Quick question, issue came up during a recent game of the core set. When a crisis gives you the choice of discarding cards (or paying another cost), rather than taking a skill check, what happens if the player is not able to fulfil the complete cost of that alternative, can it still be taken?

For example: A crisis card hypotheically has the card text. "Current Player chooses, skills check OR Current Player discards 3 cards." If the current player does not have three crads to discard, can they still opt for the alternative to the skill check?

Many thanks,
SomethingBruin

Check page 30 of your rulebook, and all will be revealed.

Version for lazy folks: you can pick it even if you don't have the cards.

Don't feel bad,...I scoured that rule book and couldn't find it till James told me too;-)

Solid question, you and everyone else come to this logical conclusion. Glad people beat me to the answers.

If you have game group members who have distaste for this rule than you could simply cite the Build a Cylon Detector Card

Your given two choices:

Discard 1 Nuke Token

or

-1 Morale and the Admiral Discards 2 Skill Cards

The game would reach a stand still if the Admiral didn't have 2 skill cards. Hence, that's why you can always Choose Option 2, but option 1 DEMANDS a nuke token

The faq says you can't activate a location if Roslin if you don't discard two cards, so we played you can't do something if you can't fulfill the demand.

Then we found the page 30 line and all got confusing.

I think the difference is just that roslin's negative ability is "big stuff" and HAS to be strictly followed compared to the not-enough-cards-but-still-discarding choice you can make with crisis.

I agree that this point that the FAQ clarified is not completely serious. I mean, a choice you can make because it pleases you better even if you don't have the pre-requisites... it is a bit... "too much" and not serious (hard to translate that, sorry), but I guess Corey & designers wanted to play it cool and soft on the gamers.

Hem said:

My guess is that the Cylon detector Card was thematically important, and you CANT resolve that card if people had neither resources. It's not necessarily a matter of being "soft" it's just a matter of creating a rule so the game can still flow. Also, your talking about two completely different mechanisms. Roslin's hindrance is a character weakness it does not affect the progress of the game. It merely creates an obstacle for the players.

Crisis cards function as a means to move the game forward, and for that reason this rule needed to exist. Otherwise, you'd have imbalance and ultimately a broken game.

I don't know how soft they intended also, because Cylon's can draw Crisis Cards and make all the choices when they are the current player. That's not very easy going if you think about it.

We think of it as costs vs effects - a cost if it exists has to be paid but an effect will resolve even if it no longer has a legal target. The "discard choices" on crises are an effect of resolving the crisis, while Roslin's discard is an additional cost to activating a location. Similarly, you can't risk a raptor for Launch Scout if you don't have one, and you can't move between ships if you don't have any skill cards - those are both costs.

Hem said:

It seems to me that the difference is that the rules very specifically allow you to make a crisis choice when you don't have the cards in your hand, but there is no such clause for other things. Not "big stuff" vs. "small stuff" but "what the rules say you can do" vs. "what the rules don't say you can do."