Author |
|
Tarquon Exalted
Joined: 02 January 2007 Posts: 197
|
Posted: 14 August 2007 at 3:46pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
How do people interpret the rules printed on the warrior: "immune to everything but crew card attacks..." Immune to vacuum? location skip? media personality (is she attacking?)? abilities played to him? abilities played against him? I can still choose to discard him, right?
also, if I time trap my last crew, does the opposing warrior go to the bottom of the deck immediately or when?
|
Back to Top |
|
|
RobPro IRC
Joined: 10 May 2004 Location: United States Posts: 835
|
Posted: 14 August 2007 at 5:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Literally, everything. Except crew attacks. It's sorta simple, and sorta confusing.
What I'm wondering is... it doesn't say the warrior HAS to change locations and kill an opponent crew each turn. For example, my opponent has two crew in play in different locations. I play him to one opponent location to kill a crew card. I don't chose to move him to another location, thus allowing one opponent crew to remain in play so my Warrior doesn't go to the bottom of my deck. Is this legal?
I would say no in the flavor of the card, but yes in the way it is worded. (i.e. the actual rules)
How do you all rule on this?
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Galaktische IRC
Joined: 27 June 2007 Posts: 354
|
Posted: 14 August 2007 at 5:09pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I read that as can only be affected by crew card attacks.
The question about what he does when you time trap your last crew is an interesting one... I think he stays around waiting for it to reappear. His card says he goes to the bottom of the deck when all opponent crew have been killed.
I can see the argument for the other side too... sounds like a house rule to me.
I say let him wait out the time trap... he is a C10 afterall.
J--
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Tarquon Exalted
Joined: 02 January 2007 Posts: 197
|
Posted: 15 August 2007 at 7:42am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Oh, I forgot my favorite: Is he immune a c5/5?
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Lobo IRC
Joined: 04 July 2007 Location: United States Posts: 533
|
Posted: 15 August 2007 at 8:50am | IP Logged
|
|
|
-This seems awfully darn straightforward. He's immune to everything aside from crew card attacks. That means if whatever comes after the start of the question "Is he immune to..." is not the 3-word phrase "crew card attacks", the answer is yes, he is immune. Nothing else can touch him except the crew card attack.
As for the function of going away, unless the crew is killed, the C10 waits around by the rule printed ont he card. Clear language, plain meaning and all that. As with any card, however, you can always house rule it (and someone probably will) to whatever gimped or suped-up wording you want.....Lobo
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Eaglepreacher IRC
Joined: 21 December 2003 Location: United States Posts: 573
|
Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:10pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Of course, if the opponent has two crew and you kill one, but leave the other around so as not to discard the Primordial, Your opponent can always discard that crew and force you to discard Primordial.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Tarquon Exalted
Joined: 02 January 2007 Posts: 197
|
Posted: 16 August 2007 at 6:45pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
A lot of primary wording was revised in the later reprintings. For instance,
compare a primary and universe marine. 'killed' was mostly replaced by
'discard' as a game concept. Also, the 'out of play' game mechanic wasn't
really developed until time gates. so, perhaps my question should have
been "how are people interpreting the primary wording of the warrior in
universe terms?"
in the spirit of the card, I could believe that the primordial warrior would
have wording like "no type of card, except crew, affect this card" and "placed
on the bottom of the deck when no opponent crew are in play"
of course that leaves open the question of 1) crew attacks vs crew actions
and 2) abilities played to/against the warrior
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Galaktische IRC
Joined: 27 June 2007 Posts: 354
|
Posted: 16 August 2007 at 7:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I agree there should be a consolidation of 'mechanics' but since we're not getting paid to do that... I'm not likely to care enough to work it out.
So long as Lobo and I can agree on what it does that is good enough for me.
