Terminal Network ends at the start of the next turn.

In Data Heist, the doors are opened at the start of the turn.

Which one is resolved first? / Does R2-D2 choose, which door can be opened?

Isn't the trigger for the doors on Data Heist still at the end of the mission even though the doors open at the start of the round?

As always, it would be appreciated if you would write the relevant cards in here in full, so people who don't have constant access to (all of) their cards might chime in.

Terminal Network
► Use while adjacent to a terminal. Until the start of the next round, you gain control of all terminals, regardless of which figures are adjacent to them.

Data Heist

Start of each Round: For each terminal a player controls, he may open 1 door of his choice.

RRG, page 2, Timing: In a skirmish, resolve mission rules first, followed by effects triggered by the player with the initiative, then effects triggered by his opponent.

Therefore, R2-D2 chooses, which door can be opened?

It sounds like terminal network functions right up until a new round starts. Then, once the new round has acutally started (and thus terminal network has ended), players get to open doors.

The crux is the word "until" in Terminal Network. It's neither "up until" nor "until including".

Since "Start of the Round" isn't an official phase, I would say it really doesn't matter. The triggers happen simultaneously and dancorsi outlined how to resolve the conflict. Mission rules (opening doors) first, then effects triggered by the player (terminal network).

I've already argued in a past tournament about how Terminal Network does nothing with Data Heist in regards to rules. I've submitted the question:

Terminal Network only lasts until the Start of the next round at which time it ends so it would not last long enough to effect the Start of Round effect from the Data Heist mission.

Thanks!

Paul Winchester

Creative Content Developer

Fantasy Flight Games

I'm not one to argue against official rulings, but this one makes no sense at all.
The phase itself Paul uses to state the ruling is contradictory.
But since I'm not a big fan of Skirmish, I'll let this go and keep my rage for nonsense rulings that affects Campaigns.

I'm not one to argue against official rulings, but this one makes no sense at all.

The phase itself Paul uses to state the ruling is contradictory.

But since I'm not a big fan of Skirmish, I'll let this go and keep my rage for nonsense rulings that affects Campaigns.

How is this nonsensical or contradictory? It's pure logic.

"Until the start of each round" means exactly that. If it *IS* the start of the round, then you have already passed the time frame covered by "until the start of the next round".

If I say "until tomorrow" that would mean up to 11:59:59pm. "Tomorrow" is 12:00:00am.

I'm not one to argue against official rulings, but this one makes no sense at all.

The phase itself Paul uses to state the ruling is contradictory.

But since I'm not a big fan of Skirmish, I'll let this go and keep my rage for nonsense rulings that affects Campaigns.

How is this nonsensical or contradictory? It's pure logic.

"Until the start of each round" means exactly that. If it *IS* the start of the round, then you have already passed the time frame covered by "until the start of the next round".

If I say "until tomorrow" that would mean up to 11:59:59pm. "Tomorrow" is 12:00:00am.

If I state: "Guys, this sale goes until tomorrow, go check it out!" you will understand that this sale is over today when I mean is that tomorrow is the last day of the sale.

So I see this until X as including X and you are arguing that until X is actually until right before X starts , with, frankly, makes no sense for me.

For the game, my point is that if the Start of the Round was not intended to be part of the card effect, using End of the Round would be a more natural (and I dare to say, correct) way to phrase it.

I'm not one to argue against official rulings, but this one makes no sense at all.

The phase itself Paul uses to state the ruling is contradictory.

But since I'm not a big fan of Skirmish, I'll let this go and keep my rage for nonsense rulings that affects Campaigns.

How is this nonsensical or contradictory? It's pure logic.

"Until the start of each round" means exactly that. If it *IS* the start of the round, then you have already passed the time frame covered by "until the start of the next round".

If I say "until tomorrow" that would mean up to 11:59:59pm. "Tomorrow" is 12:00:00am.

If I state: "Guys, this sale goes until tomorrow, go check it out!" you will understand that this sale is over today when I mean is that tomorrow is the last day of the sale.

So I see this until X as including X and you are arguing that until X is actually until right before X starts , with, frankly, makes no sense for me.

For the game, my point is that if the Start of the Round was not intended to be part of the card effect, using End of the Round would be a more natural (and I dare to say, correct) way to phrase it.

You have to understand that until is a duration, seen as a binary switch state determining when the duration expires. Either the condition is on or off, there is no middle ground. Once the "start of round" condition is present, the effect terminates. Your logic suggests that because "start of round" has several components to it, that the effect should persist during all the components. This flawed logic is why you cannot make sense of the ruling.

"Wait until your father gets home". *NOT* "Wait until your father gets home, takes off his shoes, hits the bathroom, eats dinner, and walks the dog".

"This pumpkin will remain in its carriage state until midnight". *NOT* "This pumpkin will remain in its carriage state until midnight, plus the other 59 seconds of midnight."

"You will be awake until the drugs kick in" *NOT* "You will be awake until the drugs kick in, and then you can get in your car and drive across town before you fall asleep".

I'm not one to argue against official rulings, but this one makes no sense at all.

The phase itself Paul uses to state the ruling is contradictory.

But since I'm not a big fan of Skirmish, I'll let this go and keep my rage for nonsense rulings that affects Campaigns.

How is this nonsensical or contradictory? It's pure logic.

