Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
A Gift from the Past
Submitted
Guest
, -- | Last updated --
![]() |
A Gift from the PastType: Event Cost: 0 Force Icons: 2 Faction: Light Jedi Action: Remove a target unit you control from the Force. Then, commit a different target unit you control to the Force. Resources Generated: Block Number: 166 - 5 of 6 Set: Jump to Lightspeed Number: 0818 Illustrator: Matt Zeilinger |
0 Jedi Knights have rated this card!
Click on a star and be the first to rate this card! |
|
Other Cards in Block 166 | |
---|---|
Recent Decks Using This Card: |
Star Wars and all associated elements are © 2011 Lucasfilm Ltd. & TM. All rights reserved. Fantasy Flight Games, Fantasy Flight Supply, and the FFG logo are trademarks of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.
11 Comments
Question: Can this be played if I have all my units committed to the force? I'm thinking the 'Then' part isn't included in the play restrictions, but wanted to make sure.
I'm reading that according to FAQ 3.6, you cannot play this if you have no uncommitted units at the time you initiate the action. All aspects of the effect must be able to legally resolve at the time of initiation.
"If, given the current game state, it is impossible for at least one aspect of the effect to resolve, the ability cannot be triggered."
If the second sentence had a trailing "if able" it would a legal initiation, see cards such as Aggression, Punch It and Entangled.
Thanks for your input. I checked 3.6 but see it differently and have convinced myself it can be played. It says 'at least some independent aspect of the card's ability effect might successfully resolve'. Removing a unit from the force should be enough to make it playable, and the rest fizzles. Committing a different unit is a dependent aspect. I'll confirm with FFG unless there are other thoughts.
FAQ Section 3.6 does not prevent A Gift from the Past from being played if all of your units are committed.
I'm confused, then. Can I get the "explain it like I'm five" explanation?
3.6 says if it is impossible for at least one aspect to resolve under the current game state, it can't be initiated.
I can certainly remove a unit from the force, no problem there. But how do I choose another target unit legally, if all of them are committed?
When I have all my units committed, is it not impossible to commit them again?
3.6 says if it is possible for at least one independent aspect to resolve under the current game state, it can be initiated.
"3.6 says if it is impossible for at least one aspect to resolve under the current game state, it can't be initiated."
that's just a wording problem: it just means that at least one aspect has to resolve
EDIT FOR CLARITY
Actually, the choosing a target is a different issue from section 3.6. In addition to needing to have at least part of the effect resolve, you also need to be able to choose legal targets. That may keep it from working, depending on how the targeting requirements are interpreted. I'll double check.
-Section 3.6 of the FAQ is satisfied because there is an aspect of the effect that can resolve.
-The targeting restrictions are met because it only requires that you target another unit, not another unit that is not committed (i.e. There is no implied targeting restriction that requires you to pick a non-committed target).
I'm no longer. I was reading the language as if it said if it were impossible for any of the aspects to resolve then it wouldn't resolve, instead of reading it as if it were impossible for any of the aspects to resolve.
If it was worded as "The ability cannot be triggered if none of the aspects of the effect can resolve given the current game state" I wouldn't have gotten confused.
The intent is that as long as one aspect can resolve, it's good, not that all aspects need to be able to resolve
Rulings
http://www.cardgamed...st-lost-master/