J--
|
Back to Top |
|
|
RobPro IRC
Joined: 10 May 2004 Location: United States Posts: 835
|
Posted: 17 August 2007 at 6:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Eaglepreacher wrote:
Of course, if the opponent has two crew and you kill one, but leave the other around so as not to discard the Primordial, Your opponent can always discard that crew and force you to discard Primordial. |
|
|
Never thought of it like this.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
deth66 Acolyte
Joined: 19 August 2007 Location: United States Posts: 6
|
Posted: 19 August 2007 at 12:58pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
A C4 Marine still kills him...
Edited by deth66 on 19 August 2007 at 12:58pm
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Lobo IRC
Joined: 04 July 2007 Location: United States Posts: 533
|
Posted: 20 August 2007 at 7:40am | IP Logged
|
|
|
-Assuming the C4 Marine's ability is a "crew card attack", then yes, a C4 marine can kill/discard it as it is not immune to that.
Unfortunately, with the company behind GE no longer around, even revised language on cards is not clear when compared to some of the rulings. For instance, the word "must" is generally a condition on CCG card plays that just has to be met for the card to work. Thus, a clear and plain ruling on something like Planet of Ill Repute would say if you don't have crew to discard, you cannot fire upon it. Easy, simple. If that wasn't intended, one would hope a later reprinting of the card would change/remove the word "must" as it is misleading.
.....Lobo, tyring to remember to not go on tangents in posts
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Gekonauak IRC
Joined: 10 May 2006 Posts: 1595
|
Posted: 21 August 2007 at 7:39am | IP Logged
|
|
|
That means if whatever comes after the start of the question "Is he immune to..." is not the 3-word phrase "crew card attacks", the answer is yes, he is immune. Nothing else can touch him except the crew card attack.
we will have to keep Lobo around he is good for a few laughs.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Tarquon Exalted
Joined: 02 January 2007 Posts: 197
|
Posted: 21 August 2007 at 8:12pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
The only way I can interpret 'crew card attack' in the universe framework is as 'crew card action'. Any crew can do a there-and-back to do an action at that location - that is a documented ruling. Also, the mystic wanderer summons the crew to his/her location - isn't that an attack? Doesn't the media personality 'attack' (even the warrior isn't immune to the free press)? If not, then I would like someone to try to explain the difference.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Vercinorix Devoted
Joined: 25 October 2007 Location: United States Posts: 49
|
Posted: 25 October 2007 at 10:25pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I'm in favor of the 'crew card action' interpretation. It simplifies working out the rules interactions.
Also, if a Time Skip, Time Warp or Time Trap is used to remove the last remaining crew from play (even if temporarily), that should trigger the removal of the Primordial Warrior.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
MogwaiSC IRC
Joined: 20 January 2004 Location: United States Posts: 903
|
Posted: 25 October 2007 at 10:39pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
The problem here is that there is no clear definition of what differentiates
an "attack capable crew". This reference is made in different places, on
cards and the like, but nowhere that I know of in the rule book or on any
card is there a definition.
I believe it is a valid distinction, however. For instance, if you look at
some of the ability cards, I'm thinking of an A5 Battlesuit, if I remember
correctly that says something like "lets non attack capable crew attack
enemy crew" or something like that. So, the distinction is one that was
intended when the game was being actively developed.
My opinion is that the wording is the wording; it says "crew attack", not
"crew card action". Regardless of what revisions were planned and/or
should have been, the situation is the same as with how we've discussed
the Cybermage card text ruling. All we have to go on is the card text. So,
I suppose that in the end the interpretation will ultimately have to be in
house.
The group I play with though, does not let him be affected by the C5/5 or
the C3 Media Personality as they are not specifically attacks. We also go
by the fact that since the card specifically says "may", whether to move
him or not is at the option of the owner. We also play that he floats in
space when his location is destroyed, again, because he is immune to
everything but a crew attack.
I usually put an A4 Demolition Expertise on him, so he can also destroy
equipment and do structural damage to his location.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
werewolflht65 Exalted
Joined: 08 October 2007 Location: United States Posts: 780
|
Posted: 25 October 2007 at 10:52pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Ok, here is my question then: Take a look at the wording of this card, which came out after Primal did.
