To see the cards themselves, check out this Card list for the Q-Continuum expansion set.
PICTURE: Our first Q-card. Let me make a few comments about the graphics on these: First, the Q-icon is fine. A bit silly looking perhaps, but functional. The white on black design, I like. My Q-Continuum is off the spaceline dark like outer space and the infinite depths of the imagination. The black also highlights the picture which is: Nice colors and a striking image. When this frame appeared on the show, I couldn't really make out any "serpent", but here we can easily see them on the sphere without all the distortion and rotation. (What kind of fauna IS this??? What you get when you cross a cobra and an Edo Probe?) And the Easter Egg is totally unintrusive. A pretty 4.5.
LORE: Not much to work with on Q-cards as they're no more than quotations from members of the Q-Continuum. This one, like most, is fine. Certainly illustrates the game text where the title and picture do not. A 3.
TREK SENSE: Nothing to do with serpents and everything to do with the featured quotation. The show is very well represented here. A 4.
STOCKABILITY: To stock or not to stock in the side-deck... well, it's too easily overcome, so there's a risk to doing so. But the effect is pretty good if it works. Q = 3.
TOTAL: 14.5 (72.5%) One of the better Q-cards overall, especially in its more intangible qualities (those other than game play).
PICTURE: Two things spring to mind. 1) Gee, Mrs. Rogers is kinda cute; and 2) what's that cola can next to her knee? But really, a close-up might have been more effective here as the distance really washes away any detail of the already transparent couple. A drab 2.5.
LORE: Word for word Q's speech. Really explains why the game text is as it is. A solid 4.
TREK SENSE: It plays a bit like it did when the Rogers had Amanda in the first place - it takes and protects an Amanda from the Q-Continuum (from being played as an Interrupt). The other two cards I imagine are the parents themselves, but that all conceptual here, lowering the score to a still impressive 3.9.
STOCKABILITY: It's mostly protection against Palored Amandas, and not very strong at all. The Amanda still has its effect. A minor Q-ability for yourself if your opponent hits it. So a 1.8.
TOTAL: 12.2 (61%) A pass thanks to its thoughtful extrapolation from the show.
PICTURE: A cool surreal picture, like that of many AU cards. Data is uncharacteristically(?) emotional as, disturbed, he answers his own phone. Still, a bit far away and dark... a 4.
LORE: Not exactly correct. Saying that Data's dreams were surreal because of the interphasic plasma creatures is like saying dreams are not usually surreal. And they are. Even Data's (as seen in "Birthright"). It does a fair job of explaining the game text though. Not bad. A 3.3.
TREK SENSE: Well worked out except for one detail. I'll get to it in a moment. First, it requires an Android, logical to say the least. Then, that android (presumably) kills a crewmember. Troi didn't die, but then, she's a main. Also, if the Interphasic Plasma Creatures are on board, the Android gets to kill three people. In the show, of course, the dilemma never occurs at all without the IPCs' interference. Dr. Soong can cure, makes sense. What doesn't to me is that Empathy could possibly stop the carnage. Why? Most androids don't have emotions! Troi was lucky. She certainly didn't have a sense of Data's mental state. So since Empathy has no business being there, score lowered to 3.9.
SEEDABILITY: Depends on your opponent's propensity for using androids, really. They're more and more common, but so is Empathy. It makes a natural combo with IPC too. What I'd like to see is somebody save his three big Romulans from Lore's murderous rampage (like he needed an excuse) by sending his nemesis, Dr. Soong, over to the crew. Specialized, so it's risky: a 3.4.
TOTAL: 14.6 (73%) A middle-of-the-road dilemma with a nice picture and some thought put into its design.
PICTURE: An excellent pic for an Equipment card. The image is clear and focused, and has a nice color scheme. Too many cards show beige pieces of equipment on a beige background. Here, the purples and blues are nice. A 4.
LORE: Not as general as it could be (limiting it to use by the Enterprise), but I like the examples. One thing though: do you really mine ships? Or don't you mine an area? Fuzzy. A 2.
