 |
|
||||
| |
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
|
| DOWN |
| Re: For Taibak on HQ/Going to the Top ... Taibak ... [5/12/99 22:47] |
|
>Thanks for your explanation to my comment last night. You're quite right about my comparison to matching commanders - it was a bad example, and you caught it and explained it well
> Thanks. >However, I still have problem with your contention that if it isn't in the lore, it doesn't count. Mendak is an obvious example for the reasons stated above - the Devoras refers to him as "Admiral Mendak". > >Gowron is another example. It's hard to ignore the fact that he's been Chancellor of the Klingon High Council since the Redemption Episodes in NextGen - but since the lore on his card doesn't say Chancellor, using your logic above he wouldn't count for Going to the Top. (Also, the lore on Grilka's card refers to him as "Chancellor Gowron"). > >I'm sorry, but arguments to the contrary sound alot like what I was hearing when the matching commanders list first came out - and Jean-Luc Picard was NOT listed as the matching commander for the Enterprise-D. Despite the reasons Decipher gave, it was a ludicrous and widely ignored ruling. > >And while I generally hold your comments in high regard, as far as I'm concerned as a TD if a player finds a quote on a Decipher STCCG card lore that says a character is an "Admiral" or a "Chancellor" or the like - I'm going to rule in his favor in a rules question. > >This may seem like stubborn, trivial ranting - but it is hard enough to get and keep players for STCCG as it is. I know for a fact that one local high school kid dropped STCCG in disgust when he couldn't run Picard as the Enterprise matching commander when he played the Federation. Rulings like this (and the recent one on opaque covers) make it that much harder to keep up interest in the game. > If that's what you need to do to keep people in the game so be it. However, bear in mind that the official ruling is what it is and if you are running a sacntioned tourney, you are obligated to follow it. Not to sound harshe or anything, but I'd hate to see players getting discouraged because you are making incorrect rulings. Also, bear in mind that what you're proposing requires you to have either every single card in the game on hand during a tournament to ensure consistent play or an encyclopedic knowledge of every card. Each scenario can be extremely frustrating to a new player as well. If I were to say, "Personnel X is an admiral because Card Y says so," and I don't have card Y in play or even in my deck and neither does my opponent, what's to prevent my opponent to think I'm making it up? In terms of following the series exactly, bear in mind there are players who don't watch the show. The owner of a local card shop is an avid ST:CCG player and didn't start watching ST:TNG untill *after* he started playing and still hasn't seen anywhere near all the episodes. To ensure consitency in gameplay, you have to follow the cards exactly and forget about the show. Even if it doesn't make much Trek sense. Taibak |
|
|
| NAVIGATOR |
Re: For Taibak on HQ/Going to the Top ... Taibak ... [5/12/99 22:47]