"Until the start of each round" means exactly that. If it *IS* the start of the round, then you have already passed the time frame covered by "until the start of the next round".

If I say "until tomorrow" that would mean up to 11:59:59pm. "Tomorrow" is 12:00:00am.

If I state: "Guys, this sale goes until tomorrow, go check it out!" you will understand that this sale is over today when I mean is that tomorrow is the last day of the sale.

So I see this until X as including X and you are arguing that until X is actually until right before X starts , with, frankly, makes no sense for me.

For the game, my point is that if the Start of the Round was not intended to be part of the card effect, using End of the Round would be a more natural (and I dare to say, correct) way to phrase it.

You have to understand that until is a duration, seen as a binary switch state determining when the duration expires. Either the condition is on or off, there is no middle ground. Once the "start of round" condition is present, the effect terminates. Your logic suggests that because "start of round" has several components to it, that the effect should persist during all the components. This flawed logic is why you cannot make sense of the ruling.

"Wait until your father gets home". *NOT* "Wait until your father gets home, takes off his shoes, hits the bathroom, eats dinner, and walks the dog".

"This pumpkin will remain in its carriage state until midnight". *NOT* "This pumpkin will remain in its carriage state until midnight, plus the other 59 seconds of midnight."

"You will be awake until the drugs kick in" *NOT* "You will be awake until the drugs kick in, and then you can get in your car and drive across town before you fall asleep".

I strongly disagree.

You are saying that my lack of understanding has to do with logic,

I'm saying that this discussion has to do with semantics and how words are used.

I'm arguing that until is a inclusive statement. You are saying is not.

Also, when you say that I'm assuming that "Start of Round" has several elements to it, that is not true.

IF "Start of Round" THEN "Control of all terminals over"

IF "Start of Round" THEN "Each controlled terminal gives the controller the option to open or close one door"

They are one of the same and there is a timing conflict.

You cannot argue semantics if you do not understand the definition of the words that are being used.

Merriam Webster's definition is as follows:

Full Definition of UNTIL
1 chiefly Scottish : to
2 —used as a function word to indicate continuance (as of an action or condition) to a specified time <stayed until morning>
3 : before 2 <not available until tomorrow> <we don't open until ten>

source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/until

Main Entry: 1un·til
Pronunciation: <omitted>
Function: preposition
1 : up to the time of <stayed until morning>
2 : BEFORE 3 <doesn't open until ten>

source: http://www.wordcentral.com/cgi-bin/student?book=Student&va=until

I'm not trying to be rude or an a-hole or anything, I am just trying to show you how your personal (and incorrect) definition is affecting your understanding of the ruling.

Either embrace knowledge and broaden your horizons, or choose to ignore them. Either way, the logic of the ruling is sound.

1 : up to the time of <stayed until morning>

Actually, I would assume that in the example "I stayed until morning" I was still there in the morning.

"I will be back before morning." means, that it will not be morning, when I'm back.

"I will be back until morning." means, that it will already be morning but not later than that, when I'm back.

Fizz, I usually respect your opinion and totally agree with what you're saying, but in this case, I think you're totally wrong.

If the card would say before instead of until , I would agree with you. But it doesn't.

Fizz, I'm not trying to be rude or an a-hole or anything, I am just trying to show you how your personal (and incorrect) definition is affecting your understanding of the ruling.

Either embrace knowledge and broaden your horizons, or choose to ignore them. Either way, the logic of the ruling is not sound.

We can agree to disagree. Until is pretty clear to me as meaning "before".

Just know that your English Literature and Language Arts teachers are crying themselves to sleep tonight, knowing they failed to teach you proper use of the preposition "until".

I would also agree that it should have been a bit clearer, as shown by the need for a FAQ and the amount of people here who are confused by it.

We can agree to disagree. Until is pretty clear to me as meaning "before".

Yes, we can.

I speak some more languages and I'm not a native speaker, so I admit, I may be wrong or mix things up. Having said that, half of my family comes from England and I asked my cousin, who has to do a lot with contract law due to his job. He said:

When I say, I'm there before 14:00, it's OK, when I'm there at 13:59, but not later.

When I say, I'm there until 14:00, it's OK, when I'm there at 14:00, but not later.

But actually it doesn't matter at all. Your opinion, my opinion, they don't count. It's the officials' opinion at FFG that does. I'm sure, there will be an official ruling in form of an updated FAQ. Therefore, I will not argue any further on this, except for one thing:

Please, FFG, be a little bit more precise on wordings.

We can agree to disagree. Until is pretty clear to me as meaning "before".

Yup. I think the problem is that language is pretty subjective. Resorting to dictionary definitions is fine, but if they are lacking, any further interpretation is valid. This is why the option to ask rules questions to FFG is so great. Paul said Terminal Network is resolving before the start of the next round, so that's how it should be played. Regardless if it fits the subjective definition of the word "until" for the players.

I too said it would last until the moment the door mechanic triggers, but I was wrong. Happens. Now I know and will play accordingly.

The FAQ update puts the nail in this coffin. R2-D2 + Terminal Network = no doors for a contested terminal.

Q: When an ability’s effect lasts “until” a certain timing window (e.g. “Until the end of the round…”), does that effect persist through that timing window? A: No. These abilities’ effects end immediately as the specified timing window begins, before any other effects in that timing window are triggered. So, in the given example, the effect that persists “until the end of the round” would expire before any other “end of round” effects are triggered.