Let's assume, I have 2 deployment cards of regular Stormtroopers, both of them not exhausted, and I have Change of Plans and Strength in Numbers on my hand.
I use one of the two groups of Stormtroopers, exhaust their card, their activation is resolved. I use Change of Plans to exhaust the other Stormtroopers' card and ready the card of the Stormtroopers, that just resolved their activation. I use Strength in Numbers and reactivate the same deployment card again.
Is that allowed?
You cannot activate a deployment card that is exhausted.
Lets' go through what happened.
Stormtrooper 1 (Ready)
Stormtrooper 2 (Ready)
Stormtrooper 1 (Activated -> Exhausted)
Stormtrooper 2 (Ready)
Use change of plans to exhaust 2 and ready 1
Stormtrooper 1 (Ready)
Stormtrooper 2 (Exhausted)
Stormtrooper 1 (Activated -> Exhausted)
Stormtrooper 2 (Exhausted)
Use Strength in Numbers... but wait, there is no other group to activate! Both troopers are currently exhausted.
Stormtrooper 1 (Exhausted)
Stormtrooper 2 (Exhausted)
I really meant:
Stormtroopers 1 (Ready)
Stormtroopers 2 (Ready)
Activate Stormtroopers 1
Stormtroopers 1 (Exhausted)
Stormtroopers 2 (Ready)
Use change of plans to exhaust 2 and ready 1
Stormtroopers 1 (Ready)
Stormtroopers 2 (Exhausted)
Is it allowed to use Strength in Numbers to activate Stormtroopers 1 again?
Yes - this is a legal move. Both Change of Plans and Strength of numbers are played at the same timing instance. Keep in mind you opponent has an opportunity to play a command card in the same timing instance in between your two cards, if he could possibly change the outcome somehow.
In a previous post I believe this was considered NOT possible since Stormtrooper 1 is not 'another card'?
Hmm. The use of the word 'another' in there would lead me to believe that, no, you couldn't do that. but then again, it says "another" not "an other"
I'm inclined to say no, but not with 100% certainty. This might be worth sending an email to FFG about.
Hmm. The use of the word 'another' in there would lead me to believe that, no, you couldn't do that. but then again, it says "another" not "an other"
I'm inclined to say no, but not with 100% certainty. This might be worth sending an email to FFG about.
You would never say" an other" instead of "another". This is not a legal play.