32 replies to this topic

[BobaFett]

I got a few rules queries concerning the upcoming brainiac.  I'll just post them in order and see how many we can get answered.  I apologize in advance if one or more of these were asked in one of the other brainiac threads.

 

1. stolen plans: After enhanced objective generates 1 or more resources, draw 1 card.  So if you make the first "1" a "0" then you just get to draw a card whenever you want after you use brainiac on it?

 

2. Echo caverns: Action: focus this enhancement to choose 2 targets that share a Trait.  Until the end of the phase, one of those units loses a combat icon of  your choice, and the other gains that combat icon.  Does this work at all if you make the "2" a 1?  Doesn't seem like it but who knows these days with FFG.

 

3. Clearing House: After the opponent resolves a card effect that draws 1 or more cards, remove 1 focus token from this enhancement.  So if you make the "1 or more" a "0", does that mean every time your opponent initiates any card effect during that phase you get to remove 1 focus token?

 

4. this last one encompasses a whole host of cards so i'm not going to put all the texts down, just list the cards since its all the same issue.  Fleet command center, hoth scout, yoda's protection, security control center, Chewbacca (IE version).  So all of these add 1 shield or such to a unit.  If you bump thenumber to add multiple shields to a single unit, does that become a legal play, like using our most desperate hour, or kashyyk resistance hiedout,  since a card is breaking the rules, or is that still going to be considered illegal to have multiple shields on 1 card.  This one is a bit tricky, i hope its ruled that if a card effect is breaking the 1 shield per card rule, its legal but again, i don't know what FFG will rule.

[doctormungmung]

I've got a rule query into FFG on #1, and haven't heard back yet, so I'll say the jury is still out on that one.

 

2. I believe that if Brainiac bumps Echo Caverns to 1, I believe that it's still legal, but will have no net result, as the target unit is first losing the chosen icon, then gaining it back.  On the other hand, if you change 2 to 3, then the first unit would lose an icon, and the other two would gain the icon, as it has been stated that grammar is corrected to make sense with changing singular/pluralities (in this case other would go to others).

 

3. I believe that you have that one correct.

 

4.  I think you could still initiate the effect, but then when the second shield would get placed, it gets discarded.  But that's more of a hunch.

[dbmeboy]

I've gone ahead and submitted all questions to FFG.

[Scottie]

I'd venture to say that it isn't possible for a card to generate zero resources and still have "generated resources", so making that alteration you are just blanking stolen plans for the round.

[BobaFett]

Yeah, some of these I think we can take pretty sure guesses on bit I've got a store championship this coming weekend so I'm trying to decide if I want to build some jank deck with brainiac, so I want to know for sure what since of these answers are before I decide, and with some of FFGs rulings I dare not assume without double checking.

And these were only the light side questions. I have yet to go through the DS cards so I'm sure that will generate a few more questions.

[dbmeboy]

Brainiac certainly opens up plenty of complicated interactions, as is fitting for a card with his name.

[dbmeboy]

Best Answer

 1. Stolen Plans: After enhanced objective generates 1 or more resources, draw 1 card. So if you make the first "1" a "0" then you just get to draw a card whenever you want after you use Brainiac on it?

 

The trigger for Stolen Plans involves the generation of resources. You cannot “generate 0 resources” and have that be a successful resolution of “generating resources.” In order to successfully generate resources from something, you must actually generate some non-zero amount of resources. So, this use of Brainiac won’t produce the effect of just being able to draw a card unless the enhanced objective actually generates 1 or more resources.

 

 2. Echo caverns: Action: focus this enhancement to choose 2 targets that share a Trait. Until the end of the phase, one of those units loses a combat icon of your choice, and the other gains that combat icon. Does this work at all if you make the "2" a 1?

 

In order for something to be “shared,” it is required that there be more than a single entity with the thing to be “shared.” A card does not “share” a Trait that it has with itself, it *has* that Trait. This is similar to the definition of “switch” which requires that there be something on both ends of the switch in order for that to take place.

 

3. Clearing House: After the opponent resolves a card effect that draws 1 or more cards, remove 1 focus token from this enhancement. So if you make the "1 or more" a "0", does that mean every time your opponent initiates any card effect during that phase you get to remove 1 focus token?

 

This situation is the same as Question 1. Clearing House requires that an effect actually draw a non-zero cards in order for the triggering condition to be met.

 

Another way of phrasing it: something that does not actually change the game state (i.e. “generating 0 resources” or “draw 0 cards”, etc) does not generate a triggering condition for other effects to trigger off of.

 

4. This last one encompasses a whole host of cards so i'm not going to put all the texts down, just list the cards since its all the same issue. Fleet command center, hoth scout, yoda's protection, security control center, Chewbacca (IE version). So all of these add 1 shield or such to a unit. If you bump thenumber to add multiple shields to a single unit, does that become a legal play, like using our most desperate hour, or kashyyk resistance hiedout, since a card is breaking the rules, or is that still going to be considered illegal to have multiple shields on 1 card.

 

This is a case of the golden rule coming into play (and follows the precedent that the Kashyyyk Resistance Hideout establishes), with a few caveats and things to be aware of.