TREK SENSE: The mining area is a good idea, and well rendered. Navigation WOULD help you through it. And since anti-matter is easily detectable by sensors while being very hard to transport, you WOULD need Transporter Skill to nullify the pods. But why not leave them at planet missions too? These hold some conceptual space. Fear of reentry? A 4.2.
STOCKABILITY: If you leave one somewhere, make sure you don't need to go back there again. Couple with other ship stoppers (like Q-Nets and Tetryon Fields) to make sure they hit. (I love pollution decks.) They even work against heavily shielded ships like those of the Borg. Unfortunately, Pods are getting less and less effective. Decipher keeps putting out more and more Transporter Skill and Navigation with every expansion. What? You say you use it to nullify Manheim's Dimensional Door? Get real. A 2.5 and dropping.
TOTAL: 12.7 (63.5%) Fair, but in real danger of being relegated to the binder for good.
PICTURE: It's odd that this card turns up the same week as my review of Admiral Picard. Jean-Luc's got the same posture on both cards! For a Klingon concept, I would have liked something more Klingon. Maybe a clearer shot of the Rite of Succession? Can't give it more than a 2.2.
LORE: What the card needed was a definition of an Arbiter of Succession. We get the story surrounding Picard's stint as one instead. An off-track 2.
TREK SENSE: Though the Rite normally ends in battle, that's not what we got on the show (thanks to Worf). In any case (and this works), the winner is rewarded with points (like completing a mini-mission), and the choice made would naturally nullify the Civil War. Killing the chosen Chancellor counts as another mini-mission that undoes the first. You only have one Chancellor of course, so the whole deal is unduplicatable. Half the fun of the card is getting to choose B'Etor or Konmel as the new Klingon leader. A 3.9 only because Going to the Top won't get you the new Chancellor.
STOCKABILITY: Unfortunately, it's hard to use. How can you be sure your opponent will play Klingons? Even then, you have to kill his appointed Chancellor to get the points (at least, one of his leaders is already dead from Arbiter). Play it on your own Klingons (maybe getting extra points by killing Konmel or Korris in K'nera's presence and/or with Klingon Death Yell) but risk having him die on you, transferring those juicy points to you opponent. Dangerous... a 3.5.
TOTAL: 11.6 (58%) Fun but risky. There are better ways to get 10 points. Still, to end the game... perfect.
PICTURE: Even more eerie for its far away shot, this has just the kind of surreal look most Q-cards should have. The "brother" is well represented by the monk's outfit. A solid 4.1.
LORE: The quote (fun that the Q-cards have Q-uotes as lore, eh?) goes to the game text which doesn't make sense without it. It's not one of Q's wittier moments however. A 3.6.
TREK SENSE: Sparse. Q's gifts (actually Q-Riker's in the episode) had nothing to do with point values. Anytime you score points in the game (Trek sense-wise), it should be because you accomplished some goal (a mini-mission). Here, there's no sense to it. It follows the lore to game mechanic land, plain and simple. A 0.3.
STOCKABILITY: Well, it doesn't cost much to try, but the real reason to stock this in you Q-Continuum is to try to get Gifts of the Tormentor for yourself. Fat chance of that happening unless it was your whole Q-strategy. It's not limited to that ploy though (like Gift is), you could always be lucky enough to score from some dilemma or Klingon Yell in the discard pile. Another way to maximise on points gained from a Gift stategy is to destroy a few of you opponent's missions through Supernova or Black Hole. It's all very hard to take advantage of... a 2.2.
TOTAL: 10.2 (51%) None too good... too specific a card to use at all times, with uneven qualities.
PICTURE: A Trek rendition of the traditional barber pole with neatly folded towels on an end table. It's a good set shot of something we didn't regularly see on the show. Cool, but static and drab: a 3.
LORE: Deadpan is the way I like my humor... funny while staying in the documentary mode. Did you know the Enterprise also had a fully-staffed kitchen as well? Another 3.
TREK SENSE: Plays on table. Can't disagree. The uselessness (gamewise) of the ship's barber shop is well illustrated. 4.
