| Author |
|
Gekonauak
IRC
Joined: 10 May 2006
Posts: 1595
|
| Posted: 26 November 2008 at 2:28pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Should Planetary Destruction be able to destroy a T/B?
Please keep in mind that when Planetary Destruction was created, that the T/B cardss were merely Ts, and that there is NO mistake that they would have been blown to smithereens.
Edited by Gekonauak on 02 December 2008 at 8:18am
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
RobPro
IRC
Joined: 10 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 835
|
| Posted: 26 November 2008 at 2:41pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I vote "Yes" because I believe that is their intent. However, as Mogwai points out, the rules do say it wouldn't be able to blow up a T/B.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lobo
IRC
Joined: 04 July 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 533
|
| Posted: 26 November 2008 at 3:22pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
-I voted no. The card rules take precedence. Thus, the general interpretation should start there unless you don't play with rules. Oh, pardon me, semantics. The wording ain't confusing or vague in the least.
As a house rule, however, it's obviously your call. Do what you like. The game is long passed the prime of its life, still fun, people still play for fun, so house rule whatever you like. I just don't recognize this particular card as needing house ruled or clarified in the least.
The R/L4 Miscommunication, however...
Lobo
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
rlpowell
Acolyte
Joined: 14 September 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 28
|
| Posted: 26 November 2008 at 4:20pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
For those of you not there for the rest of the discussion, the question is, should it be able to destroy a T/B?
I don't actually care, because I don't play with entities, but it seems obvious to me that that was the intention, and I think the intention is important in this case. I voted Yes.
-Robin
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ericbsmith
IRC
Joined: 12 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 321
|
| Posted: 27 November 2008 at 12:42am | IP Logged
|
|
|
RobPro wrote:
| I vote "Yes" because I believe that is their intent. |
|
|
Intentions, and rules interpretations, change over time. As originally "intended" the POT command Ship didn't even have a Command Point. As intended the Krebiz were unplayable (and are only marginally so now). As intended the Argonian GP Chamber is utterly worthless.
I voted No. If you were using the Primary Edition rules I'd vote differently, but generally we go by Universe Edition interpretations.
Edited by ericbsmith on 27 November 2008 at 12:44am
__________________
Eric B. Smith
GE Card Museum
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ceejee
Acolyte
Joined: 03 March 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 21
|
| Posted: 27 November 2008 at 8:06am | IP Logged
|
|
|
This came up at a tourney (when they still had them) and the judge ruled that the O10 does not work on T/Bs. The judge worked for the comp. i think his name was george.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
RobPro
IRC
Joined: 10 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 835
|
| Posted: 27 November 2008 at 4:50pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
ericbsmith wrote:
RobPro wrote:
| I vote "Yes" because I believe that is their intent. |
|
|
Intentions, and rules interpretations, change over time. As originally "intended" the POT command Ship didn't even have a Command Point. As intended the Krebiz were unplayable (and are only marginally so now). As intended the Argonian GP Chamber is utterly worthless.
I voted No. If you were using the Primary Edition rules I'd vote differently, but generally we go by Universe Edition interpretations.
|
|
|
Intention and what was printed on a card are unfortunately sometimes different. A lot of utterly worthless cards were printed, I've got thousands of them, but I do believe this card would have been allowed to kill a T/B had it been printed Universe or later.
If this card weren't an entity, I'd be fine to say it can't destroy a T/B, but I believe a card of this power level should be able to. I am not basing this on the rules, just what I would do as a "house rule." Each to their own, my group has a fair amount of house rules as it is (not too too many, though).
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Galaktische
IRC
Joined: 27 June 2007
Posts: 354
|
| Posted: 27 November 2008 at 6:34pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I voted yes but not for any rules reason, I think Lobo and Geko summarized that subject well enough.
I side with the intent here a bit, I mean it is an entity.
It doesn't really matter to me, so long as I know ahead of time what the local concensus is.
The R/L4 Miscommunication.... is another stroy. Lobo and I have a gentleman's agreeement not to use it.
