Yup... I was really pleased to see that command card, when I opened my RTH box! This card is now an auto include in all my deck and a good thing IMO... To many times Take initiative is the turning point of the game and it is clear that's the card they had in mind, when they created that one!

Cancelling Take initiative or Element of Surprise will be in most game, a game changer! Especially with TI since Negation is played AFTER the opponent's card, which means that your opponent will have engaged his character + he does not get the Initiative, which is huge!

Will this card stop people from playing TI by fear of having an engaged plus most probably death unit? TI now become a serious gamble...

Discuss

It would be great if you could give us the text of the card if you want us to discuss it. Most people don't have their hoth boxes yet and it is not listed on ia-armies.com atm.

It would be great if you could give us the text of the card if you want us to discuss it. Most people don't have their hoth boxes yet and it is not listed on ia-armies.com atm.

It negates the effect of a command card with cost 0.

If it negates a card then you should not have to exhaust one of your cards. Thé whole card should be negated including the exhaust part.

However, it does sound like a interesting card anyway, will still play with Take Ini. To good to pass up.

Could you still give the exact text, please?

Exact Text would be useful.

If you take a look at Take Initiative you can see that you don't have to exhaust of your Cards if it gets canceld as there will be no Then .

Exact text: "Use after your opponent plays a Command card with a cost of 0. Discard that card and cancel its effects"

It is written then in TI and it is part of the cost for playing the card. Since negation mention After and not while the card is being played. You have to play the whole card and its effect first, The cost to play TI must still be met, but the overall effect is cancelled: the effect of taking the initiative.

I am pretty sure about that, would have to write to ffg to be absolutely sure.

So you cancel its effects. Including canceling the exhausting of the deployment card.

Well in a lot of games "Magic" comes to mind here... Even if you cancel an action or a card, if the cost was paid, it is not undone if the card/action gets cancelled. The effect is negated but the cost for playing the card like engaging a unit for instance remains paid and cannot be undone... You just not unengaged an already engaged card... Anyway I am going to write to them directly, that way we will be absolutely sure... Nevertheless... I think that card is now an auto include as much as TI is.

Well in a lot of games "Magic" comes to mind here... Even if you cancel an action or a card, if the cost was paid, it is not undone if the card/action gets cancelled. The effect is negated but the cost for playing the card like engaging a unit for instance remains paid and cannot be undone... You just not unengaged an already engaged card... Anyway I am going to write to them directly, that way we will be absolutely sure... Nevertheless... I think that card is now an auto include as much as TI is.

But exhausting the deployment card isn't a mechanical "cost" of playing take initiative - it's a perceived cost. Mechanically it's an effect of playing the card:

"Use at the start of the round to claim the initiative token. Then exhaust one of your deployment cards."

Just because something has a perceived negative effect, that doesn't make it a cost of playing the card.

I think VisionVoid has it exactly right. Exhausting your deployment card isn't written as a cost of playing the card, but an effect.

To me, it reads like an interrupt when the card is played, and not after. Therefore, if you cancel "Take Initiative" the opponent would not have to exhaust a deployment card.

It's more like: "I'm playing this card!" "Think again!" and you act as if the card was never played in the first place (it's just discarded).

You guys are probably right, but in any case.. I asked ffg. The thing that bugs me is that Negation mentions AFTER the card is played. Not while... So after the card ia played.. So you played TI and you engaged the card and now I am cancelling after everything is done...

Yeah, but I already took the initiative token, too. If you can't cancel exhausting the deployment card, you can't cancel taking the initiative.

I don't see why this is so hard.

Here is what Take Initiative says: Use at the start of a round to claim the initiative token. Then exhaust 1 of your Deployment cards.

Negation cancels the effects of the command card.

So, you give back the initiative token and unexhaust the deployment card you exhausted (or just don't do anything on the card in the first place!).

Ok, I see it happening like this. One side plays take initiative, before it resolves other side plays negation, so nothing writen in take initiative happens

Just got the answer... And it's not helping us much....

"Hi,

Unfortunately, we don’t answer any rules questions regarding products immediately after release. We are collecting any rules questions that come in for a period of 30 days to ensure clarity and consistency of answers. After that period has elapsed, I’ll be sure to get back to you with an answer.

Thanks!"

