RAW:

----------------------------------------------------------

Rest

During a campaign, hero figures can perform an action to

rest. When performing a rest, the hero recovers [strain] equal to his

Endurance.

• If he recovers more [strain] than he has suffered, he recovers one

[damage] for each [strain] he cannot recover.

----------------------------------------------------------

So my question is, if I'm a hero with 0 strain and 5 Endurance, on my Activation can I take the Rest action twice and remove 10 damage?

Yes, that's 100% correct.

However, before you think that the Rest action is overpowered, remember that there is definitely a speed element to these missions. If you watch the Team Covenant video playthroughs, you'll see that the Rebels very rarely have the extra time to spend resting...they've gotta always be on the move and attacking, etc. So obviously, if you need to recover strain or health then you need to Rest, but it seems like there will usually be much better options for your actions.

That's a good question. Does one need to have strain on them in order to rest, or can a player just rest off damage.

Also rest seems very thematic for strain but not so much for wounds. The number of times in our 3 player game in I would charge in using double activation tokens as the wookiee cleave on the charge and second attack then spend a whole turn healing. It seemed very not thematic to be resting while sitting in the center of a pile of alive and dead stormtroopers.

Thanks. I wasn't necessarily judging yet. We are playing our first campaign Sunday. But it does seem powerful. I won't feel so bad playing those nasty Imperial cards...

KennedyHawk, That was my first thought too but I don't think having strain is a requirement for the Rest action as written.

As for thematic I don't really enjoy excessive healing in games--especially when it's source is so nebulous. If it becomes something you just have to do it's no fun. It's too much bookkeeping and often the game can be designed so it's just as easy/hard without it. However I'm more concerned about this in RPGs and tend to let it slide in board games, plus if time is a factor like thereisnotry mentions it becomes more a risk/reward than a no-brainer that everyone just wastes their time having to do.

Also this is only for heroes and also it is not in skirmish.

Yup eventually, like thereisnotry mentioned, we ran out of time for rest and a lot of missions we either complete with a few of us wounded or near wounding.

I remember in some edition of D&D (maybe 4?) each character got a healing surge spell or something that they could use once per encounter. It was a powerful heal but a lot of times it mean you could get through a scenario without a full on healing class although those still existed. It allowed a lot of us cleric players to be more support.

As a support/cleric class sort of person myself I searched for this in IA but have yet to find what I like. The commander was fun but I felt like I contributed very little other than giving other people bonus attacks.

I just played a side mission with a limit of 5 rounds.

Every rest action a hero performed was 10% of their total actions for the mission, a double rest would take a huge chunk out of their game.

Yes, hero's can do a lot of healing but excessively using rest will cost games.

The best imperial tactic is to delay the rebels, stun bleed and rest are all friends of the empire.

We played the Aftermath mission the other night and only one hero used the rest action (and this was only once in the whole mission) despite them taking serious amounts of damage. It all came down to round 5 when I (the Imperials) managed to Wound every hero (my E-Web even managed to "kill" the Smuggler!)

Was fun though!

Awesome feedback mulletcheese and Space Monkey. Thanks.

Does it feel like your success is based on tactical decisions or does it feel more like a rush in and roll dice.

Time limits add suspense but they do take certain tactics off the table by definition. How's the balance of that spectrum playing for you in this game?

Does it feel like your success is based on tactical decisions or does it feel more like a rush in and roll dice.

There was a discussion based on this notion over on BGG.

However, I think it's impossible to properly answer this question until we get a lot of people completing campaigns.

I hope the campaign retains tactical decision making after a couple of play throughs and doesn't turn into a: "screw it, ignore combat and just run to the objectives while resting" type of game

There's definitely a learning curve to the tactics used in the campaign game.

Missions have been varied so far.

I don't think an all rush or an all fighting approach would work.

I haven't played enough games to generalize the best tactics yet.

Time limits add suspense but they do take certain tactics off the table by definition. How's the balance of that spectrum playing for you in this game?

Not all missions have time limits.

A limit is required early on to make up for the small amount of threat gererated each turn, otherwise it's almost a rebel auto win.