Unless he's winning... a lot. :P
J--
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ericbsmith
IRC
Joined: 12 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 321
|
| Posted: 28 November 2008 at 12:33am | IP Logged
|
|
|
RobPro wrote:
| If this card weren't an entity, |
|
|
The Primordial Warrior is an entity; he doesn't get to destroy bases either. The C10 PW says it destroys Crew, the O10 says it destroys Terrain. The T/B is NOT a terrain, it is a base for all (other) purposes, except being played and taking damage. It says so right on the T/B cards. Being an entity doesn't make the O10 magically say it gets to be played to a Base stack any more than the C10 PW gets to destroy base stacks just because it's an entity.
__________________
Eric B. Smith
GE Card Museum
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
RobPro
IRC
Joined: 10 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 835
|
| Posted: 28 November 2008 at 2:31am | IP Logged
|
|
|
When the O10 was printed, it could destroy T/Bs. All I am saying is I think that speaks for its intent. I am not saying -anything- on the T/B's text should be changed, but rather the O10 should say "any terrain or terrain base (T/B)." I am not saying to count a T/B as anything other than it is, but that I would add a qualifier to the O10's text.
You guys don't have to agree with me, or even like the way I think, I just want you to see where I'm coming from. I've already said I agree the rules say it shouldn't, I personally am of the opinion that it should be able to destroy a T/B.
This has nothing to do with Brown v Board of Education, majority vote, civil rights, etc. as this is a game with its own sets of rules and precedents. I really don't think any of that is relevant, so let's try to keep these forums as politically neutral as possible. I'd hate to attract more bots from them picking up on those keywords. :P
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Galaktische
IRC
Joined: 27 June 2007
Posts: 354
|
| Posted: 28 November 2008 at 7:26am | IP Logged
|
|
|
MogwaiSC wrote:
| Since when is a point of logic decided by majority vote?*** |
|
|
Since we're playing a game and the only thing that hinges on the outcome is ummm.... nothing of consequence.
I agree the rules say it shouldn't but in my games I'd allow it. So long as the rulings are consistent I'm ok with either interpretation.
This game ceased to have a governing body a long time ago which puts the interpretation of rules in the players hand. How else are we to decide issues which players disagree on? People make their arguements, some based on logic, others based on feelings and the voters decide.
J--
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
RobPro
IRC
Joined: 10 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 835
|
| Posted: 01 December 2008 at 9:21pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I have never disagreed with you about the rules, I just think they should be changed.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
dizzydemon
Devoted
Joined: 05 July 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 43
|
| Posted: 02 December 2008 at 7:11pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I voted yes. As pointed out above, a Vektrean Asteroid Starbase is played and damaged as a terrain - and is a base for all other instances. The key here, I believe, is that the O10 Planetary Destruction says it destructs, in other words, destroys. Since the Vektrean is damaged as terrain, this card would indeed affect it. Anywho that's the way I see it.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MogwaiSC
IRC
Joined: 20 January 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 903
|
| Posted: 02 December 2008 at 7:15pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
dizzydemon wrote:
I voted yes. As pointed out above, a Vektrean
Asteroid Starbase is played and damaged as a terrain - and is a base for all
other instances. The key here, I believe, is that the O10 Planetary
Destruction says it destructs, in other words, destroys. Since
the Vektrean is damaged as terrain, this card would indeed affect it.
Anywho that's the way I see it. |
|
|
See the other thread on this.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Galactus
IRC
Site Administrator
Joined: 25 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: 14 December 2008 at 7:54pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I think it should wipe the T/B off the face of the UNIVERSE!!! The original
intent was to utterly destroy the planet (and all bases on it). The T/B is just a
hollowed out planet/planetoid floating in space...it should die!!!!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Biegel
Exalted
Joined: 19 October 2007
Location: Christmas Island
Posts: 390
|
| Posted: 15 December 2008 at 6:11am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I think that Card rule should take the cake and those playing should eat it. Since their eating it at the table , thowing in the sugar that all present want ,The group doing the bakeing should get the final say.So all I can say is Get Baked (Forgive me Julia were ever you may be.)
