
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
1E Deep Space 9 Regional Champion 2023
#546740
BCSWowbagger wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 4:16 pm Since the Guest Quarters "put back" is mandatory, if you can't perform it, wouldn't the entire action become illegal ab initio and you'd have to undo it, like when you play a card with a mandatory download but your opponent flips Computer Crash so you can't complete the mandatory download and the whole thing goes back to your hand?

After all, our game famously does not have a "do as much as you can" rule. (Unlike our cousins in Second Edition.)

I feel only about 43% confident of this answer, but nobody else has suggested it yet.
Sure, but "exchanging cards" offers a solution, in that the effect could transfer to the card doing the replacing. Granted, that's not a 100% applicable rule to this situation, but... it could be massaged to be.

Also, the Computer Crash scenario is a bit different, since Hidden Agendas are... a timing nightmare.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#546743
JeBuS wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 4:20 pm Also, the Computer Crash scenario is a bit different, since Hidden Agendas are... a timing nightmare.
100%.

An interesting side question: is there any reason why Hidden Agendas have that stupid weird timing, except to protect the victims of Computer Crash from losing their downloads? (That's a question I've had on a list for a while, because if we could eliminate the bizarre [HA] timing exceptions and just make them valid-response speed just by putting a non-functional clarifying errata on Computer Crash, that'd be well worth the trade.)

Anyway, back on topic: I do like your "exchange" solution, and it makes a certain amount of intuitive sense... but it feels like a bit of a timing nightmare as well, since I think the downloaded card would resolve its gametext before being replaced.

P.S. I will get back to the Hold The Salad thread, but I've been in hiding for two days partly because I'm super busy IRL and partly because I'm quite sure I got some stuff wrong in my last response and want to be sure I'm right this time. It's not good when the Rules Manager answers a rules question wrong, but it's a lot better than the Rules Manager answering a rules question wrong twice.
Question for noob

You can use Defend Homeworld instead of Quark[…]

Only works when RS is played after AIV. This is be[…]

Still a few weeks left to get registered for the[…]

Hey all, we are running a "Warum-up" fo[…]