Cross posted on BGG:

The Imperial player is constructing a Death Star on the remote system of Tatooine.

The Rebel player plays Sabotage on Tatooine. This says it prevents units from deploying. The Death Star is defined as a unit. Thus the Death Star cannot be deployed while the sabotage marker is on the system.

Research and Development mission card appears to be the only card that allows the Imperials to remove a sabotage marker. But that card says it can only be deployed on a loyal system. Remote systems cannot have loyalty.

Is there any way for the Imperial player to remove sabotage to get the Death Star deployed? Or is the sabotage card not allowed to be played on a remote system as there are no resource icons on it?

What is the exact wording on the Death Star and Sabotage mission cards?

Construct Death Star:

Resolve in any remote system that does not contain a Rebel unit.

Gain 1 Death Star Under Construction in this system and place 1 Death Star on space 3 of the build queue.

When the Death Star is deployed, it replaces the Death Star Under Construction.

Sabotage:

Attempt in any system.

If successful, place a sabotage marker in this system. This marker prevents players from building units from and deploying units in this system.

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

As you can see Construct card says "when the Death Star is DEPLOYED" and the Sabotage card says it prevents units "DEPLOYING units in this system".

But Research and Development cannot be deployed on a non-loyal system. So how does the Imperial player get rid of the sabotage marker and get the Death Star out of the queue?

Sabotage says "attempt in any system." So it can be attempted in a remote system.

As far as I know there is no way to get rid of the sabotage marker. Someone on the BGG thread pointed out that the DS could be deployed even if the marker is there by using the mission card "Oversee Project."

This seems like kind of an awkward situation, with the DSUC just sitting there forever unless the Empire is lucky enough to draw that one card. Makes me wonder if the designers intended for it to work like that. On the other hand, the "any system" wording wouldn't make sense otherwise... it would be useless to play it in a remote system. So maybe that was their intention. If so, it seems a little too powerful for the Rebels but I guess we won't know for sure until there is an errata. I think I might house rule this in the mean time because it doesn't seem very fun, at least to me. Either say the DS still deploys even if there is a sabotage marker in the system, or allow an exception so that R&D can be played there.

Sabotage says "attempt in any system." So it can be attempted in a remote system.

As far as I know there is no way to get rid of the sabotage marker. Someone on the BGG thread pointed out that the DS could be deployed even if the marker is there by using the mission card "Oversee Project."

Except the next post he did cancelled that as the Oversee Project card reads (emphasis mine):

Resolve in any system that contains an Imperial unit and no Rebel units.

Choose 1 Imperial unit on space 1 or 2 of the build queue and DEPLOY it in this system

So you can't deploy it in the system where the sabotage marker is as that prevents units from deploying. So I guess the argument is that you then deploy the Death Star to an entirely different system than where the Death Star Under Construction model is? But then that breaks the Construct Death Star which says when the Death Star is deployed it replaces Death Star Under Construction, which is in the sabotaged system.

Doesn't the replacement effect get around all this? When a unit comes off the build queue its ready to be deployed and regular deployment allows you place the unit in any system that is loyal/subjugated with out a sabotage marker. This new Death Star has only one place to go because of this replacement effect and you are no longer following the basic rules for deployment.

Well normally you can't deploy units in a Remote System anyway so obviously the Death Star Construction card avoids the Deploy rule else no one would ever be able to make one with or without sabotage.

OR if you want to get really technical, the card doesn't say you have to deploy the Death Star in the system it is under construction in. So you can deploy it on Coruscant (unless THAT is sabotaged) and the game rules move the Death Star to where the Under Construction Death Star is and replaces it as it says on the card.

Except, as my wife argues as she was the one who did this to me (she was the rebels and I was the Imps), the card states "When the Death Star deploys". The sabotage marker prevents it from deploying, thus if it can't deploy, then it can't replace as the card has one action occurring before the other.

Deploy means you can't put units in that system from the Build Queue. Sabotage doesn't prevent units built from that system deploying elsewhere. It just means you can't deploy units there and ignore build icons during the build turns.

The Death Star doesn't deploy at the Remote System as that is impossible already with the default rules, sabotage makes no difference on a remote system... You CANNOT deploy on a remote system no matter what as Imperials. That rule alone would prevent the 2nd Death Star from ever being constructed with or without sabotage.

