"The Imperial player cannot choose an Agenda set if it contains a card with a listed time period range that does not include the time period of the campaign."

Is this restriction still valid? I thought I read something to the effect that time period restrictions are no longer in effect, but I couldn't find it.

In a mini-campaign, you do not include forced missions from sets in your agenda deck. Since you are already removing the relevant time-period offending card, could you still include the remainder of that set in your deck?

Not sure on the second question regarding mini campaigns but yes they've done away with time period restrictions.

Technically time periods are still in effect- the newer releases just don't utilize them.

For instance, the new Heart of the Empire campaign doesn't have a time period, so there are no restrictions for it. However, Return to Hoth still has a time period, so it is bound by that.

Nothing since and including The Bespin Gambit has utilized time periods, so I don't see them coming back.

Honestly, though- unless you're a huge stickler for the rules, play as how your group wants. If you want to allow Han on Return to Hoth, by all means go ahead. If you want to restrict HotE's allies to the likes of only pre-ANH-friendly characters like Ahsoka, Hera, and Leia, go ahead. In the long run, timelines were only made to be thematically friendly, anyway.

7 minutes ago, subtrendy2 said:

Honestly, though- unless you're a huge stickler for the rules, play as how your group wants. If you want to allow Han on Return to Hoth, by all means go ahead. If you want to restrict HotE's allies to the likes of only pre-ANH-friendly characters like Ahsoka, Hera, and Leia, go ahead. In the long run, timelines were only made to be thematically friendly, anyway.

I liked (and still like) time period as it gave an impression of playing the game in the canon timeline. I'd wished they kept it as an official optional rule (yes I know nothing prevent me from enforcing it as a house-rule, which I do!)

Like said above, the time period rule is still in place, but it only matters during the Return to Hoth campaign, because.

1. You can use all agenda sets and side missions in the core campaign.

2. Minicampaigns do not have time periods or side missions. (You can include any agenda set, you then discard all side mission cards - both forced and normal agenda side missions.)

3. Except Return to Hoth, expansion campaigns do not have time periods, so you can use any side mission and agenda set.

1 hour ago, IanSolo_FFG said:

I liked (and still like) time period as it gave an impression of playing the game in the canon timeline.

It might be actually more interesting to house rule time periods in effect for all campaigns to encourage different allies and villains during campaign play. The number of times I've seen the Rebels include Leia or R2-D2/C-3PO...

Granted, house ruling the threat costs can help with this as well, although I would prefer official campaign fixes for some of the overcosted allies and villains. Maybe FFG will just errata that skirmish upgrades can work as attachments in the campaign?

33 minutes ago, machfalcon said:

It might be actually more interesting to house rule time periods in effect for all campaigns to encourage different allies and villains during campaign play. The number of times I've seen the Rebels include Leia or R2-D2/C-3PO...

Thing is, wouldn't Leia and the droids fit into pretty much any time period so far (even if house ruled, as they don't even have an associated time period by default)? If anyting, it'd make them actually more viable.

But I totally agree- I'm tired of them bringing those two. Was hoping Hera and Chop would be a good alternative, but that didn't happen.

2 hours ago, IanSolo_FFG said:

I agree with you, but common sense should apply. Without the period restriction in Return to Hoth, it would be weird to bring Han Solo as an ally for this Bane

mission

I liked (and still like) time period as it gave an impression of playing the game in the canon timeline. I'd wished they kept it as an official optional rule (yes I know nothing prevent me from enforcing it as a house-rule, which I do!)

I think timelines are a great guideline, but I do appreciate that it's up to the players to decide what sort of experience they'd like to have.

16 hours ago, subtrendy2 said:

I think timelines are a great guideline, but I do appreciate that it's up to the players to decide what sort of experience they'd like to have.

Sure, agreed, but I think "this campaign is time period X, but ignore that if you want a more freeform experience" supports that better than "we're not going to tell you the time period for this campaign, because we've decided you shouldn't really be using time periods".

4 hours ago, Bitterman said:

Sure, agreed, but I think "this campaign is time period X, but ignore that if you want a more freeform experience" supports that better than "we're not going to tell you the time period for this campaign, because we've decided you shouldn't really be using time periods".

That's fair.