For the meantime I will play it as if the caracter is not engaged, like there seems to be a consensus here, but will see... Do they mean by effect, the whole card effect including engaging or only the primary effect of the card which is to take initiative...

They mean everything written on the card.

Exact text: "Use after your opponent plays a Command card with a cost of 0. Discard that card and cancel its effects"

it seems to me that there are 2 primary interpretations ->

1. I can totally see where tropoFarmer is coming from with his "interrupt" interpretation:

To me, it reads like an interrupt when the card is played, and not after. Therefore, if you cancel "Take Initiative" the opponent would not have to exhaust a deployment card.

It's more like: "I'm playing this card!" "Think again!" and you act as if the card was never played in the first place (it's just discarded).

...in this sense, to play a command card is simply to reveal it - however, the rules give a more all-encompassing definition of what it means to "play" a command card:

from page 5 of the Skirmish Guide > Command Cards:

A player can play each Command card when specified on that card.

To play the card, he:

1. reveals it to his opponent
2. resolves its ability ("If the card has the (Special Action) icon, that figure must use one of its actions to resolve the ability on the card.")
3. discards the card

...and given that definition of what it means to play a command card, I'm actually leaning more towards the following for Negation:

2. Jagd's interpretation:

It is written "then" in Take Initiative and it is part of the cost for playing the card. Since Negation mentions "after" and not "while" the card is being played. You have to play the whole card and its effect first. The cost to play Take Initiative must still be met, but the overall effect is cancelled: the effect of taking the initiative.

...the idea then is that that card is revealed and the ability is resolved (including the player having suffered the necessary cost to resolve the ability), however then Negation can be used at which point any of that ability's effects are ignored / cancelled, and the played command card is discarded - and here, "...[t]hen exhaust one of your Deployment cards" would be an effect (not a cost) which is then cancelled

but we could definitely use a ruling from FFG on this

Just simply NO. I can not see how you can interpret this card like that.

If you cancel a card then you cancel the card, it is as easy as that.You wont exhaust any of your cards if the cards gets cancelled.

Why do people alwayse have to read stuff into rules that does not exist.

Just do what the card says.

Just simply NO. I can not see how you can interpret this card like that.

If you cancel a card then you cancel the card, it is as easy as that.You wont exhaust any of your cards if the cards gets cancelled.

Why do people alwayse have to read stuff into rules that does not exist.

Just do what the card says.

Lol... just relax buddy, we will have the definitive answer soon! And in the meantime just play it the way you want... This post was also about the impact of this card in a game, since it's a precedent in IA.

There is no doubt that the cards cancel all the other card's effects.

Anything else is just trying to abuse the rules in a way they were not meant to be.

If it doesn't remove the exhaust part, then it doesn't cancel the move of the initiate token either. You can have one without the other.

Same with it removing "Element of Surprise" card, then it wouldn't remove it until the defense die had already been removed. Again the card would have no effect.

It just doesn't make sense!

Having played multiple card games then to me there is no doubt that is a counter spell that removes the play of the card before anything happens.

if Negation is used to cancel a command card that requires an action to resolve its ability, has that action been spent or is it still available?

Just got the answer... And it's not helping us much....

"Hi,

Unfortunately, we don’t answer any rules questions regarding products immediately after release. We are collecting any rules questions that come in for a period of 30 days to ensure clarity and consistency of answers. After that period has elapsed, I’ll be sure to get back to you with an answer.

Thanks!"

For the meantime I will play it as if the caracter is not engaged, like there seems to be a consensus here, but will see... Do they mean by effect, the whole card effect including engaging or only the primary effect of the card which is to take initiative...

I think you guys are going to find, as I have with X-Wing, that the root of the problem goes far deeper than one vaguely worded card or awkward interaction. FFG has a poor track record when it comes to consistent rules and card templating, and this is just the latest example. Normally I'd want a prompt answer just as much as the next man/woman, but this is the exact sort of thing that merits more consideration in the long run; give them all the time they need to address fundamental issues with the rules system, for the long term health of the game. It's better for all of us that way.

1. Pay for your car wash using credit card and then get your car washed.

2. Credit card has been rejected by the ATM.

Do you get your car washed?

Don't look so deep for a straight forward card in a game without resource/price model.