As I said, from a game mechanics perspective you simply deploy the Death Star 2 in any legal POPULATED system and then the game teleports the Death Star 2 to the Death Star under construction and replaces it, you are not deploying in the system the Death Star under construction was as that is impossible.

Sabotage says "attempt in any system." So it can be attempted in a remote system.

As far as I know there is no way to get rid of the sabotage marker. Someone on the BGG thread pointed out that the DS could be deployed even if the marker is there by using the mission card "Oversee Project."

Except the next post he did cancelled that as the Oversee Project card reads (emphasis mine):

Resolve in any system that contains an Imperial unit and no Rebel units.

Choose 1 Imperial unit on space 1 or 2 of the build queue and DEPLOY it in this system

So you can't deploy it in the system where the sabotage marker is as that prevents units from deploying. So I guess the argument is that you then deploy the Death Star to an entirely different system than where the Death Star Under Construction model is? But then that breaks the Construct Death Star which says when the Death Star is deployed it replaces Death Star Under Construction, which is in the sabotaged system.

I had an answer to this written up and then took one more look at the rules and I see where I was confused. RR p. 3 says "if the ability is resolved in a system, it can be performed even if there is a sabotage marker in the system." But that is referring to abilities that "place units on the build queue," not ones that "deploy" units. So yes, you are right. There is no way to deploy the Death Star with the sabotage marker there.

Doesn't sound like much fun and seems waaaay too easy for the Rebels to prevent the DS from being built so for that reason I think it will be errata'd. But as it stands I see no rules reason preventing it.

Again, a sabotage marker does NOTHING to the imperials when placed on a remote system.

Sabotage markers prevent 2 things, the planet adding units to the build queue and deploying units there.

Remote Systems have NO build icons and units can NOT be deployed on Remote systems even WITHOUT sabotage markers. The only way to deploy a unit on a Remote System is if the Rebel Base is there.

Deploy means you can't put units in that system from the Build Queue. Sabotage doesn't prevent units built from that system deploying elsewhere. It just means you can't deploy units there and ignore build icons during the build turns.

The Death Star doesn't deploy at the Remote System as that is impossible already with the default rules, sabotage makes no difference on a remote system... You CANNOT deploy on a remote system no matter what as Imperials. That rule alone would prevent the 2nd Death Star from ever being constructed with or without sabotage.

As I said, from a game mechanics perspective you simply deploy the Death Star 2 in any legal POPULATED system and then the game teleports the Death Star 2 to the Death Star under construction and replaces it, you are not deploying in the system the Death Star under construction was as that is impossible.

Except the card text overrides the normal deployment rule by saying the DS "replaces" the DSUC when it is deployed. Card text takes precedence over the rule book. The problem is, it says the DS replaces the DSUC when it is deployed, so it can't do that if the sabotage marker is preventing it from deploying. If the text said " the Death Star replaces the Death Star Under Construction instead of being deployed," there wouldn't be an issue.

Again, a sabotage marker does NOTHING to the imperials when placed on a remote system.

Sabotage markers prevent 2 things, the planet adding units to the build queue and deploying units there.

Remote Systems have NO build icons and units can NOT be deployed on Remote systems even WITHOUT sabotage markers. The only way to deploy a unit on a Remote System is if the Rebel Base is there.

By definition, "deploying" means putting units on the board after they slide off the build queue. Other effects that put units in a system (like revealing the rebel base) are NOT deploying. Sabotage does not impact those other effects but if it says "deploy" on the card then sabotage prevents it from happening. The whole thing we are discussing is that the Empire CAN deploy a unit to a remote system IF they use the Construct Death Star card (the card text takes precedence over the normal deployment rule). And if there's a sabotage marker there, it can't be deployed.

I've already said I don't like this fact and I think it should be changed, but for now that's what the rules say.

How many times do I have to say it? Nowhere on the card does it say you have to deploy the Death Star in the same system. The Death Star is treated like a normal unit once it is on the build queue. Just because Corellia is building a Star Destroyer doesn't mean I have to deploy the Star Destroyer at Corellia. I can deploy that Star Destroyer to any legal target, even if Corellia is sabotaged or destroy. Once that ship is on the build queue only missions that specifically target the build queue can effect it. Sabotage does NOT affect the build queue.

