Tried to make a general category for this:
1) We had the Klingon Character, Toral, that can be upgraded to another Klingon Character of 8 value or less and wondered if Worf was considered both a Federation Character and a Klingon Character. I'm quite sure he is only a Federation Character (which would require using the Wesley Crusher card), but his card DOES say Klingon on it. Thanks!
Last edited by hoopsjvl; 01-13-2012 at 04:55 PM.
look here: http://www.bandaicg.com/startrek/for...3-Promo-Picard
"Commander Character would refer to a Character with the Commander Characteristic. "
Being a Character with a Klingon trait makes the card a Klingon Character.
You would look at their allegiance. Worf has the Federation sign as his symbol. He's considered a Federation character only.
To contrast, Promo Q has no symbol. Wesley cannot become him, and obviously nobody else can become him.
I agree with Ida_Joe, but would like an official ruling due to the comment left by Jan.
Also, one nitpick, sure seems like the Worf Character should have had at least a +1 Speed also. Only a +2 attack along with his ability seems slightly lacking compared to other 6 cost Characters. Just my opinion though, love the Game!
Last edited by hoopsjvl; 01-14-2012 at 10:51 AM.
Guys, with regard to the explanation on Commander character, Worf must be a Klingon character. Otherwise this would be an inconsistent wording.
If "Commander Character would refer to a Character with the Commander Characteristic. "
then "Klingon Character would refer to a Character with the Klingon Characteristic. ".
Toral doesn't speak about an affiliation, it just promotes a Klingon Character. That's what he is.
Last edited by Jan Horinek; 01-15-2012 at 12:09 AM.
You've got the right idea, but the wrong context.
Worf is a Federation character with the Klingon Characteristic.
Sela is a Romulan character with the Human Characteristic.
Note that Sela does not have a "Federation" Characteristic. Wesley couldn't become her even if she cost 8. Characteristics refer to race, rank, etc. Toral, Wesley, etc. act based on Allegiance. (Probably not the proper term, but I think you get the idea)
ALEX? Can you end this little debate? THANKS!
In that case there is no place for a Commander Character in the game. Just an Affiliation Character with Commander Characteristics. That would change the wording a bit ... if there has been any wording indeed.
I believe the "spirit" of the card was meant to deal with whose side the characters are on. It would not make much sense to be able to upgrade a Klingon Character who is assigned to a Klingon ship to a Federation Character assigned to a Federation Ship. I think characters like Sela and Worf confuse the issue, but Sela is only half human, and Worf is clearly not on the side of the Klingon's. When Worf was on the side of the Klingon's he gave up his Starfleet commission, but his card clearly shows he is in Starfleet. I could be wrong, but this is the only explanation that makes sense to me. Alex, please tell me I'm right or wrong!
Also, * Jan, it makes no sense to me to discuss the Basic characters since these cards clearly state the only characters they can upgrade to are either Ferengi, Romulan, Klingon or Federation. I think that's why including the Basic Characters in this discussion has created confusion. Again, I could be wrong.
Last edited by hoopsjvl; 01-16-2012 at 06:00 PM.
to hoopsjvl: Basic Characters don't play role at all - they are characters, that's all that matters. I am talking about wording .. statements that define relations - here between affiliation, trait (here called characteristics) and a name of a card. Clever, consistent wording helps great deal when you need to clear up tangled situations in a game.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote