I don't get it, people are saying that you can't ignore the discard rule (even though the title specifically says to replace the discarded card) yet have no trouble ignoring the rule in regards to no more than one upgrade occupying a slot.
Sounds like people are intentionally looking for complexity where the intent is obvious.
2 minutes ago, Gadgetron said:I don't get it, people are saying that you can't ignore the discard rule (even though the title specifically says to replace the discarded card) yet have no trouble ignoring the rule in regards to no more than one upgrade occupying a slot.
Sounds like people are intentionally looking for complexity where the intent is obvious.
Because it’s impossible to argue intent in a dry rules environment, as we legitimately have no guidance on intent, as only the designers can give it - and they don’t.
So although we all understand that, we make arguments to intentionally find a way Without relying on nebulous intent.
because it’s the only way we can do so without knowledge we are not privy to.
Stating you know intent is stating you are a designer, as they are the only ones who KNOW intent.
You can surmise, guess, suggest or infer it, to name a few... but you cannot know it.
3 hours ago, Drasnighta said:At least you have a reason, even if it is blind Imperislistic fascism. ?
...which is the best kind of Imperialistc fascism!
23 minutes ago, Mikael Hasselstein said:...which is the best kind of Imperialistc fascism!
To be fair though there really isn't a bad kind of Imperialistic Fascism.
2 minutes ago, Megatronrex said:To be fair though there really isn't a bad kind of Imperialistic Fascism.
Very true, but the blind kind is the most loyal.
On 11/27/2017 at 6:56 PM, Drasnighta said:This is not the first time we have had “replace” as a potential thing.
The first time was the preview of Sato.
That one changed before release.
But the card still says replace? I thought Sato's preview issue was about timing and they ended up adding the "before you roll" thing
1 hour ago, Darth Sanguis said:But the card still says replace? I thought Sato's preview issue was about timing and they ended up adding the "before you roll" thing
The card previously just said to replace 2 attack dice.
No guidance on timing. Just to replace. So we asked, "as it wasn't a keyword, what does replace mean?"
And we never got an answer on that.
Its an assumption that still has to be made.
6 hours ago, Drasnighta said:Because it’s impossible to argue intent in a dry rules environment, as we legitimately have no guidance on intent, as only the designers can give it - and they don’t.
So although we all understand that, we make arguments to intentionally find a way Without relying on nebulous intent.
because it’s the only way we can do so without knowledge we are not privy to.
Stating you know intent is stating you are a designer, as they are the only ones who KNOW intent.
You can surmise, guess, suggest or infer it, to name a few... but you cannot know it.
Unless you understand the English language. Then the word replace has specific meaning. Furthermore, context is also important. In the context, replace in used in the statement of the Chimaera title, meaning (here is where I wish I could insert the card) that after the FC has been discarded (the rules say flipped upside down but remaining on the table) it is then replaced (as in the definition of the word, take the place of ) on the table with a new FC, if you replace the card, the old card is gone, removed from the game, no longer flipped over yet still on the table, why? Because it has been replaced .
The issue is discard is a keyword with specifics spelled out, and replace is not.
Common logic is replace would "replace" and remove the discarded card completely, and pretty sure when (eventually) a FAQ is made it will do so.
Rules as written are specific that a discarded card still counts for points, and stays on the table and all that... I don't think anyone here is vehemently arguing that replace isn't intended to affect the discarded state, but as one is a fully fleshed out mechanic/keyword, and the other is not, it can/will come up if you are TO at some point by "that guy", and/or as a TO you will probably want to make a note of how it will work under your watch, if it's live before FFG clarifies replace.
For all we know they could clarify "replace" in a rulesheet that comes with the ship, making even a FAQ unnecessary.
Could that be cause of the 3 month delay?
For me, the question is...
...if replace has its natural English meaning (remove it, and put something else in its place), what purpose does it serve to discard it first?
In other words, what's the difference between:
upgrade card you have equipped and replace it with another
upgrade card."
upgrade card you have equipped with another
upgrade card."
Does it mean the replaced card still counts as discarded for e.g. scoring purposes? But then, why is it not worded as e.g.:
upgrade card you have equipped and equip another
upgrade card."
38 minutes ago, DiabloAzul said:For me, the question is...
...if replace has its natural English meaning (remove it, and put something else in its place), what purpose does it serve to discard it first?
In other words, what's the difference between:
- "At the start of the Command Phase , you may discard 1
upgrade card you have equipped and replace it with another
- "At the start of the Command Phase , you may replace 1
Does it mean the replaced card still counts as discarded for e.g. scoring purposes? But then, why is it not worded as e.g.:
- "At the start of the Command Phase , you may discard 1
Discard would be a requirement. If you cannot accomplish it you cannot replace it.
