Obstensibly, this is an Assymetric game in that one player must be Light Side and one must be Dark Side.

However, I dont see why it could be made symmetrical in casual (non-Tourney) play. The Lightside will be battling it for first to destroy 3 objectives, and both Dark Side players will have their own dial of death. As for the Balance of the Force, just declare whoever randomly goes first as "Light Side" and the other uses the Dark Side for the token.

This came up because I have 2 players who I am teaching the game to, and neither like the Light Side. So: why not let them bash it out as DS?

I'd say if you were to try it'd be smartest to stick to a "one solution" sort of system, like the first to destroy 3 of the other player's objectives.

have you decided what happens when both want to play a unique card like vader? can they both have one? or is it first one on the field…?

Ravncat said:

I would imagine the game of thrones rules would be useful here. Unique characters can be played by different players but cannot switch controls in a way that would make one player have 2 same name uniques.

flightmaster101 said:

Page 26 of the Core Rulebook already has a rule for that.

"When a unique card is in play, no player can put into play another card with the same card title."

Does that preclude me from having Imperial Vader & Sith Vader in the same deck?

cdgodin said:

No, it just precludes you from having both of them in play at the same time. Just like you can have 2 Sith Vaders in your deck, but only one of them in play.

D.Knight Sevus said:

We're throwing a bit of the rules out when we decide to go to LS vs LS or DS vs DS, I think when we make that change we discover that there are currently no way's for a light side player to have vader on the table - it doesn't exist. So now that we're looking at mirror matches we have that possibility.

One side getting palpatine and vader before the other becomes a pretty huge advantage. However capturing may allow a mechanic to get around it. Other games have different solutions. Is following the title rule across both players in a mirror match something that you'd want to be in this variant? I'd suggest playtesting is needed to find out - but I suspect that like Game of thrones above - or Magic the gathering - that an alternate solution to "just one" on the board may be needed to give these decks a hand at balancing.

As a side note, I've always found it fairly interesting that capturing cards turned them face down so that they become cards - It seems to me that capturing leia should prevent the LS from playing another leia.

Ravncat said:

Thank you for that. I was making a suggestion. If we were actually playing by the rules there would be no DS v DS or LS v LS.