 

The basic rule (established in the Rulebook, page 23) is: “A shield token may not be assigned to a card that already has a shield token.” This rule does not use the phrase “cannot,” therefore, it *can* be overridden by card text as per the Golden Rule (page 11) when there is a direct contradiction. If a card effect is attempting to place 2 shield tokens at once, that is in direct contradiction to the rule, so the card text takes precedence.

 

As a caveat to the above, if that card effect does not let you put a shield token (or 2) on a unit that is already shielded, you would *not* be able to use it if the target is already shielded. In that case, even if you didn’t use Brainiac on the effect, you would not be able to use effect to place a single shield on the already shielded unit. For example, the Kashyyyk Resistance Hideout does let you place shield tokens on an already shielded unit, but Imperial Entanglements Chewbacca does not.

--

Erik Dahlman
LCG Developer
Fantasy Flight Games

[doctormungmung]

Ok, the ruling on "0 something" makes me wonder if changing the text on BotF Dash has any effect:

 

Action: During an engagement, spend 1 resource to have this unit gain a [Unit Damage] icon until the end of the engagement. Any friendly player may initiate this effect.

 

Can I spend 0 resources for infinite guns, or does the 0 in there make that effect null?

[sdrewthomson]

I guess it doesn't work, since you didn't "spend" a resource, just like you don't actually "generate" a resource or "draw" cards in the examples above. So I guess EoD Lando doesn't work either...

[dbmeboy]

Reducing a cost to 0 is very different than attempting to change a trigger condition to effectively "when nothing happens."  All Erik seems to be saying to me is that trigger conditions must actually be a change in game state.

[doctormungmung]

Reducing a cost to 0 is very different than attempting to change a trigger condition to effectively "when nothing happens."  All Erik seems to be saying to me is that trigger conditions must actually be a change in game state.

 

Mind checking with Erik on the reduced cost to 0 side of things?  You're faster at getting questions answered than I am (I submitted the question on Stolen Plans on March 1st and still haven't gotten a response).

[dbmeboy]

Yes, reducing costs does work. There and many things that have a 0 cost. “Action: Pay 1 resource to…..” can be changed to “Action: Pay 0 resources to….” and still function.

 

Changing a numeral in a triggering condition does not work, however; as previously noted.

--

Erik Dahlman
LCG Developer
Fantasy Flight Games

[mazugpeti]

Can I change a cards printed cost?

For Example: I have 2 'Sleuth Scouts' (While this unit is attacking alone, enemy units with printed cost 3 or higher cannot be declared as defenders.) And my opponent has an 'Emperor's Royal Guard'. Can I change the Guards printed costs, to attack with both of my sleuths unopposed?

[theChony]

Can I change a cards printed cost?

For Example: I have 2 'Sleuth Scouts' (While this unit is attacking alone, enemy units with printed cost 3 or higher cannot be declared as defenders.) And my opponent has an 'Emperor's Royal Guard'. Can I change the Guards printed costs, to attack with both of my sleuths unopposed?

No, even the great Brainiac can't change the dry ink on a card.

[BobaFett]

 

 1. Stolen Plans: After enhanced objective generates 1 or more resources, draw 1 card. So if you make the first "1" a "0" then you just get to draw a card whenever you want after you use Brainiac on it?

 

The trigger for Stolen Plans involves the generation of resources. You cannot “generate 0 resources” and have that be a successful resolution of “generating resources.” In order to successfully generate resources from something, you must actually generate some non-zero amount of resources. So, this use of Brainiac won’t produce the effect of just being able to draw a card unless the enhanced objective actually generates 1 or more resources.

 

Yeah, figured on this one, mainly because infinite card draw would be a idiculously bad idea.  Although its these types of interactions that are just going to make Brainiac cause many a headache trying to explain all these different interactions and all the new ones to come to even seasoned veterans.

 

 

2. Echo caverns: Action: focus this enhancement to choose 2 targets that share a Trait. Until the end of the phase, one of those units loses a combat icon of your choice, and the other gains that combat icon. Does this work at all if you make the "2" a 1?

 

In order for something to be “shared,” it is required that there be more than a single entity with the thing to be “shared.” A card does not “share” a Trait that it has with itself, it *has* that Trait. This is similar to the definition of “switch” which requires that there be something on both ends of the switch in order for that to take place.

 

 

makes sense, but what about the other scenario that the good doctor brought up, where you change the 2 units to 3 units that share a trait?  do you steal the combat icon from the one unit you choose and give it to the other two?

 

3. Clearing House: After the opponent resolves a card effect that draws 1 or more cards, remove 1 focus token from this enhancement. So if you make the "1 or more" a "0", does that mean every time your opponent initiates any card effect during that phase you get to remove 1 focus token?

 

This situation is the same as Question 1. Clearing House requires that an effect actually draw a non-zero cards in order for the triggering condition to be met.

 

Another way of phrasing it: something that does not actually change the game state (i.e. “generating 0 resources” or “draw 0 cards”, etc) does not generate a triggering condition for other effects to trigger off of.