However that's the problem: English is not enough as @Gadgetron say it is.
We need an in-game meaning of replacing. Placing the new upgrade next to the ship means nothing. Faceup or facedown? Is it equipped? Of course we can intend some things cause we know Chimaera has a purpose but if the discarded upgrades are still equipped why the rules say "for purpose of scoring"? It allows, at least, to wonder about if they are not for other purposes. Otherwise that rules is obscenely redundant as we already have a scoring rule that clarify that point and another about their effects being inactive.
One way or another there is something meaningless (replace or for purpose of scoring).
A stronger meaning for discarded would help also:
Are discarded upgrades still equipped for other purposes, not only scoring?
Edited by ovinomanc3r15 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:One way or another there is something meaningless (replace or for purpose lo scoring).
That's exactly my point.
"Replacing" is not the same as "swapping". A replaced item [here: upgrade card] does not necessarily go to wherever its replacement came from [here: game box].
My understanding is that:
But this is insufficient to determine whether the old card:
a) ...can be chosen by Chimaera (will it be flipped face-up again?) to re-replace the new card, and/or
b) ...is still "contained in the fleet" (meaning a new copy cannot be introduced)
36 minutes ago, DiabloAzul said:But this is insufficient to determine whether the old card:
a) ...can be chosen by Chimaera (will it be flipped face-up again?) to re-replace the new card, and/or
b) ...is still "contained in the fleet" (meaning a new copy cannot be introduced)
b) That's unclear. Contained is not equipped, obviously, as you cannot equip Darth Vader Squadron but your fleet contains him. The "range" of contain doesn't go beyond the fleet list (in practice), which is not affected by the ongoing game. Destroying Darth Vader, he is not removed from the fleet. The fleet still contains him. That is an assumption of course but I suppose that, as long as unique works with "contain" rather than equipped, the discarded fleet command is still contained in the fleet, even if the card would say remove it from the game. As long as it is not removed from the fleet, the fleet contains it. That would be some kind of CC ruling precedence. However, Chimaera doesn't change your fleet list (maybe we should talk about just fleet ) and I would be surprised if I had to change my fleet depending on which fleet command upgrade ended the game on my Chimaera. This way, anything that entered by Chimaera wouldn't count as contained so uniqueness would mean nothing here. However this way it would open the possibility of playing with two AFFM being active. So despite I think that rule would work more or less like I think, I suppose the final idea is to avoid that so it will be FAQed.
a) Talking about the card itself I would say no. If the idea is to remain discarded next to the ship you would need another one to track it. You couldn't bring it again cause you are not undiscarding it so a discarded one must be there. However if you could equip the same upgrade (not card) again it will depend on the uniqueness resolution.
But I agree, those points remain unclear and we cannot know anything sure.
Edited by ovinomanc3rDiscarded upgrades are still attached to the slot they fill, replace just means you are putting a new card into that slot which can only take a single card. It only over writes part of what discard says This is due to the keyword saying the card is still on the table/in the fleet roster and counts points wise if the equipped ship is destroyed
So if we aren't using the definition of the word "replace" because we don't have an in game definition, do we have in in game definition for the word "at"? How can we begin to understand this card if we don't have individual in game definitions of each word in the card description? Or, do we just take the word for its meaning in English?
People are reading WAY to hard into card rules when the intent is written quite obviously.
5 minutes ago, Gadgetron said:So if we aren't using the definition of the word "replace" because we don't have an in game definition, do we have in in game definition for the word "at"? How can we begin to understand this card if we don't have individual in game definitions of each word in the card description? Or, do we just take the word for its meaning in English?
People are reading WAY to hard into card rules when the intent is written quite obviously.
At: If any portion of a hull zone, base, or token is inside a specified band, that component is at that band.
9 minutes ago, Gadgetron said:So if we aren't using the definition of the word "replace" because we don't have an in game definition, do we have in in game definition for the word "at"? How can we begin to understand this card if we don't have individual in game definitions of each word in the card description? Or, do we just take the word for its meaning in English?
People are reading WAY to hard into card rules when the intent is written quite obviously.
Status is the meaningful thing when we talk about cards in this game.
Your replace definition is just too open to really know what effects it has. Placing the card where the other was means nothing. I usually have ship cards next to the upgrade cards of other ship and the ship is not equipped on the other. Here we are talking about status (equipped, exhausted, discarded). In which way are you replacing one card by another? Everyone? Only some of them? Which one?
Edited by ovinomanc3r4 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:At: If any portion of a hull zone, base, or token is inside a specified band, that component is at that band.
