-
Another rule issue I couldn't find by reading rulebook or searching forums (the usual apology if it's buried somewhere and I failed to find it):
On a robot develop action (or on response if playing as Galactic Developers), does the robot have to pay a credit to place Imperium Planet Buster?
I played that it does pay a credit, since it is more expensive than a 6-dev (for which it must pay a credit) and scores the same number of points as a 6-Dev. NB: I play all games on Hard difficulty; if playing on Easy or Medium I would have ruled that IPB scores 9 anyway since it is a pre-printed value, although I am not certain that is true either.
Thanks in advance for help/insight!
-
Serge
Canada
Vancouver
British Columbia
-
Admittedly i know very little on the intricacies, but wouldn't the way one plays Pan-Galactic Research be related and help answer the question?
-
-
PGR is paid for like any other 6 dev, but is worth the stated 4 points. Even so, it is somewhat odd (although I understand the thought process) that PGR doesn't count for the "1st 6-Dev" goal and Imp Planet Buster only scores 1 for GalFed even though it's harder to place than a 6-cost.
Because of the way these two devs are handled in the rules, it would surprise but not shock me if the intent was for the robot to place IPB for free (in which case I've been playing it wrong).
-
Tom Lehmann
United States
Palo Alto
California
-
theright555J wrote: On a robot develop action (or on response if playing as Galactic Developers), does the robot have to pay a credit to place Imperium Planet Buster?
No.
(We try to avoid special rules for individual cards just for the solo game. However, if you want to play a variant house-rule treating IPB (for the robot only) as a 6-dev, feel free to do so. But the "official" answer to your question is "no".)
-
-
Tom Lehmann wrote: No.
(We try to avoid special rules for individual cards just for the solo game. However, if you want to play a variant house-rule treating IPB (for the robot only) as a 6-dev, feel free to do so. But the "official" answer to your question is "no".)
Thanks, Tom.
I must admit that I am surprised by your answer, though. There are at least two cards that get "special rules" in the solo game, at least for setup purposes (Ancient Race and Galactic Scavengers) in that the robot only starts with 3 cards in the draw stack for each of those. I played GS wrong at least twice because I hadn't read the fine print in the rulebook. Moreover, it's not entirely intuitive that the robot should discard Doomed World from tableau after activating its super-settle power: it doesn't discard R&D Crash, New Military Tactics, etc. under any circumstances. So it's not without precedent that cards get treatment in the solo game that is not deducible without reading the rulebook itself (i.e. the iconography does not suffice to correctly interpret the whole rules).
Enter IPB. I have always interpreted the credit meter as an abstaction of the robot's hand size, hence the necessity of credit for the robot to place 6's and dev-chits. Calling build phases to wreck the robot's credit is even consistent with calling build phases with a live opponent to punish low hand size. If it costs 1 credit to place a 6-dev, why shouldn't it cost at least 1 credit to place IPB?
-
Tom Lehmann
United States
Palo Alto
California
-
You are correct that start worlds do get special setup treatment in the solo game. However, we wanted to keep actual play as simple as possible.
As a variant, you could play IPB as costing the Robot 1 credit (when 6s are worth 9) or 2 credits (when 6s are worth 6) or even 2 credits all the time. Either would be a reasonable variant. However, officially, IPB costs the robot 0 credits.
The robot's solo game is an abstraction of RFTG, not a simulation of it. If you want to add extra house rules to make it more of a simulation, feel free to do so. It's your game.
-
|
|
