I got into an argument over at cardgamedb about the interaction between Dying Sun Marauders and Raid. One member pointed out that because Raid does not say "gain", it does not trigger the Marauder condition. My counter argument is as such:

That is an interesting argument. Can you elaborate on it? The issue is that there is not much in the rules to go on here, so it might help if maybe you are aware of a clearer reference that I am not.

As far as I can see, the only reference to "gain" in the context or resources in the rules is that "when a player gains resources he transfers them from the token bank to his resource pool." (Rules Reference p. 13, "Resources"), which would tend to agree with your argument since you are apparently taking it not from the bank but an opponent. However, this is in contrast to the standard vernacular and legal use of the term gain (i.e. and "profit" according to Black's Law Dictionary, which clearly includes this case since you end up with more than you started with). As a further complication to the issue, the rules for command struggles specifically do NOT use the word gain, although there is not way that any interpretation of the rule above could not result in this being a "gain" of resources ("he must take the exact number of resources", Rules Reference, p. 24). Following standard interpretation and practice, therefore, to "gain" cannot be specific to the use of the term "gain" in rule text, since this would produce a direct contradiction in the rules, and taking a resource (in exact game text) can be construed to be a gain.

So basically, I see no way to distinguish between the following interpretations in terms of correctness:

1) Gaining and taking from the bank are equivalent (i.e. Command wins are a gain but Raid is not).

2) Gaining represents any situation where you would increase your resource total (i.e. Command wins and Raid are both gaining).

3) Gain is a keyword-specific term like Move (i.e. neither Command wins or Raid are gains).

The obvious reference example here would be the term "Move", which is officially a keyword. In this case, (i) the keyword is listed specifically in the Rules Reference as such, and (ii) The framework in the rules reference specifically does use the correct keywords to avoid any contradiction. Given that both of these are not the case for the term "Gain," case #3 would be difficult to argue (although this could just be a case of very poor rules editing so we cannot strictly rule it out). However, lacking any clarification in the rules about this, I do not think there is a clear and fair way to resolve this (unless, as I say, there is additional text or rulings somewhere that I do not know about).

Can anyone help to clarify this mess? Alternately, does anyone know how to contact a rules manager, designer, or equivalent so they can resolve this (i.e. tell us how they played in testing then officially set the rules to that in the future).

Thanks!

There's a rules link at the bottom of this page; just click "rules questions".

Alternatively PBrennan over at CGDB is pretty much the rules authority. I believe he was the rules editor and still has contact with the developers, so if you ask a rules question and he answers, you can be sure it's answered.

Couple of quick things:

"Move" is not a keyword. It has been given a definition in the RRG as a specific game term - so one cannot argue that it should be assigned its vernacular meaning - but that is not the same as a "keyword," which is a term that imparts specific abilities under the rules to a card (like Brutal or Mobile). It may seem like a fine distinction, but it is am important one.

"Gain" is not specifically defined in the rules, but, as you say, there is specific text in the rules related to what happens when a player "gains" a resource (i.e., it is taken from the token bank and put into the player's resource pool). That's the closest thing we have to any sort of direct word on how to interpret "gains a resources" as a triggering condition.

The distinction between "gains" as "any movement of resources from the token bank and into a player's resource pool" or "any movement of resources into a player's resource pool" would be from the "game state" perspective. When you use Raid to take a resource from your opponent, you are not changing the total number of resources available in the current game state - only which player has access to them. In contrast, taking resources out of the token bank "gains" resources overall in that there are more total resources available over the entire game state.

I'm not saying that is the ultimate distinction here - only that it does provide a possible distinction between those two possibilities.

There is some natural argument against using a vernacular definition of "gains" when determining if a triggering condition takes place. For example, say that you hit one of my units with the ability of Last Breath ("Reaction: After attached unit damages an army unit by an attack, the attacked unit gets -3 ATK until the end of phase. "). At the end of the phase, when the -3 ATK wears off, does my unit "gain ATK"? Or would losing a negative modifier not be treated the same as applying a positive modifier, even though the unit's ATK number goes up in both cases? In FFG's other LCG's, this normally would not create an "After a unit's ATK increases" triggering condition. So, with that example in mind, there is some support for the idea that a "gains resources" triggering condition/game occurrence will not necessarily be the same as the number of resources in a given resource pool going up.

But, as you say, since there is no specific game definition of the word "gains" in the RRG, the natural tendency/assumption is to assign it it's plain language meaning, which would support an "any time the number of resources in your pool increases, no matter the cause." That is contrasted by the rules text, which implies a more restrictive, game-set definition of "when the number of your resources in your pool increases because you took resources from the token bank." There is no direct, definitive answer in the rules, and both of these options are defensible, so your best bet is indeed to ask FFG directly using this link .

For anyone wondering, I have an official ruling now and the answer is #2. All described cases count as "gaining" a resource.