Traveller CCG - Community

Hello to all,

I understand you can't split a card's Expense Value between multiple expenses, but is that also true when you're restoring health to crew members or repairing upgrade damages?

So, in essence, can one card with an Expense Value of 3 be used to heal two wounds and repair one one damage from an upgrade?

Many thanks for your time and help.

pvanniervp wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:03 pm

Hello to all,

I understand you can't split a card's Expense Value between multiple expenses, but is that also true when you're restoring health to crew members or repairing upgrade damages?

So, in essence, can one card with an Expense Value of 3 be used to heal two wounds and repair one one damage from an upgrade?

Many thanks for your time and help.

I don't play it that way. The of 3 would have to have all 3 applied to the same thing, like heal the of the same member or the repairing of on the same . The way I read the rules is you spend on "one thing at a time". But I'd sure like to play it the way you say! I hope I'm wrong, that would be great.

--> Capt. Ric, you can indeed play it that way!

I had posted my question on BoardGameGeek as well and received an official reply from Horizon Games:

I asked our lead developer and Ian said that yes, they would count as a single expense, so you could use one card to heal multiple wounds and/or structure.

I bid you safe travels in the Mains!

WOOT-WOOT! Thanks that is good to know.

From e-rulebook, page 10.

Stage 4: In initiative order, captains may restore from and/or repair from , at a cost of per
point. Captains may elect to recover some or all of the or , at their discretion.

Not intuitive, perhaps, and not spelled out well. Design intent was that you can group all of your wound payments together. Because wound payments are way more common than repairing structure, comes up far more often when teaching the game. When written into the rulebook, no distinction is implied or stated that paying for structure is different from paying for wounds.

I can see how someone can interpret however seems more intuitive, but we can justify saying you treat it as effectively saying "Choose how many and how much you are paying for. The total is a single expense." in how we did word things.

The combination of "and/or" in one line and the sweeping casualness of how much to fix of the second line might lead one to how Horizon intended it to work. Also, the "Stage" isn't broken up into components, which at least doesn't work against thinking of it all as a single expense.

Thanks Ian. I had just gotten in my head that when expending it was "always" for one "thing" at a time. I wouldn't call this errata personal, just a clarification.