Hoss-Drone wrote: ↑Sun Jul 03, 2022 8:29 pm
Armus wrote: ↑Sun Jul 03, 2022 8:10 pm
The general rules are:
But where is that in the rules? Why does "can't override can" - especially if it's two cards interacting since, prima facie, the entire point of writing a card is for it to be able to do it's thing if it's already breaking rules to do it?
Cards override rules
specific overrides general
Can't overrides can
If you evaluate along those 3 axes, you can usually come to a good answer.
It's not perfect, but it's a start, and a pretty good rule of thumb.
As a TD, I need more than just "a rule of thumb" to rule whether the Dial Martok for murder wins or the strategema wins. Especially since the argument both players will make to me is:. My Card is overriding a rule, it is saying what I can specifically do affect the situation and while strategema says can't, DMfM doesn't specifically say can as it specifically does something which actually makes it more specific than strategema. So if I buy into the rule of thumb, DMfM wins because I would say it wins at specific over general but the next TD might say that a card saying can't always wins.
One last problem: this rule of thumb has already been rejected by TMW's "can" overiding a "doesn't work with" can't........and case precedent holds a lot of sway with me
Last point first: Sure, there's a specific exception to the general rule that a card-specific "Can" trumps a card-specific "Can't" -- but that's clearly spelled out in the glossary.
So yeah, first step to resolving a given rules question is see if it's already specifically addressed. If it's not, then apply the general rules.
Let's look at your Dial Martok for Murder
DMfM allows your Infiltrator to initiate a battle against up to two personnel without being exposed. You are correct that the card text overrides the rule about when you can initiate battle. So if your Infiltrator and your opponent's personnel were hanging out on, say, Fever Emergency
, then the card would have its effect, and at least one of your opponent's personnel present would likely die (assuming you played it properly, which I'm granting for purposes of this example).
Now, same fact pattern, but instead of being on Fever Emergency, we're on Qo'nos, the Klingon Homeworld. You play DMfM to initate your battle. Again, the card allows you to do so. However, in this case, your opponent pops Q the Referee
to download Strategema
. Now you have a card saying you can do a specific thing and another card saying you can't do that specific thing. Cant trumps can, so you can't initiate that battle against a
...But WAIT! There's more! Strategema only protects a
force at Qo'nos. So if your infiltrator is present, and your opponent has any non-
personnel there, then, because DMfM allows you to target one or two personnel, I would argue that you would
be able to initiate battle against those specific personnel even with Strategema in play.
Definition of Force:
A group of cards belonging to one player which may participate in a battle. In personnel battle, a force may be an Away Team or crew. In ship battle, a force may consist of one or more ships and/or facilities, including their crews (or your Away Team in your planet facility).
All cards in a force (including all crew members) must be compatible.
A force may include one or more affiliations which can restrict it from initiating battle or prevent it from being attacked. For example, any force which includes at least one Federation-affiliation card, such as a Non-Aligned ship with a mixed Non-Aligned/[Fed] Federation crew, is a Federation force and may not initiate battle except against Borg and self-controlling cards. A Klingon ship with a mixed Klingon-[Rom] Romulan crew is both a Klingon force and a Romulan force. It may not initiate battle against Romulans or be attacked by the opponent's Romulan force.
Emphasis added and Strikethrough added to highligt the general rule that DMfM overrides.
So if your opponent has, a bunch of
personnel and, say, Barry Waddle
on Qo'Nos, you can DMfM Barry, and since he's the only opponent's personnel targeted, he's a
force, and can be battled as such.
In this case specific trumps general.
Does that evaluation make sense?