Frayed Time Spindle:-Played against a stack totaling more than 20 strength points. -Causes
the stack to be discarded. -Placed at the bottom of Discard pile after
use.
Now, the rule book does say that Card Rules Take Precedent. So, in a chain, it goes like this: C-10 played to Galactic Trade World, with a E-6 Tactical Fighter sitting there parked. Stack is 21 points. I drop a FTS on it, and according to my card rule, the whole stack is discarded.
What say you?
__________________ "Light Balls? You didn't ask for Light Balls. You asked for Light BEER!" Capt. Sergei Fukov, CPP Kalinka
Star Wreck, In The Pirkinning
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Eaglepreacher IRC
Joined: 21 December 2003 Location: United States Posts: 573
|
Posted: 25 October 2007 at 11:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I'd say "what stack!".... Try this one. S6 Vek battlecruiser, E2 Repulsion beam, and C9 Admiral equals only 17 points. My friend thought he was safe from the spindle. I dropped a H6 cosmic cyclone or soemthing like that on it and then slapped down the time spindle to discard the whole stack. What say you to this ?
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Tarquon Exalted
Joined: 02 January 2007 Posts: 197
|
Posted: 25 October 2007 at 11:18pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
In defense I'ld time trap the biggest substack/card that's not the basis of the
stack.
What say you to this?
Also, isn't he immune to everything - including abilities played to him?
|
Back to Top |
|
|
werewolflht65 Exalted
Joined: 08 October 2007 Location: United States Posts: 780
|
Posted: 26 October 2007 at 6:49am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Eaglepreacher wrote:
I'd say "what stack!".... Try this one. S6 Vek battlecruiser, E2 Repulsion beam, and C9 Admiral equals only 17 points. My friend thought he was safe from the spindle. I dropped a H6 cosmic cyclone or soemthing like that on it and then slapped down the time spindle to discard the whole stack. What say you to this ? |
|
|
That is legal. Any cards played to a location are considered part of that location. As long as the hazard/monster/etc says it is played to "A ship/base/terrain in the fleet" it is a legal action. I should know, because it happens here in our group also.
My interpretation of the rules is that the last card played takes precedent. So, our pickle of the Primordial Warrior is solved. If the stack is discarded, and he is part of the stack, he goes bye bye.
Think of it like this: Darksteel Colossus is Indestructible. So, I can't Dark Banish it, I can't fireball it, and I can't disenchant it. But, I can send it farming, return it to it's owners hand, and force my opponent to sacrifice it.
What I am saying is, even though it is an entity, it isn't a god card. It's not immune to other removal effects. Blow up the terrain he is on, he floats in space; try to vac him, and he laughs at the attempt; But, send a platoon of Marines after him, and he runs crying like a little girl. Hit his location with a discard effect, and he goes with it. He may be immune, but the location STACK isn't. And since he is part of the STACK, he goes.
__________________ "Light Balls? You didn't ask for Light Balls. You asked for Light BEER!" Capt. Sergei Fukov, CPP Kalinka
Star Wreck, In The Pirkinning
|
Back to Top |
|
|
MogwaiSC IRC
Joined: 20 January 2004 Location: United States Posts: 903
|
Posted: 26 October 2007 at 8:40am | IP Logged
|
|
|
We've made a similar ruling with Dragons and occurrences. You can't play
an occurrence directly on the dragon, but you can play it on the location
the dragon is at, or on the dragon player's fleet. That allows you to do
things like play Capital Revitalization and Surprise Attack when you're
Dragons.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
werewolflht65 Exalted
Joined: 08 October 2007 Location: United States Posts: 780
|
Posted: 26 October 2007 at 9:24am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Well, since dragons count as ships (it even says so in the rule book) The surprise attack would still work. Cap Revit would have no effect on a dragon or psi or anyother non ship empire, since it affects your hand, not cards in play. Now, if you had said an EW card, like the O-3's, that might be open to interpretation.
