- Beta Quadrant
 -  
#587899
The updated version of the stasis rule reads as follows:
Cards in stasis may not take actions, use gametext, or characteristics, and may not be targeted or moved by any effect except the one placing them in stasis.
Does this mean that if a ship has even a single personnel in stasis aboard, it cannot move? In other words, does "any effect except the one placing them in stasis" include being moved along with the rest of a ship? If so, cards like DNA Metamorphosis and Off Switch may be more powerful than I realized.

The new disabled rule reads
Disabled personnel may not be used in any way. They may not take actions, use gametext or characteristics, or even enable gametext on other cards that depend on the disabled personnel being in play ... However, disabled personnel may be moved and beamed like equipment cards, and may be targeted by effects that target their card types.
How does this work with Data's Body? Presumably, the card reports disabled. But how can Data's Head "attach" if the cardtext on Data's Body is inactive, and if Data's Head can't target Data's Body (since it doesn't target his card type).
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#587905
A very glib and unhelpful answer is "the same way they always have." Consider the old disabled and in stasis rules:
Decipher 2002 Glossary v.1.8 wrote: disabled - ...Disabled personnel may not be used in any way (including game text, attributes, icons, lore, skills, traits such as gender, species, or matching commander status, etc.), may not enable game text requiring that personnel to be in play, and may not perform any actions.

stasis - ...[Cards in stasis] may not perform any actions and may not be moved or beamed.
So the text you're pointing out is, for the most part, not new, and we may therefore look to precedent to help us understand how to interpret them.

Slightly less glib but very off-the-cuff thoughts on how to answer each question:

1. I think that moving a ship that has a personnel aboard it does not count as moving that personnel, legally speaking. I could be wrong.

2. Data's Body works, first and foremost, because it has a Glossary entry that decrees that it works by fiat, although you might be able to suss out an argument that it works, even without the Glossary entry, from the Golden Rule + verba cum effectu sunt accipienda alone. Needless to say, the modern RC would put the connection text on Data's Head, not Data's Body.
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#587909
BCSWowbagger wrote: Mon Oct 31, 2022 2:21 pm So the text you're pointing out is, for the most part, not new, and we may therefore look to precedent to help us understand how to interpret them.
This is a good point, but the question could have been asked of the original rules as well -- is the way everybody had been playing actually what the rule said?
1. I think that moving a ship that has a personnel aboard it does not count as moving that personnel, legally speaking. I could be wrong.
I had not considered this possibility. Would this mean that Doppelganger does not trigger if the newly-arriving personnel comes by ship?
2. Data's Body works, first and foremost, because it has a Glossary entry that decrees that it works by fiat, although you might be able to suss out an argument that it works, even without the Glossary entry, from the Golden Rule + verba cum effectu sunt accipienda alone. Needless to say, the modern RC would put the connection text on Data's Head, not Data's Body. [/hidden]
Reasonable enough. I still wonder what such text would look like on Data's Head if we wanted to remove this Glossary exception, since my understanding of the new rule is that it would have to target a card type and not a card name. ("May attach to personnel present named Data's Body?")
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#587933
Rachmaninoff wrote: Mon Oct 31, 2022 2:56 pm I had not considered this possibility. Would this mean that Doppelganger does not trigger if the newly-arriving personnel comes by ship?
That would be an accurate implication of my suggestion. It might even be legally correct!

I think I can count on three things, though: that wasn't how Doppelganger was intended to be read; nobody will in practice ever think of reading it that way (unless they happen to have read this thread); and nobody will come up with a good reason to stock Doppelganger before we manage to find an excuse to clarifyingly-errata it anyway. :P
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#587946
BCSWowbagger wrote:nobody will come up with a good reason to stock Doppelganger before we manage to find an excuse to clarifyingly-errata it anyway
This is true, but it makes me a little sad. Doppelganger has been an "almost-include" for me on a number of occasions as a Tent card but it always gets cut later in the deckbuilding process. In a mirror match it can be a devastating late-game card... Tent for it, play it, move your ship to your opponent's and wipe out a crew. Maybe this is a sign of health for the metagame (no one dominant affiliation), or maybe there are just too many affiliations now for it to ever be a viable card.
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#587950
Cards in stasis may not take actions, use gametext, or characteristics, and may not be targeted or moved by any effect except the one placing them in stasis.
Doesn't this technically mean Dead in bed is a dead card? It says:
Kills any one personnel currently in stasis.
And by a strict reading of the above rule, that's targeting a personnel with an effect that is not the one that placed them in stasis. (Or am I missing something)
User avatar
Online OP Coordinator
By pfti (Jon Carter)
 - Online OP Coordinator
 -  
2E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#587951
boromirofborg wrote: Tue Nov 01, 2022 9:58 am
Cards in stasis may not take actions, use gametext, or characteristics, and may not be targeted or moved by any effect except the one placing them in stasis.
Doesn't this technically mean Dead in bed is a dead card? It says:
Kills any one personnel currently in stasis.
And by a strict reading of the above rule, that's targeting a personnel with an effect that is not the one that placed them in stasis. (Or am I missing something)
Because this card specifically allows for the targeting of a person in Stasis, it is a perfect example of a case where a card overrides a rule
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

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

Opponents turn

Remodulation

It started in mid-2013. At that time it became sta[…]