The same goes for the Death Star EXCEPT the card states that once the Death Star is deployed (doesn't matter where) it replaces the one under construction. REPLACES not deploys.

How many times do I have to say it? Nowhere on the card does it say you have to deploy the Death Star in the same system. The Death Star is treated like a normal unit once it is on the build queue. Just because Corellia is building a Star Destroyer doesn't mean I have to deploy the Star Destroyer at Corellia. I can deploy that Star Destroyer to any legal target, even if Corellia is sabotaged or destroy. Once that ship is on the build queue only missions that specifically target the build queue can effect it. Sabotage does NOT affect the build queue.

The same goes for the Death Star EXCEPT the card states that once the Death Star is deployed (doesn't matter where) it replaces the one under construction. REPLACES not deploys.

That's an interesting interpretation of the card text but to me, "replace" the DSUC means take the DSUC and put the DS where it was. The DSUC "turns into" a DS. To me it doesn't make much sense for the DS to warp across the map as soon as it's finished. For the Star Destroyer example, the materials to build the thing maybe come from Corellia but it's not necessarily being assembled there. But the DSUC is sitting on the board for three turns, they are working on it RIGHT THERE in Endor or wherever. So they turn the last bolt and suddenly it's in Naboo?

Now if it said "remove the DSUC when the DS is deployed," things would be different. But it says "replace." Instead of a DSUC you now have a DS. Why would you suddenly be able to move it across the board?

Even though you deploy it in another system, the rules on the card force the 2nd Death Star to move and replace the construction one. So even if you deploy it at Naboo

it still ends up in Endor.

Even though you deploy it in another system, the rules on the card force the 2nd Death Star to move and replace the construction one. So even if you deploy it at Naboo

it still ends up in Endor.

Ok I think I get what you are saying now but I have to say I still don't agree with this interpretation as it still involves "teleporting" the DS. The card text changes the deployment rule in this one case so that the DS is deployed where the DSUC is by replacing it.

I'm sure I still haven't convinced you but I hope someone somewhere is finding this discussion useful.

Also I just realized I'm arguing with you even though I think your interpretation makes the game better! But I still think it's worth talking about because in my view this requires an errata so might as well discuss why I think that.

I played a lot of MtG. Rule loopholes and other things like this are not alien to me.

In MtG this would be similar to something preventing you from summoning a creature but you could still put a creature into play by other means.

I would argue that based on these two texts, there are two types of "deploy" being described.

First, there is the regular sense of "deploy", that is, to place units into a system when they have finished building. This is clearly prevented by the Sabotage card.

Second, the Construct Death Star seems to refer to the act of sliding off the build queue as "deploy".

This would make sense to me. The sense of the card seems to me that the completed DS replaces the DSUC in the system where the DSUC was previously located; if building it in Endor, you can't deploy the finished DS to Saleucami. So, the Death Star isnt "deployed" like a regular unit. Instead, they are referring to "finished building". So in that sense, when the DS finishes being built, it doesn't "deploy" the way the Sabotage card is blocking. Which means it would finish as normal, at least in my mind.

technically it is already deployed when it is lands on the remote system under construction. it just finishes building and replaces the already deployed Death star. that's how i would play it.

but i guess it is the discussion of the 'Deploy' Text.

technically it is already deployed when it is lands on the remote system under construction. it just finishes building and replaces the already deployed Death star. that's how i would play it.

but i guess it is the discussion of the 'Deploy' Text.

That would be my view as well, just that the worded things poorly (shock!!!).

I agree with the previous few posts that a DSUC is already deployed and is simply being replaced once it's completed. I've got to believe the developers never thought anyone would ever perform a sabatoge in a remote system as they can't build or deploy units. A simple Errata to the Sabatoge mission changing it to attempt in any populous system is forthcoming.

The only way to stop the Death Star from being completed is to attack it and deal 4 black hits.

If you could just sabotage why would that even be an option?

I like the idea of being able to sabotage the construction of a new death star to delay it coming into the game. It is funny that the DSUC is the artwork on the sabotage mission card. That doesn't mean anything but hints to me that RAI you can sabotage the DSUC and I would say a strict interpretation of RAW confirm this.

I agree that they messed up with the RAW when they made it nearly impossible to remove the sabotage marker on DSUC.