Good day! Perhaps you could help clarify something:

1. The errata states that when expansions are incorporated into an imperial assault campaign, rebels choose from HALF the total number of items listed in each tier. So if there are a total of 14 items in tier 2, for example, this could mean choosing from 7 items (14/2=7)

Our game runner says that Twin Shadows is a mini-campaign (i.e. not "incorporated" into a larger campaign), therefore original rules are to be followed (choose from 6 cards for each tier deck). He says the same applies for the upcoming Return to Hoth expansion (since we will be starting a new campaign from scratch).

Has he got that right? If not, if you could direct me to the actual text in the RRG or errata to support the answer, he'll need to see that to change his mind ?

2. Follow up question. Are hero side missions from the core campaign still available to be played in the Hoth expansion, or are we limited to the hero side missions contained in the Hoth campaign?

Many thanks in advance. Love this forum.

1. "Incorporated" means you're adding in items from expansions, it doesn't matter if it's a "mini campaign" or a "Hoth campaign" or a "Jabba's Realm campaign": are you adding items from those expansion boxes into the deck?

The half rule was because the Core box had 12 items per tier, so it made sense to just draw 6 everytime. But once you start adding in extra items the item deck gets diluted

2. Hero side missions are tied to which heroes you pick, not to which campaign. IP still follows side mission construction rules (4 red + 4 green + 4 grey, where the 4 reds should match the 4 Rebel heroes)

20 minutes ago, ricope said:

1. "Incorporated" means you're adding in items from expansions, it doesn't matter if it's a "mini campaign" or a "Hoth campaign" or a "Jabba's Realm campaign": are you adding items from those expansion boxes into the deck?

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, we are adding in items from the expansion boxes to the original core game. However, our game runner is adamant that "incorporated", means running everything as one big campaign, and that independant campaigns, or mini campaigns, go by the original rule (6 items from each tier) . Is your interpretation explicitly stated somewhere? If it's not written, he will stick with his interpretation ?

Quote

The half rule was because the Core box had 12 items per tier, so it made sense to just draw 6 everytime. But once you start adding in extra items the item deck gets diluted

Agreed!

Quote

2. Hero side missions are tied to which heroes you pick, not to which campaign. IP still follows side mission construction rules (4 red + 4 green + 4 grey, where the 4 reds should match the 4 Rebel heroes)

Ah, thanks for clarifying ?

1 hour ago, TeethAlmighty said:

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, we are adding in items from the expansion boxes to the original core game. However, our game runner is adamant that "incorporated", means running everything as one big campaign, and that independant campaigns, or mini campaigns, go by the original rule (6 items from each tier) . Is your interpretation explicitly stated somewhere? If it's not written, he will stick with his interpretation ?

Ah I don't have the errata text in front of me but your game runner's interpretation literally makes no sense: how do you even "run everything as one big campaign"? Try to play Core -> Hoth -> Bespin ...etc non-stop? Nothing (credits, xp, influence...) would add up and there's no such rule regarding playing another campaign right after another without reset

Really this is more like a personal taste issue. Campaign imo allows a lot more hand-waviness and leeway than skirmish. If your group is fine with drawing 6 then go with your IP's rule. If not tell him that his interpretation makes no sense and just draw half. Someone else might be able to direct you to the exact errata text though

31 minutes ago, ricope said:

...there's no such rule regarding playing another campaign right after another without reset

That's an excellent point.

He referenced this, from "Playing the mini campaign" on page 6 of the Twin Shadows rulebook:

"Unlike a full campaign, missions in the mini campaign are all considered to be story missions and are played in a specifc order. Side missions are not played during the mini campaign."

From this, he interprets that a mini-campaign does not fall under this provision in the FAQ (page 10):

"When 1 or more expansions are incorporated into an Imperial Assault campaign, Rebel players follow a diferent procedure during Rebel Upgrade Stages."

Quote

Really this is more like a personal taste issue. Campaign imo allows a lot more hand-waviness and leeway than skirmish

He's treating it pretty competitively. Does the rule change make a big difference, do you think? If I can't find something definitive, it may be best to just concede rather than get into an argument about it... and save the debate for when we start Hoth.

Minicampaigns are still campaigns, otherwise you would not do campaign setup and never get to play them.

Only 6 cards drawn when the Rebels have a full deck puts them at a disadvantage mini campaign or not.

3 hours ago, TeethAlmighty said:

He's treating it pretty competitively. Does the rule change make a big difference, do you think? If I can't find something definitive, it may be best to just concede rather than get into an argument about it... and save the debate for when we start Hoth.

It kind of does if you mix all the expansions, yes

The items you'll see (that are available to buy) by drawing 6 out of 12 is going to be very different vs. drawing 6 out of 24

I'm personally not a fan of "competitive" campaigns as I'd go to skirmish mode to scratch that itch. But alternatively maybe both sides can try to meet in the middle and (let's say if there's 24 cards total) draw like 8 or 9 instead of 12?

5 hours ago, a1bert said:

Minicampaigns are still campaigns, otherwise you would not do campaign setup and never get to play them.

?

4 hours ago, TallGiraffe said:

Only 6 cards drawn when the Rebels have a full deck puts them at a disadvantage mini campaign or not.

Less so for 14 cards, but if we eventually get to 24 cards per tier, yep, that's not much to choose from.