STOCKABILITY: Two uses. 1) Call it cool and collect 5 points from Parallax Arguers. Unfortunately that's still 2 card slots for 5 points. 2) Play as a mark of your confidence in your deck and as a way to win a psychological victory over your opponent. Heck! Protect it with a Rishon Uxbridge for extra Parallaxing! Go crazy! (Many think you'd HAVE to be crazy to play Barber Pole. I say to them: you can't know until you've been there.) Not too stockable... a 1.5.
TOTAL: 11.5 (57.5%) Despite not passing Barber Pole, I wish Decipher hadn't given up on Barbering cards. They are still some of the funnest and funniest cards in the game. One per expansion wasn't too much...
PICTURE: A little dark, but a great expression on Sarek! A shocking 4.
LORE: A good explanation of the disease's effects, but, as we'll see, it doesn't quite match the game text. A 3.2.
TREK SENSE: Of course, it needs an older Vulcan to hit, which is not to say that any Vulcan without Youth is prone to it. The show says that Vulcans in their 200s can get it. Now, Satelk or Solkar (to name a couple) don't look to be that age, yet can catch the disease in the game. The strange delay for death is actually pretty cool. "You can't do another mission in your condition." "What condition? I'm fine!!!!!!!" The Vulcan overtaxes himself and croaks. While the Vulcan is affected by the Syndrome, everyone (Vulcan included) drops in Integrity represented by the infighting and petty jealousies seen on the show. Good job except for the first part (but there's no other way to do it). And how can such a rare disease be seeded under every mission? A 2.9 nevertheless.
SEEDABILITY: With Vulcans getting more and more important thanks to that universal wall Primitive Culture, a good attack of Bendii on some other planet is great. It helps that non-Federation players will have few Vulcans at their disposal. Vulcans are also necessay to fly the Vulcan Lander, one of the cheaper ways to land on universal Planet. Put Bendii on the Planet and your opponent might risk getting stuck on the planet if he solves the mission. Some good uses, but not everyone will stock Vulcans. A 3.
TOTAL: 13.1 (65.5%) A dilemma that makes the cut, but has seedability that might vary greatly as other Vulcans cards appear.
PICTURE: This picture suffers from TNG's first season inexperience. The make-up is laughable, and the sky is purple-pink just like on every other planet in the original series. It lacks a little drama - a 2.
LORE: The lore explains the game text and has a little something about the Tkon Empire, but it fails miserably in describing the BLADE of Tkon. There is no mention of it, and no reason why this should be the card's name. A 2.2.
TREK SENSE: Like I just said, the Blade itself has absolutely nothing to do with the card's effect. It's just there as a reasonable artifact. As to the game text respecting the Empire's planet moving ability, it more or less works. For one, I was under the (reasonable) impression that "moving" planets meant they could travel like a ship to their new coordinates, not teleport away from them. But I may be wrong. How this translates into an Artifact usable by away teams is the main point against this card. No more than a 2.2.
SEEDABILITY: Disrupting the spaceline has a number of uses - repair damage done by Q, send an opponent to spaceline's end, avoid a Sheliak situation (though this requires timing), etc. But seed slots are valuable and putting this one in for mainly defensive reasons is probably not the best thing to do. Seed your own Q dilemma instead. In a good combo, you can do a lot more damage. A 3.0.
TOTAL: 9.4 (47%) Not very much, but then, it's an ugly little card.
PICTURE: One of the coolest in the Q-Continuum set. The extreme close-up, the torture room paraphernalia, the slight fish-eye lense effect and Geordi's expression all lend to the sheer drama of the picture. Geordi's a great subject for the pic too, as his white eyes speak of the mind washed clean behind them. A masterful 5.
LORE: The usual problem of stating specific instances to describe general effects rears its ugly head again (can we brainwash personnel who don't have VISORs? Of course we can.) A 2.5.
TREK SENSE: Plenty. A captive is needed and once brainwashed, he or she is assimilated into the enemy affiliation. That personnel can even spy on his former affiliation since he or she never lost the original affiliation. One thing that cannot happen though (well, not yet) is having that personnel infiltrate its original team (like in the episode). Another thing that goes against Trek Sense: do all affiliations really brainwash captives? I don't think the Federation or the Bajorans do. Some Klingons, maybe... a square 3.5 on this issue.
