Adventure card resolution

[Admrobbo]

Just for clarification, a query I have been asked to explain a number of times....

Captain Andy and Captain Beth are comitted to same contract. Andy has initiative as his ship has higher initiative. Contract has two complications in this example.

Andy goes first in Resolution phase as has higher initiative. It so happens that he cannot resolve either complication. Therefore his phase ends and as the contract to which he is committed still has complications at the time he was forced to pass, I.e. failed to resolve either complication, he is ineligible.

Beth now has her turn. She can resolve one complucation. Her turn again, can resolve remaining complication. She then passes and as contract has no remaining complications, she is eligible.

She then resolves the contract. Scores points. The contract is then removed to discard. Both Beth and Andy become uncommitted. Andy misses out as he failed to resolve complication on his turn and was thetefore forcex to halt his phase and became ineligible, even though by stage 3 of that phase the contract had no complications remaining.

I believe the above is correct ?

Similar example.. . Andy succeeds in removing complication on his turn, Beth does so also on her turn, Andy passes and is eligible and Beth does same and is also eligible.

Now both Andy and Beth can resolve contract in stage 3. At this point, as Andy has initiative, he resolves contract first. Rules say that if a contract is resolved, move it to discard.

I get asked why Beth also scores contract when it should be discarded after Andy resolves it as he had initiative and resolves first and when a contract is resolved it goes to discard.

Only way for Beth to resolve first would be if she pumps up her initiative using an event at the moment of the start of stage 3 so she gets to resolve first before Andy.

However, rules state that if two captains resolve same contract in stage 3, they both score, but both for 1 point less.

Just to be clear that discarding of contract once it has been resolved does not occur until all eligible captains have had the chance to resolve?

However, it being driven by initiative and being discarded before the other can resolve is much more ruthless!

Finally, linked to above, is initiative checked at start of every stage of each phase, and can be inflated or reduced by events and reactions at start of each stage.... as though start of each stage is start of a queue?

I hope the above makes sense. The queries have been asked of me a number of times. Thanks for confirmation.

[Horizon Ian]

Quick answers to some of the questions:

From Page 10 of the downloadable rulebook:

Stage3: Determine play order by comparing each captain’s . The captain with the highest rating sets play
order by choosing a first captain for the remainder of the round. When play occurs in “Initiative Order” it begins
with the first captain, then proceeding clockwise. The “acting captain” is the player currently progressing
through a stage.

Initiative Order is set once during the round, during the ready phase. Changes to Initiative Ratings during the round won't affect Initiative Order after it has been set.

The player with the highest Initiative Rating during this step of the ready phase chooses the first captain (player), i.e. the highest rating doesn't equate to being first each phase of the round. Order goes clockwise from the chosen captain when player order occurs.

For multiple captains pursuing the same contract, per the sidebar, each eligible captain has the opportunity to go through the stage's steps and resolve the contract and any subplots. These steps aren't sequenced such that one captain would have an advantage over another as long as they are all eligible. When all eligible captains are done with the stage and at least one of the captains resolved the contract, the contract will get discarded and replaced. Just for clarity, if no captain succeeds at resolving the contract, the contract would remain in play.

Is this simple? No. I wish it were easier to explain. Certain choices were made to enable multiple captains to resolve the same contract as that leaves the play field more open, especially for three and four player play. Also, there are tactical reasons to try to suppress an opponent's victory points by pursuing (and resolving) the same contract, which have come up reasonably often in my play.

You are correct in your examples about how the multiple captains would take turns resolving complications, given that Andy was chosen as the first captain for the round.

[Admrobbo]

Many thanks Ian for the detailed response. My example assumed but didn't state that Andy chose himself to play first.

I've been teaching it correctly which is good news, however I'm kept on my toes by folks reading rulebook differently to me. They are also thinking much more ruthlessly than me !

I suggested they could play that way with a house rule, however your explanation confirms that allowing all eligible captains to get a chance to resolve it before it is discarded allows flexibility and more options.

As you say, it also creates tactical option to do it deliberately to restrict points gain by your opponent.

I'll keep the examples coming as they come up. As I say to all, there is no such thing as a silly question.

The initiative question came from a player who was thinking initiative should should be more fluid and adjustable mid round otherwise why have cards that change initiative, however I showed some card options where with the right combinations, it can be advantageous to adjust initiative. I'll maybe review these and add them to my teaching.

Could you share some examples ?

