Card clarifications

A place to find, request and discuss rulings and errata.
Post Reply
korric
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:26 am
Player Locator: Not enrolled in the Player Locator

Card clarifications

Post by korric » Sun Dec 22, 2019 5:40 pm

Ta'Nal of Adari: At the start of the phase, each crew restores 1 wound.
That's all crew, including opponents' crews?

Fragmentation Grenade: Use, Jettison: Inflict 2 wounds on up to 2 different crew controlled by the same Captain.
That's either 1 wound on each of 2 crews, or 2 wounds on one crew, yes?

Panacea Autoinjector: Reaction - Jettison: Remove 2 wounds from attached crew.
If I understand correctly, if an unwounded crew with 3 wound capacity then takes 3 wounds from a single source, Panacea Autoinjector cannot save them. If, however, they already have 2 wounds, and then take 1 more, Panacea Autoinjector can be jettisoned in response to that one wound to remove the 2 pre-existent wounds so that, after everything resolves, the crew will have 1 wound and live. Are these situations both correct?

Also, while I'm here, a comment for what it's worth because I love airing my opinions in online forums: I enjoy the solo adventures, except that I dislike the dice rolling on solo missions 4 and 5. It adds an additional fiddliness that I prefer to not have in my card games. I also don't like that kind of randomness in a card game; the randomness intrinsic in a shuffled deck is sufficient. An idea that I think would be interesting for solo play is a set of solo-only contracts/complications that, when they are revealed as complications, have an immediate effect that the player must suffer, whether or not the player resolves the complication. The contracts would also be more difficult for solo play. Solo scenario 1 is the most enjoyable, as it allows me to focus on playing the game and completing contracts rather than building a deck for a specific purpose, but it is too easy (which makes sense as it's the first solo scenario). A solo-only expansion like this could make scenario 1 more challenging, and if you're really masochistic you could use them in any of the other solo scenarios.

Unsolicited opinion number 2: I really hate that, to get 3 copies of some cards, one must purchase 3 copies of the exact same deck (Defensive Mines, for example). If I wanted to have to pay for a bunch of redundant cards just to get one more copy of a single card, I'd play a collectible card game.

User avatar
Horizon Jeff

Merchant Prince Free Trader Network Member
Term 4
Posts: 374
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:08 pm
Medals: 2
Player Locator: Enrolled in the Player Locator

Re: Card clarifications

Post by Horizon Jeff » Sun Dec 22, 2019 6:56 pm

korric wrote:
Sun Dec 22, 2019 5:40 pm
Ta'Nal of Adari: At the start of the phase, each crew restores 1 wound.
That's all crew, including opponents' crews?
Yup, she's helpful to everybody!
korric wrote:
Sun Dec 22, 2019 5:40 pm
Fragmentation Grenade: Use, Jettison: Inflict 2 wounds on up to 2 different crew controlled by the same Captain.
That's either 1 wound on each of 2 crews, or 2 wounds on one crew, yes?
No, it's 2 :wounds on each of the :crew.
korric wrote:
Sun Dec 22, 2019 5:40 pm
Panacea Autoinjector: Reaction - Jettison: Remove 2 wounds from attached crew.
If I understand correctly, if an unwounded crew with 3 wound capacity then takes 3 wounds from a single source, Panacea Autoinjector cannot save them. If, however, they already have 2 wounds, and then take 1 more, Panacea Autoinjector can be jettisoned in response to that one wound to remove the 2 pre-existent wounds so that, after everything resolves, the crew will have 1 wound and live. Are these situations both correct?
Your understanding is entirely correct!
korric wrote:
Sun Dec 22, 2019 5:40 pm
Also, while I'm here, a comment for what it's worth because I love airing my opinions in online forums: I enjoy the solo adventures, except that I dislike the dice rolling on solo missions 4 and 5. It adds an additional fiddliness that I prefer to not have in my card games. I also don't like that kind of randomness in a card game; the randomness intrinsic in a shuffled deck is sufficient. An idea that I think would be interesting for solo play is a set of solo-only contracts/complications that, when they are revealed as complications, have an immediate effect that the player must suffer, whether or not the player resolves the complication. The contracts would also be more difficult for solo play. Solo scenario 1 is the most enjoyable, as it allows me to focus on playing the game and completing contracts rather than building a deck for a specific purpose, but it is too easy (which makes sense as it's the first solo scenario). A solo-only expansion like this could make scenario 1 more challenging, and if you're really masochistic you could use them in any of the other solo scenarios.
You can always add Challenges to Solo Play Scenario 1. There's some in the base rule book, and a lot from our Solo Play Saturday list.
korric wrote:
Sun Dec 22, 2019 5:40 pm
Unsolicited opinion number 2: I really hate that, to get 3 copies of some cards, one must purchase 3 copies of the exact same deck (Defensive Mines, for example). If I wanted to have to pay for a bunch of redundant cards just to get one more copy of a single card, I'd play a collectible card game.
This opinion is definitely a fair one to have. From our position, there wasn't any single ideal distribution method, and we were trying to balance a number of factors. Namely:

1. Card Pool: We knew as a smaller company that our release schedule would be relatively slow, and in fact that future products weren't necessarily guaranteed at all. So we wanted the largest pool of available cards as we could manage. If every ship's captain's deck were just three copies each of 20 cards, the card pool would have been smaller.

2. Functionality: The ship decks are meant to be playable out-of-the-box (though in no sense necessarily ideal). It would have been much harder to make them viable with only 20 different cards.

3. Usefulness: Since we knew not all cards were equally useful, we tried to ensure the "core" cards weren't the ones that ended up with fewer copies. For instance, Professor Isaacs whom you identified on BGG as a less-available card, has an ability that currently has no application (though this is changing in an upcoming set).

4. Supplemental Deck Availability: Because we knew the Starter Set would come with a Supplemental Deck that consists almost entirely of reprints, we knew we'd be able to get close to a full playset of all cards for any player with the Starter Set and the two other ship decks (Sub Merch and Marava). Unfortunately it wasn't possible to ensure a full playset for all cards, but we came pretty close.

No single solution was going to square the circle for us, so we had to pick our poison. I completely understand if you would have made a different choice, but at least I hope you'll appreciate that it wasn't an arbitrary outcome for us.

korric
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:26 am
Player Locator: Not enrolled in the Player Locator

Re: Card clarifications

Post by korric » Mon Dec 23, 2019 8:08 pm

Thank you for responding to that; it's at least good to understand the reasons behind the decision.
Might there be a possible POD pack in the future of those cards that are short of 3 in the initial run of the starter box, Empress Marava, and Subsidized Merchant?

User avatar
Horizon Ian

Merchant Prince Free Trader Network Member
Term 2
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:32 am
Medals: 2
Player Locator: Enrolled in the Player Locator

Re: Card clarifications

Post by Horizon Ian » Mon Dec 30, 2019 11:41 am

Not going to be the most useful answer as I'm covering for people who know more about these things than I today.

We will look into what is required to make it easier for people to get full play sets of all non-promotional cards.

For promotional cards, we are hoping they get used for promotional purposes, such as running demos/intros/tournaments/leagues or other activities that will help increase awareness about the game.
:connection
Ian Lee
Lead Developer
:connection

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest