User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#474207
SudenKapala wrote:Cleaning up the timing rules: :thumbsup: if it can be made more clear/consistent; but...
Striking Down [DL] ("suspend play") timing In Anger: :thumbsdown: because for me, it's really embedded in the feel of 1e.
This is, unfortunately, one of those "choose one" situations. You can have cleaned up, clearer, more consistent timing or you can maintain the current functionality of everything. Maybe it's not [DL] that gets changed but something else (like [Int] timing), but you almost certainly can't have both.
There's probably a whole Manifesto to be written
Yes. I want that Manifesto. (Your post is nevertheless quite welcome.)
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#474213
BCSWowbagger wrote:
There's probably a whole Manifesto to be written
Yes. I want that Manifesto. (Your post is nevertheless quite welcome.)
And a finger on the monkey's paw curls shut... ;)

I'll see what I can do.
User avatar
 
By 9of24 (Jeremy Huth)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#474419
AllenGould wrote: Interrupts can be played at any time between other actions — even during your opponent's turn!
AllenGould wrote:.. except that it's not some mystical "between" - it's just when you could take an action. It's one of the few actions you *can* take on an opponent's turn, but it's still just a regular ol' action.
I suspect that between was chosen due to the nature of the name of card type. Since they decided to call them Interrupts, they probably realized that at least some people would think they could interrupt other actions with them, rather than just interrupting a turn. In my eyes explicitly stating that they can occur between other actions helps alleviate that confusion.
AllenGould wrote:"suspends play" is the other annoying one, because it's not really "suspending" anything - you don't stop the game and go get sandwiches - but it's just a wildcard of sorts. "suspend play" can be explained as "this is a valid response to anything". Timing-wise, it works exactly the same - the response resolves before the original card does. (Hidden Agendas as well, now that I think on it).
Just to clarify, when you suspend play, either via a [DL] or a card with that text, it does not have to be done during the response step of the action process in the same way a valid response would need to be used. Instead you can suspend play during the initiation or results step of an action.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#474643
9of24 wrote:
AllenGould wrote:"suspends play" is the other annoying one, because it's not really "suspending" anything - you don't stop the game and go get sandwiches - but it's just a wildcard of sorts. "suspend play" can be explained as "this is a valid response to anything". Timing-wise, it works exactly the same - the response resolves before the original card does. (Hidden Agendas as well, now that I think on it).
Just to clarify, when you suspend play, either via a [DL] or a card with that text, it does not have to be done during the response step of the action process in the same way a valid response would need to be used. Instead you can suspend play during the initiation or results step of an action.
If you're doing it in response to initiation, it's no different from doing it as a valid response to the card. If you do it in response results, it's a "just" action. Either way, it's still in the same timing windows.
Card Page Glitches

So, it's seeming on some sets that the cards on th[…]

Question for noob

Awesome. Thanks everyone for all the help!

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

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