__________________
mostspaceman
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ericbsmith
IRC
Joined: 12 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 321
|
| Posted: 15 December 2008 at 6:23am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Galactus wrote:
The original
intent was to utterly destroy the planet (and all bases on it). |
|
|
The original intention of the T/Bs were that they were Terrain, and so did not consume a Command slot. Should we go back and use that original intention as well?
__________________
Eric B. Smith
GE Card Museum
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Biegel
Exalted
Joined: 19 October 2007
Location: Christmas Island
Posts: 390
|
| Posted: 15 December 2008 at 7:02am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Logic Denotes:Terrain is Terrain is Terrain. Unless God, Yes I said God, That could be YOU or ME or US in a game decides Differently. My logic is based on odds(Which I borrow from the foundation). What are the odds of all things coming together to make a Mule.(Read Foundation Series) While ingrossed in a six week reading frenzy and playing Polker at night with me Buddies (I use that term Losely) I pulled Three Royal Flushes in a row(3 different dealers) I went home with 87 bucks in Quarter Max Five Card Draw. I borrowed to get in the game. Any ways to ramble on for all the Cutsie, Flavor, Fantasy of this game ,all games and life boil down to Math(I know this cause Tom Cruise said so, Not. Why do I hear the Funny Farm song in my head Right now.
__________________
mostspaceman
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ericbsmith
IRC
Joined: 12 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 321
|
| Posted: 15 December 2008 at 10:05am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Biegel wrote:
| Logic Denotes:Terrain is Terrain is Terrain. Unless God, Yes I said God, That could be YOU or ME or US in a game decides Differently. |
|
|
I don't need God to come down and decide differently - the T/Bs themselves say they are not Terrain for the purposes of having cards played to them.
Cards that can be played to, combine with, or otherwise affect terrain cannot be played to or against or affect T/Bs because they're Bases, and a Base is a Base is a Base.
__________________
Eric B. Smith
GE Card Museum
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lobo
IRC
Joined: 04 July 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 533
|
| Posted: 15 December 2008 at 10:17am | IP Logged
|
|
|
-I think this boils down to house rules at this point. Of course, everything with this game can go that direction. For my part, i can see that the majority here don't agree with me, and that's fine. But that opinion is clearly against the wording on the card.
Lobo, who's going to see if Galaktische allows him to errata the R/C1 Janitor to provide the card rule: 'As a reaction, discards any card with the words garbage, repair, vacuum, sauce, or T/B in their title."
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MogwaiSC
IRC
Joined: 20 January 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 903
|
| Posted: 15 December 2008 at 11:24pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
ericbsmith wrote:
Cards that can be played to, combine with, or
otherwise affect terrain cannot be played to or against or affect T/Bs
because they're Bases, and a Base is a Base is a Base. |
|
|
Exactly. As a consequence of this you could never play something like an
A10 Artificial Landmass or an A7 Defended Territory to a T/B (yes, I'm
ignoring the A7 has to be played to an equal or lower strength card, but
there are T/B's out there it could be played to). After all, if I have a T/B 6
in play, with a Tac Officer or a Base Commander on it, then I just put the
A7 on it, my sector HQ is virtually bulletproof. (Again, yes, I am aware
there are cards that can be played to get rid of the A7, that's not the
point.)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
RobPro
IRC
Joined: 10 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 835
|
| Posted: 16 December 2008 at 11:31am | IP Logged
|
|
|
On a similar note, would L10 Galactic Armageddon discard T/B's?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Gekonauak
IRC
Joined: 10 May 2006
Posts: 1595
|
| Posted: 16 December 2008 at 11:52am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Yes, it would.
For the same reasons that the O10 would not be able to destroy it.
Edited by Gekonauak on 16 December 2008 at 11:52am
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Blacklassie
Adept
Joined: 19 December 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 99
|
| Posted: 23 March 2009 at 11:13am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I voted no even though our group allows the O10 to kill T/B's. I don't like to argue
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
Galactic Empires : Rules Base
Topic: Should Planetary Destruction be able to e