[Horizon Ian]

Can see the KS update that explains about printers not using most recent files for additional possible confusion on rules.

I'm not sure I understand exactly which examples I can help with. But, I was playing Sunday with people I've gamed with before who just got their cards, and I think I have an example of why initiative matters.

Much of the time in my games, unless there are action phase actions that are important, the preference is to go last in initiative order because it gives the most control for placing/replacing complications.

In one of the games Sunday, my opponent had Rika Honami and I had a crew with a Neural Gun. If I go first, I Neural someone. If my opponent goes first, Rika can exert my crew and I can't use the Neural Gun's use ability. So, my opponent had an incentive to go first rather than second.

That's one situation which isn't that uncommon. Replace any damage dealing effect - Body Pistol, Aggravated Assault, Vorn Drusus - for the Neural Gun and go first with an exert effect to prevent someone from taking crew out or just dealing more damage than you want to heal later.

We also had many instances Sunday of multiple players jumping on the same contract. One time, three players were pursuing the same contract. I avoided having to deal with any complications because the other two players cleared the two complications as everyone wanted to gain VPs.

Another scenario where initiative order can be interesting, though one that I would expect to be unusual given the current ships, is a three or four player game with two captains pirating a third captain who has a static AV increase from an upgrade (as opposed to an until end of round AV increase). First pirate assigns enough structure damage to the upgrade to jettison it and the second pirate takes less damage in return fire.

[Admrobbo]

Thanks Ian.

I can see lots of reasons why being first player is useful or desirable.

A ship with higher initiative obviously has the advantage here.

Event card "Time Is Money" increases or decreases initiative of target captain which of course can be yourself or an opponent.

As an Event card is a reaction, it can only be played as a reaction to another card.

The query I've been asked a number of times is the example on page 23 of the rules.....

Why does Captain Solo want to increase his initiative, if it does not affect turn order once initial initiative is set in Stage 3 of the Ready phase, unless cards like time is money can be played in response to the start of a stage or phase.

However, I believe no cards can be played in response to the start of a stage or phase, which does not start a queue, but must be played in response to another card.

So, there must of course be cards that state something like ... "captain with higher initiative gains something or other", at which point an event card like "Time is Money" would be very useful.

I was asked to provide such examples of cards or such situations and I have not yet found an answer to share.

[Admrobbo]

Except of course ......

One such example would be "RVD Overturned Thruster Plate"....

This gives a hit bonus to ship with higher initiative, so playing "time is money" into queue in response to that effect would potentially modify that cards impact.

However, "RVDs" effect is a permanent effect.

Can Event cards be played in response to a permanent effect. How does the queue work in that example.....

[Horizon Jeff]

Both abilities on the RVD are Persistent, though the +1 is conditional on having higher .

Persistent effects do not enter the queue (page 24). Playing an event such as Time is Money to gain initiative therefore wouldn't be "in response," you would simply play the , gain the , and then if you met the condition of having higher than an opposing , you would then gain +1 against it.

Once Time is Money's duration expired (end of the round), your would go back to normal, and if that score does not exceed your opponent's, then you would no longer qualify for the +1.

[Admrobbo]

I realised that was a poor example as Time Is money can of course be played at any time and forms the start of its own queue.

I'll go back to thinking up other examples.

Many thanks.

[Horizon Ian]

Just for clarity, events can be added to the queue as a reaction to another effect, as can cards with reaction timing, but, unless otherwise specified, events and effects with reaction timing can also create a new queue, as you mention. Put another way, think of reaction as a bonus rather than a limitation.

Time is Money has always been thought of as a card played during the ready phase to allow captains to change who gets to choose being the first captain for a round. Other uses are, as you say, more esoteric.

I did notice that (at least) one crew card in its printed version isn't clear about when its ability is used and I will talk with Jeff about how we want to clarify its timing.

I expect there to be various questions around timing as we opted for timing rules of similar complexity as other card games to have the card interaction possibilities that many card game players are used to.

[Horizon Jeff]

I realised that was a poor example as Time Is money can of course be played at any time and forms the start of its own queue.

I'll go back to thinking up other examples.

Many thanks.

Timing can be the most troubling part of card game rules. Despite all manner of ingenious language across the entire industry, ultimately we're all just trying to stop arguments and fist-fights.

It may help to remember that the queue, although technically in operation whenever an activated effect is generated or a card is played, really only matters when someone (whether an opposing captain or the active captain) wants to play a (and all are unless otherwise specified) in response.