STOCKABILITY: Not for all decks, but mighty fun! A capture deck should stock some for sure. Sure, Interrogation can yield you points, but as long as you've got a captive, you might as well use 'im. Brainwashed personnel can also be used to supplement espionnage strategies. After all, who better to solve your opponent's missions than the personnel HE planned to solve them with? Warning: Brainwashed Borg cannot solve missions, limiting the use of this card against that affiliation (they still lend skills such as RANGE boosters, etc.). A 3.1.
TOTAL: 14.1 (70.5%) It's a fun card as far as storytelling goes ("strap Spot into the machine, lieutenant.") and quite useful.
PICTURE: Nice and cool. Q's shuttle gives us some scale and prevents the pic from simply being another gas cloud. Not much more remarkable - a 3.1.
LORE: Straightforward lore that tells it like it is and gives justification for the game text. A clean 3.
TREK SENSE: Could be better, but still not too bad. It moves like one of the slower ships (since it took quite a while to find Q, this is reasonable). It only damages ships, presumably because all it's after is Mortal Q, not the sentients he's associating with. The Calamarain kill Mortal Q first chance they get though. Off-center stuff: 1) Why do they attack ships when Q is not present? 2) Why can't Kevin "nullify" this race like he did the Husnock? (Maybe he finds this race more palatable, who knows?) 3) Where's the Trek sense in letting your opponent choose its starting place? I at least have a possible answer to that last query: Maybe it simulates Q choosing a form as far away as possible from his enemies. Possible. A 4.1.
STOCKABILITY: It's got a number of things going against it. First, it doesn't do much damage if used as a ship attacker, doesn't move fast, one or two mission locations at most. Killing Mortal Q is something you either DON'T want to do to your opponent (reestablishes his Leadership) or have to plan on doing to yourself (what are the chances of Q being Naked Truthed on you in any given game?) Plus, you never decide where to play it... a too constraining 1.9.
TOTAL: 12.1 (60.5%) When it appeared on Data Laughing, I was expecting so much more.
PICTURE: A simple prop shot, and I usually hate those. Let me look at this one though... nope, I still hate prop shots. Can't even see it glow. A very dull 1.
LORE: No problems here. The canar is described, as is its function as it relates to the game. A clean 3.
TREK SENSE: Well... it sort of works like a cross between a Love Interest and a nemesis icon. I imagine the canar creates soul mates. If they ever meet, they leave the service and are never heard from again. But that's not the way it works on the show, is it? Most of the card is outright fabrication... a 2.2.
SEEDABILITY: It's not like you can seed dozens of artifacts in a game, so weaker ones like Canar will get left behind. Your best bet if you ARE using it, is to target two of your opponent's personnel to keep them apart. Good choices might be two strong personnel (keeps powerful Away teams in check) or personnel that boost one another (like Quark and Grilka). But don't forget that you have to play Canar immediately upon acquisition. You won't be able to do this if he keeps all his personnel together. Your other option is to target your own redshirt and have him or her pursue a loved one among your opponent's personnel. It's not as good as a nemesis icon however, since you lose your guy too. Note that the Dominion is close to immune to Canar: they have very few females to start with, all the good ones (Founders) can morph out of it. And if your opponent is playing Borg, you have to select two of your own personnel! Is this an artifact or a dilemma? And there you have it. Finally a use. Use it as a DILEMMA when you are Borg to force your opponent to chose to keep two personnal apart (or together in discard pile). Not much of a use though... a 1.6.
TOTAL: 7.8 (39%) Artifacts are too costly to waste card slots with the bad ones.
PICTURE: A fairly simple shot of the finger puzzle, probably enhanced by computer to show so much detail. It's ok if not spectacular. A 2.9.
LORE: A good summary of an inane subplot. The "fascinating" harks back to Spock, and to Data's early days as a Spock proxy. A 3.
