 |
|
||||
| |
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
|
| DOWN |
| Re: Re: Agreed, but ..... (txt) ... Major Rakal ... [5/13/99 08:45] |
|
>>The fundamental reason why STCCG can never deviate from the exact wording of cards is because it would open the game up to entirely subjective interpretation, which can't happen. If a game ever grinds to a halt because of a rules discussion concerning what card X *should* do rather than what it *does* do, you have a badly made game.
> >I agree entirely - while my argument is now invalid (see above post), I was making my call based not on Trek lore but on what I saw on the lore of another STCCG card, the Devoras. My thinking was, "Gee I didn't know he was an admiral 'til the player pointed that out to me". The player gave me a reference not in the show, but on a card. The critical error in my argement rests in how Going to the Top is defined in the Glossary - only the lore or title on the personnel card. This applies not just to Going To The Top, but to *every* card that refers to a title or similar quality. For example, the headquarters cards allow various personnel to play for free, usually based on a title or rank. That title or rank is determined solely by the personnel card itself, going by the card's name or its lore (for example, Vedek Sorad is a vedek from his card title, but also someone is a vedek if it is in his/her lore- Bareil Antos is one, if I recall). The same applies to determining species; while "everyone knows" that Major Rakal is the half-human, half-Betazoid Deanna Troi, only Troi's card gives a species. Major Rakal *appears* to be Romulan, and her lore does not say otherwise. Therefore, she is treated as Romulan for Hate Crime. "Trek sense"? No. But it makes *game* sense because a player who never watched Next Gen and does not have Deanna Troi has no way of knowing that Major rakal is not a Romulan by species. This makes the game self-contained and not dependent on show knowledge. >>I agree entirely, however, that the rules should be made in the spirit of the shows and movies. That Jean-Luc Picard could not captain the Enterprise was a moronic ruling and Decipher failed miserably in its attempts to explain it. Fortunately they gave us the matching commander rule in part to make up for this gaffe. But in all cases, gameplay comes first. If it didn't, I would have stopped playing a long time ago. > >Same here - but lets be real honest about this - Decipher could just as easily ruled to include Gowron and Mendak (like they did Neral), with minimal game disruption. thereby avoiding this entire issue. There is something on Neral's card that allows the exception to be made: it says he is proconsul *of the senate*. That leads many people to believe that he *is* a senator, who just happens to have been elected to a "ruling" position over the senate. Since we do not know any more about the structure of the Romulan Senate, we decided it was plausible. And it does not rely on any other card. Matching commanders is entirely different, simply because to have a matching commander at all, you *must* involve two cards in the discussion--a ship and a personnel. And the definition says that the lore of *either* can define a matching commander. Jolan tru, Major Rakal (Kathy McCracken) Star Trek CCG Intelligence Officer and Tal Shiar Agent
|
|
|
| NAVIGATOR |
Re: Re: Agreed, but ..... (txt) ... Major Rakal ... [5/13/99 08:45]