So far the limit has forced the rebels to make tactical decisions, for example there is a mission where the rebels have to hack 3 very spread out consoles. Each console is on a seperate path, the rebels have to backtrack to the start before going to the next console. One group cannot make it to all 3 consoles in the time limit.. the rebels have to build 2-3 groups and decide the order in which to tackle the consoles. A much more tactical game than just tanking to one console at a time.

Can you do the same action twice? I thought you could only fight twice? (as the rebel scum)

Can you do the same action twice? I thought you could only fight twice? (as the rebel scum)

Nope:

We played Aftermath and Brushfire (or something to do with fire). Both were timed. The Rebels did not really have time to rest. I think choosing Rest hurt them in Brushfire.

And yes they often have strain to get rid of before getting rid of damage. Strain does pile up.

Here's one thing I noticed. A lot of missions have an Imperial victory if you Wound all Rebels. If you are trying for this victory you have to concentrate all your attacks on one Rebel--preferably one that has acted and has strain. If you end up a few health short of Wounding it's a little frustrating becasue it's a wasted round. They will just full heal. It's a skosh too all or nothing for my tastes.

Having said that I'm not sure it's legal to like a game as much as I like this one.

RAW:

----------------------------------------------------------

Rest

During a campaign, hero figures can perform an action to

rest. When performing a rest, the hero recovers [strain] equal to his

Endurance.

• If he recovers more [strain] than he has suffered, he recovers one

[damage] for each [strain] he cannot recover.

----------------------------------------------------------

So my question is, if I'm a hero with 0 strain and 5 Endurance, on my Activation can I take the Rest action twice and remove 10 damage?

I guess I am the only dissenting vote here because, as written, the recovery of damage is dependent upon the recovery of strain. The entire rule is based on recovering strain. The second half of that even starts with "IF". Nowhere does it talk of recovering damage independent of recovering strain. Seems that if recovering damage was independent of recovering strain, it would say recover strain OR damage up to your endurance.

Even the section on page 8 "Suffering and Recovering" says damage is recovered if you recover "in excess" of the number of strain tokens.

Even the section on page 8 "Suffering and Recovering" says damage is recovered if you recover "in excess" of the number of strain tokens.

I follow your logic; I've even considered that it might have been the intention. But, I must point out that 0 is also a valid number of strain tokens.

I figure you can use a rest action to heal damage, but you can't use a surge to do it, as there is no mention of healing damage with surge. If players want to spend actions healing up before they move on, there is is a risk involved, whether that's more threat to the Imperial player, letting the Imps get in better positions, getting ever closer to that "The Imperial player wins at the end of round 6" condition or whatever.

As a player I agree while heartedly I'm just trying to show the other side. Seems they went to a whole lot of trouble to word it the way they did when they could have just said "A Rest action recovers Strain OR Damage up to your endurance level" and been done with it.

I imagine that will be one of those questions that will be in the FAQ as soon as FFG gets around to it.

I've played 2 missions. Rebels have won both due to being able to spam the heals. The second mission wasn't timed, and they certainly made use of it. They waited to trigger the events until the map was fully cleared of initial forces and they were all fully healed. I wish being wounded had a carry over affect at the end of a mission. Like you had to spend credits to to become fully healed. I managed to wound 2 but they just hid their healthy heroes while the wounded ones went and finished the mission. If you spend all your activation's trying to wound one hero you have to make sure you get it wounded before its next turn, or all your activations would have been wasted. From what I see the imperial player can never bring down the rebels DPS because of this wound shenanigans, while the rebels cut down the imperial players DPS very quickly with every blow.

Maybe more suited in the campaign section??

Besides yes, you may Rest even when you have no Strain and you will be allowed to remove Damage equal to the Endurance.

Basically the equation is (at all times):

Damage removed = (Endurance) - (Amount of Strain)

I do agree that you don't always have time to rest, but if resting gives benefits (Battle Meditation, Emergency Medpac) then go for it. I've found it really helpful when outnumbered and having to just hold an area for X rounds: double rest and end turn.