It is not good form to use a word in its own definition. Think of the infinite loop you'd get if you tried inserting the definition of the word in place of itself in the definition.
3 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:At: If any portion of a hull zone, base, or token is inside a specified band, that component is at that band.
upgrade card you have equipped and replace it with another
upgrade card."
So we know now that Chimaera refers to hull zones... this card just got more confusing. Do we have an in game definition for "the"?
1 minute ago, Gadgetron said:
- "At the start of the Command Phase , you may discard 1
So we know now that Chimaera refers to hull zones... this card just got more confusing. Do we have an in game definition for "the"?
Don't be that guy.
Here I explained why "replace" NEEDS a deeper approach.
5 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:Status is the meaningful thing when we talk about cards in this game.
Your replace definition is just too open to really know what effects it has. Placing the card where the other was means nothing. I usually have ship cards next to the upgrade cards of other ship and the ship is not equipped on the other. Here we are talking about status (equipped, exhausted, discarded). In which way are you replacing one card by another? Everyone? Only some of them? Which one?
6 hours ago, DiabloAzul said:For me, the question is...
...if replace has its natural English meaning (remove it, and put something else in its place), what purpose does it serve to discard it first?
Clearly, if you first discard it and then replace it, you end up with Fleet Command #1 out of the game, Fleet Command #2 discarded (replacing the discarded original), and nothing equipped.
1 hour ago, ovinomanc3r said:Don't be that guy.
Here I explained why "replace" NEEDS a deeper approach.
It's not me being"that guy", it's the digging for an answer that was laying on the surface that's the problem.
The intent of the rule is not only obvious, it's quite clear. That people need a definition for a word that already has one is the issue. Just because the word "replace" isn't in the rule book doesn't mean it's meaning in the English language is suddenly called into question.
You want an in game definition for "replace" because the dictionary isn't good enough, well I call into question the in game definition of "the".
36 minutes ago, Gadgetron said:It's not me being"that guy", it's the digging for an answer that was laying on the surface that's the problem.
The intent of the rule is not only obvious, it's quite clear. That people need a definition for a word that already has one is the issue. Just because the word "replace" isn't in the rule book doesn't mean it's meaning in the English language is suddenly called into question.
You want an in game definition for "replace" because the dictionary isn't good enough, well I call into question the in game definition of "the".
I have no idea about if the designer wanted or not for those replaced upgrades to score. But congratulations to you I won't try to make you play it in other way that you wanted.
I am sure there were mind-readers while RLB effect was an issue.
2 hours ago, ovinomanc3r said:I have no idea about if the designer wanted or not for those replaced upgrades to score. But congratulations to you I won't try to make you play it in other way that you wanted.
I am sure there were mind-readers while RLB effect was an issue.
There were. I don't want to call anybody out, but there were multiple of these "I have special insight into the intent here, it's so obvious and you guys are just making it hard" comments in that thread.
Those people were all wrong .
The problem, @Gadgetron , with just using the vanilla English definition of "replace" is that, by the time you're "replacing", the old upgrade is discarded. So, if all you're doing is taking out and old one and putting the new one where the old one was, you're spending 4 points to equip a discarded upgrade.
That's obviously ridiculous, which is why there must be more to "replace" than any of the general-use English definitions .
If you're secure enough in your own interpretation that you have no questions of the functionality, and all of your local opponents agree on it, and interpretation by non-local TOs is not a concern for you, then by all means go along your way and play it the obvious right way , because there is no issue for you.
But for those of us who TO, who travel for tournaments, or who just have an interest in applying the rules, solidifying the interpretation is important to ensure standardized OP use, and we (and by "we" I mean mostly Dras) are serving a useful function here. Just like we did in coming to reasonable interim interpretations for RLB, Instigator , Sloane, nuLeia, Devastator/ Tagge, Vader/IO, and any number of other questions.
So, like Ovin said, please don't be that guy. If you don't want to discuss it, nobody's forcing you to be here.
20 hours ago, Gadgetron said:Unless you understand the English language. Then the word replace has specific meaning. Furthermore, context is also important. In the context, replace in used in the statement of the Chimaera title, meaning (here is where I wish I could insert the card) that after the FC has been discarded (the rules say flipped upside down but remaining on the table) it is then replaced (as in the definition of the word, take the place of ) on the table with a new FC, if you replace the card, the old card is gone, removed from the game, no longer flipped over yet still on the table, why? Because it has been replaced .
Alright. You can replace your Fleet Command, but it's staying face down. Show me where "replace" says to flip the upgrade face up.
Replace: T ake the place of.