User avatar
 
By Dukat (Andreas Rheinländer)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
1E European Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
1E German National Runner-Up 2024
#557636
To my knowledge, when two cards have the same card title, but one has an AU icon, they are not the same persona (anymore).

I recall having seen that in the old Glossary. The new one does not contain anything of that sort anymore.

Is that rule still in place?
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Retired Moderator
#557637
Can you give an example of this?

Closest I can think of is that there are cards with similar titles where one has an [1E-AU] icon and one does not that are different personae (Spock vs. Mr. Spock/Captain Spock, Sarek vs. Ambassador Sarek, etc.) but none with the same title where one is [1E-AU] and the other not.
User avatar
 
By WeAreBack
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#558250
This is a very annoying issue, because our "Trek Sense" is bumping up against the rules.

Why can't Movies era [CF] Captain Spock and [TOS] Mr. Spock both have time traveled to the 24th Century to meet up with plain old Spock and all the other non [1E-AU] people you have in play? Simple, Decipher thought that it would be insanely powerful to be playing a deck with all the original series characters reporting for free at Sherman's Peak.... and then also reporting free again at Camp Khitomer. I mean, isn't getting two Spocks in play at once enough?

There are very odd cases of [1E-AU] personnel who are personas with non [1E-AU] personnel - but the only example that comes to mind is Major Rakal. The best way to think of her is analogous to all of the Dr. Noah related personnel -- she's Deanna Troi in a costume, so she can't be in play when Deanna Troi is in play any more than Dr. Noah can be in play if Benjamin Sisko's body isn't trapped inside the holodeck. (Great episode, and smart way to give stakes to something happening in the holodeck other than the old "holograms have run amok and the safeties are off!")

Richard Castillo's lore should say he was involved with Tasha Yar - Alternate. This is just one of those errors that was never fixed. You'll also notice that there are a lot of mentions in lore from early sets (like premier) of romantic partners that aren't actually cards like Soren listing "Commander William T. Riker" , K'Ehleyr being a "Mate of Lieutenant Worf" and Jenna D'Sora listing "Lt. Commander Data". You would think would be good enough given that the name of the correct card is actually in there each time, but apparently we're requiring an exact match.

I'm guessing they haven't fixed this for balance reasons: using Assign Mission specialists or Assign Support Personnel could download all of the partners listed above, with Cafe des Artistes to download the other personnel.
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Retired Moderator
#558252
One of the bits that I've always found odd Trek Sense wise: Mr. Scott (The Motion Pictures) can logically only be a few years at most younger than Montgomery Scott. But those two can co-exist, while the former is a version of the same persona as Mr. Scott (The Trouble With Tribbles), who is 20-25 years or so younger. Much more age difference.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#558254
I'm not sure I follow a good chunk of your post. Captain Spock can jump forward in time to hang out with Spock. He just can't do it along with Mr. Spock, because Decipher considered Captain Spock and Mr. Spock similar enough to count as the same person from the same general time period.

However, this part I do follow:
WeAreBack wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 5:12 pmThis is just one of those errors that was never fixed. You'll also notice that there are a lot of mentions in lore from early sets (like premier) of romantic partners that aren't actually cards like Soren listing "Commander William T. Riker" , K'Ehleyr being a "Mate of Lieutenant Worf" and Jenna D'Sora listing "Lt. Commander Data". You would think would be good enough given that the name of the correct card is actually in there each time, but apparently we're requiring an exact match.

I'm guessing they haven't fixed this for balance reasons: using Assign Mission specialists or Assign Support Personnel could download all of the partners listed above, with Cafe des Artistes to download the other personnel.
I know enough about the inside baseball on this one to confirm: it's not balance reasons. If it's ever done, it will of course be playtested, but the balance reasons aren't the issue.

The resource constraints are. There are a lot of errors and issues on old cards that need to be fixed, and the number that can be handled each month is fairly low. (And you would be shocked by how "very easy things" end up being quite complicated; it took several months to iron out all the unexpected questions when we did the Scotty errata to fix lore references and add [SD] Transporter Skill. No errata ends up being a quick done-in-an-evening project.)

I hope that eventually the day comes when we have a shot at "fixing" all these broken links. That time won't arrive in 2021. But maybe before 2025?

(As for why an exact match is required: let me introduce you to a controversy known as The Dramatis Personae Crisis of 2014: part 1, part 2, part 3. Yep, that's exactly 30 pages of forum posts on the subject. There were another 10 or 15 pages on the Rules Committee board while the R.C. worked on it -- I remember because I had just joined the R.C. the week before or so, as a confidential member, and I was still an embryo when it came to serious rules work. Bottom line: dozens of people poured hundreds of hours into coming up with the best possible ruling that covered the greatest number of cases "correctly," and the one we got, despite its gaps in Premiere, was better than every alternative. Good times.)
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

Happy birthday to @Takket ! :D :thumbsup: […]

Opponents turn

Remodulation