2 hours ago, ricope said:

I'm personally not a fan of "competitive" campaigns as I'd go to skirmish mode to scratch that itch. But alternatively maybe both sides can try to meet in the middle and (let's say if there's 24 cards total) draw like 8 or 9 instead of 12?

Spoken like a true diplomat! That's a great idea if we reach an impasse.

New FAQ version gets effective from the day it is released, you should apply it even if you are in the middle of a game already started before the FAQ got released

11 hours ago, TeethAlmighty said:

He referenced this, from "Playing the mini campaign" on page 6 of the Twin Shadows rulebook:

"Unlike a full campaign, missions in the mini campaign are all considered to be story missions and are played in a specific order. Side missions are not played during the mini campaign."

From this, he interprets that a mini-campaign does not fall under this provision in the FAQ (page 10)

That statement just states what is actually written and no more than that: "all mini campaign missions are considered as story missions (regardless what's written on the card) also don't play side missions - FULL STOP". That's it. You draws N/2 item cards, although I suggest to house rule that imperial draws N/2 agenda cards to balance the game out. I found limitation on agenda cards being too penalizing. Being picky on rules is necessary in this game otherwise the campaign will soon get unbalanced for one of the factions. However being picky and trying to cheat on interpretation are very different behaviors.

The RRG defines a campaign thusly:

Personally I think half of the deck is too much, taking some of the variance out of the campaigns, but for your first few campaigns seeing more items is a good thing.

On 12/15/2017 at 5:10 AM, Golan Trevize said:

You draws N/2 item cards, although I suggest to house rule that imperial draws N/2 agenda cards to balance the game out. I found limitation on agenda cards being too penalizing. Being picky on rules is necessary in this game otherwise the campaign will soon get unbalanced for one of the factions.

This is an interesting tweak!

On 12/15/2017 at 10:38 AM, Tvboy said:

The RRG defines a campaign thusly:

A campaign is a series of linked missions with a progressing narrative. Troughout the course of the campaign, players resolve a variety of missions and acquire Agenda, Item, and Class cards.

Agreed. However, I think the wording he's getting caught up on is:

"When 1 or more expansions are *incorporated into an Imperial Assault campaign*, Rebel players follow a diferent procedure during Rebel Upgrade Stages."

The wording could have been a bit more clear here, probably. It sounds like the game developers are talking about a specific type of game play, when all that was needed for clarity was:

"When 1 or more expansions are played..."

In any event, choosing from 6 vs 7 items this campaign is in no way game-breaking, and I'm sure I can help him see the light before Hoth, with the assistance of the logic presented by you fine folks ?

On 12/15/2017 at 11:24 AM, a1bert said:

Personally I think half of the deck is too much, taking some of the variance out of the campaigns, but for your first few campaigns seeing more items is a good thing.

That's a good point. Getting the equipment you want every time is good for min/maxing, but maybe sometimes you want to see Diala with some vibro knuckers or Fenn with an end-game death hammer, and see what happens ?

1 minute ago, TeethAlmighty said:

Agreed. However, I think the wording he's getting caught up on is:

"When 1 or more expansions are *incorporated into an Imperial Assault campaign*, Rebel players follow a diferent procedure during Rebel Upgrade Stages."

The wording could have been a bit more clear here, probably. It sounds like the game developers are talking about a specific type of game play, when all that was needed for clarity was:

"When 1 or more expansions are played..."

In any event, choosing from 6 vs 7 items this campaign is in no way game-breaking, and I'm sure I can help him see the light before Hoth, with the assistance of the logic presented by you fine folks ?

Is English not his primary language? Because " an Imperial Assault campaign" means any campaign. Otherwise it would say " the Imperial Assault Core campaign". The difference between an and the seems pretty clear but would probably be challenging if you're not a native English speaker.

Like you said, difference between 6 and 7 is small, but once you get to ~18+ cards in the item decks, those 3+ extra cards become more valuable as the chances of drawing junk increases.

1 hour ago, Tvboy said:

The difference between an and the seems pretty clear but would probably be challenging if you're not a native English speaker.

Lol

Yes, English is his first language. It may just be a case of not reading closely. I don't get the sense he's trying to cheat us.

Quote

Like you said, difference between 6 and 7 is small, but once you get to ~18+ cards in the item decks, those 3+ extra cards become more valuable as the chances of drawing junk increases.

Indeed! Some here have felt that starts to tilt the balance to the rebs a bit though, unless the imperial agenda card choices are also expanded via house rules. Any thoughts?

The Agenda deck is not getting bigger every time an expansion is added, it's still 18 cards whether you use core only or all expansions.

But I could be convinced that 4 cards might be a little low, so maybe the Imperial player should be allowed to see 6 cards minimum each upgrade phase.

A mini campaign is still a campaign. All mini campaigns are campaigns, but not all campaigns are mini campaigns. And yes they are all part of imperial assault, in case there was some argument there as well.

On 12/20/2017 at 0:17 AM, KotasMilitia said:

A mini campaign is still a campaign. All mini campaigns are campaigns, but not all campaigns are mini campaigns. And yes they are all part of imperial assault, in case there was some argument there as well.

?

On 20.12.2017 at 6:17 AM, KotasMilitia said:

And yes they are all part of imperial assault, in case there was some argument there as well.

really? can you prove it by quoting relevant rule?

1 hour ago, Jarema said:

really? can you prove it by quoting relevant rule?

Can we consider the rulebook cover as a rule itself?!