__________________ "Light Balls? You didn't ask for Light Balls. You asked for Light BEER!" Capt. Sergei Fukov, CPP Kalinka
Star Wreck, In The Pirkinning
|
Back to Top |
|
|
MogwaiSC IRC
Joined: 20 January 2004 Location: United States Posts: 903
|
Posted: 26 October 2007 at 10:55am | IP Logged
|
|
|
We've played that a Time Skip can affect a dragon, if it's played to the
entire stack the dragon is on, if the dragon isn't the basis of the stack. So
if for example my opponent has a Cyberdragoness on a T7 Nest, you play
the skip to the Nest, and the dragon is taken along with it. Or, you can
skip a molting off the back of a dragon and blast away, since the skip is
played to the molting, and not the dragon.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
bignea Exalted
Joined: 17 May 2005 Location: United States Posts: 124
|
Posted: 26 October 2007 at 5:49pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
The dragon would be the basis of the stack with the molting on it, like equipment on a ship. But i do agree playing a skip to the molting works.
Why would the dragon go with the nest, it is played on the terrain to gain the benefits of the terrain, if you took the terrain with the skip the dragon would not get the benefits anymore but still be there. So if you shoot the terrain out the dragon still lives.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
MogwaiSC IRC
Joined: 20 January 2004 Location: United States Posts: 903
|
Posted: 26 October 2007 at 10:03pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
It was ruled by Geko on here about two years ago that if you skip the
planet the dragon is on, the dragon gets skipped with the planet.
You are not playing the skip to the dragon, but the terrain the dragon is
on. The dragon is at the location of the terrain so gets skipped along with
the terrain.
You could choose to skip the Nest by itself, but the skip specifically says it
can be played to a stack OR an individual card. So, if you play the skip to
the entire stack, you're not playing it specifically on the dragon, so the
dragon's immunity to O class cards doesn't prevent you from playing the
skip to the nest.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
werewolflht65 Exalted
Joined: 08 October 2007 Location: United States Posts: 780
|
Posted: 27 October 2007 at 10:12pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Personally, I'd just Divergent Anom the Dragon, and shoot the HQ.. Just me though. :)
__________________ "Light Balls? You didn't ask for Light Balls. You asked for Light BEER!" Capt. Sergei Fukov, CPP Kalinka
Star Wreck, In The Pirkinning
|
Back to Top |
|
|
RobPro IRC
Joined: 10 May 2004 Location: United States Posts: 835
|
Posted: 28 October 2007 at 12:02am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Why Divergant Anom when you can Time Warp?
|
Back to Top |
|
|
werewolflht65 Exalted
Joined: 08 October 2007 Location: United States Posts: 780
|
Posted: 28 October 2007 at 12:11am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Time warp is soooo over used... :)
__________________ "Light Balls? You didn't ask for Light Balls. You asked for Light BEER!" Capt. Sergei Fukov, CPP Kalinka
Star Wreck, In The Pirkinning
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Eaglepreacher IRC
Joined: 21 December 2003 Location: United States Posts: 573
|
Posted: 28 October 2007 at 4:37am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Time warp can be negated more easily then the divergant anom.
|
Back to Top |
|
|
werewolflht65 Exalted
Joined: 08 October 2007 Location: United States Posts: 780
|
Posted: 28 October 2007 at 7:27am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Yes, by time keepers.
__________________ "Light Balls? You didn't ask for Light Balls. You asked for Light BEER!" Capt. Sergei Fukov, CPP Kalinka
Star Wreck, In The Pirkinning
|
Back to Top |
|
|
Gekonauak IRC
Joined: 10 May 2006 Posts: 1595
|
Posted: 29 October 2007 at 10:27am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Also, it gives you a choice of actually shooting the dragon with weapons from your bases.
|
Back to Top |
|
|