 

I don't like this ruling at all.......bad imo.  2 conditions to meet. did i resolve a card effect? yes, did that card effect draw zero or more cards? yes.  A focus token should come off of clearing house.  Highly dislike.

 

 

4. This last one encompasses a whole host of cards so i'm not going to put all the texts down, just list the cards since its all the same issue. Fleet command center, hoth scout, yoda's protection, security control center, Chewbacca (IE version). So all of these add 1 shield or such to a unit. If you bump thenumber to add multiple shields to a single unit, does that become a legal play, like using our most desperate hour, or kashyyk resistance hiedout, since a card is breaking the rules, or is that still going to be considered illegal to have multiple shields on 1 card.

 

This is a case of the golden rule coming into play (and follows the precedent that the Kashyyyk Resistance Hideout establishes), with a few caveats and things to be aware of.

 

The basic rule (established in the Rulebook, page 23) is: “A shield token may not be assigned to a card that already has a shield token.” This rule does not use the phrase “cannot,” therefore, it *can* be overridden by card text as per the Golden Rule (page 11) when there is a direct contradiction. If a card effect is attempting to place 2 shield tokens at once, that is in direct contradiction to the rule, so the card text takes precedence.

 

As a caveat to the above, if that card effect does not let you put a shield token (or 2) on a unit that is already shielded, you would *not* be able to use it if the target is already shielded. In that case, even if you didn’t use Brainiac on the effect, you would not be able to use effect to place a single shield on the already shielded unit. For example, the Kashyyyk Resistance Hideout does let you place shield tokens on an already shielded unit, but Imperial Entanglements Chewbacca does not.

 

Ok so to recap, with chewbacca or really any of these cards that can put 2+ shields down on a single card, it would be a legal play to place 2 shields on them because the card thats placing the shields breaks the rule, but if there was already shields on the unit/s it would not be legal since these cards don't allow you to shield already shielded units/objectives like the kashyyk resistance hideout and our most desperate hour do?

[BobaFett]

Can I change a cards printed cost?

For Example: I have 2 'Sleuth Scouts' (While this unit is attacking alone, enemy units with printed cost 3 or higher cannot be declared as defenders.) And my opponent has an 'Emperor's Royal Guard'. Can I change the Guards printed costs, to attack with both of my sleuths unopposed?

 

You wouldn't need to do that, no?  you could just change the wording on the sleuth scout to say printed cost 2 or higher and then the guard couldn't block.   I thought i remembered reading you can't change a cards printed cost but you could certainly change the requirements on sleuth scout or blockade runners from 3 or higher to 2 or higher and that does essentially the same thing.

[sdrewthomson]

You wouldn't need to do that, no?  you could just change the wording on the sleuth scout to say printed cost 2 or higher and then the guard couldn't block.   I thought i remembered reading you can't change a cards printed cost but you could certainly change the requirements on sleuth scout or blockade runners from 3 or higher to 2 or higher and that does essentially the same thing.

 

Yep

[scwont]

Can I change a cards printed cost?

For Example: I have 2 'Sleuth Scouts' (While this unit is attacking alone, enemy units with printed cost 3 or higher cannot be declared as defenders.) And my opponent has an 'Emperor's Royal Guard'. Can I change the Guards printed costs, to attack with both of my sleuths unopposed?

 

You wouldn't need to do that, no?  you could just change the wording on the sleuth scout to say printed cost 2 or higher and then the guard couldn't block.   I thought i remembered reading you can't change a cards printed cost but you could certainly change the requirements on sleuth scout or blockade runners from 3 or higher to 2 or higher and that does essentially the same thing.

Brainiac can only affect 1 of the Sleuth Scouts, so it does produce a different result in this specific scenario. The other Sleuth would still have the same text so the Royal Guard could block it. If the Royal Guard were able to have its cost altered, it wouldn't be able to block either Sleuth.

[BobaFett]

Brainiac can only affect 1 of the Sleuth Scouts, so it does produce a different result in this specific scenario. The other Sleuth would still have the same text so the Royal Guard could block it. If the Royal Guard were able to have its cost altered, it wouldn't be able to block either Sleuth.

 

I never said you could affect more than 1.  its a limit once per turn ability so that goes without saying.  What I said was you can't change printed cost of a unit,  but what you can do is change the required printed cost needed to block form the scouts ability, because Mazugpeti suggested changing a cards printed cost, which you could change, but would have no affect since its printed cost is still whats listed on the card.

[scwont]

I never said you could affect more than 1.  its a limit once per turn ability so that goes without saying.  What I said was you can't change printed cost of a unit,  but what you can do is change the required printed cost needed to block form the scouts ability, because Mazugpeti suggested changing a cards printed cost, which you could change, but would have no affect since its printed cost is still whats listed on the card.

I never said you said you could affect more than 1. I said that if Brainiac were able to change the Royal Guard's printed cost (which it can't), it would allow multiple different Sleuth Scouts to bypass it. Which is different from changing 1 Sleuth Scout's ability, which only allows that specific Scout to bypass the Guard. All hypothetical of course since the printed cost can't actually change.