TREK SENSE: What Trek Sense? There's some, but not much. First it requires an android to hit. I can believe a naive android like Data, Lal, et al. would fall prey to this kind of absurdity. But would Juliana Tainer or Lore stuff their fingers in the puzzle? Lore? Really? You think so? How about non-androids? Wouldn't Alexander want to play too? Then, there's the whole matter of the stopping effect. Why is the entire away team stopped? Are they just standing there laughing at the droid like the end of a Scooby-Doo episode? Androids are stopped for possibly longer. The more androids there are, the longer they stay stopped. Nice little mathematical equation, but no common sense here. And really, an android should be able to rip the puzzle to shreds with its strength, no? This wouldn't be a real dilemma in the "real" world. A 0.7
SEEDABILITY: An android hoser which will always work if yor opponent carries an android, but never will if he doesn't (obviously). You might consider it a good lead into Shot in the Back, to make sure a personnel does get killed, but here's the thing: that would work against a multi-android away team, but not with one that has only one. It's not a filter, the mission does not continue, and your opponent may as well wait for his androids to solve the puzzle before continuing on. After all, androids are great mission and dilemma solvers (if not chinese puzzle solvers) and this CFP is part of a combo, no? So, not much more than a delaying tactic in most cases, but if there's Soong-type abuse in your region... A mitigated 2.5.
TOTAL: 9.1 (45.5%) Solve this one by yourself... it's not too good a card.
PICTURE: Dirt ugly. Weren't we ever shown a nice, green colony, one you'd want to live in? This one (Moab IV, right?) looks really unpleasant. And brown makes for an unappealing card with a Picture score of 1.5.
LORE: I cannot find fault in the definition supplied, but as you'll see, that's gonna get this card into trouble later. The second sentence sort of universalizes colonies and that's good too. A 3.5.
TREK SENSE: Theoretically, this card turns you into a terraformer/colonist. Any time points are scored, Trek Sense-wise, I'm looking for something I call "goal-accomplishment". Accomplishing some goal should be the only reason to score points. Here, you get points for how successful your colony is. You gauge that success by how many people want to live there and how safe it is (that is, you get no points if your people are "opposed"). CIVILIANs get you more points because they are considered more "permanent" than other, more carreer-oriented, personnel. The Neutral "affiliation" (a lot of quotation marks in this paragraph, eh?) also makes sense as all the affiliations (save Borg) build colonies (they must, or else they'd only have their homeworld... in fact, your Outpost is probably at a colony since it can't be at your homeworld). The shields are about half those of your standard fortified outpost because it's no military installation. Building it at any mission you've completed is the only real sense problem. For one thing, why can't there be colonies on unsolved missions (other than when you're using Gi'ral, I mean)? These often exist in dangerous places. Furthermore, how can you build a colony on an inhabited planet? From the mission card's lore, you can often tell that there are people there, but you can still colonize. Think about it, the Romulans can build a Colony on Earth! The timing is also strange. Building and profiting from a Colony takes about as much time as it takes for a Coalescent Organism to choose a new victim (according to that card's lore, a few days). Finally, my nice little story above about how to profit from a colony falls apart when you look at the actual game text. It mentions an Away Team scoring points, so instead of scoring for number of inhabitants, you score for number of visitors. I don't get it (I know, it's just game terminology). Ends up getting a 2.9.
STOCKABILITY: With enough personnel, cooling off their heels at a Colony, you can win the game in a matter of only a few turns. Used to be anyway. While we used to hear a great deal about colony decks, there's been a major drop off. Why? Well The Sheliak can destroy one. The Borg can assimilate all your people there. New current rulings on Cybernetics makes it impossible for CIVILIAN Soong-Types to report directly there (they report for free where Cybernetics present, but it must be at a facility where it would normally be able to do so). Add to all that the greater emphasis on personnel battles (geez, if the Dominion can just drop their Ketracel-starved Jem'Hadar on a Colony, its not such a waste) and you've got a risky strategy going. Still, if you're carrying a large super-crew, you can end the game by beaming them down to a Colony at game's end to reach 100. Those points are cumulative per round, so even if you only leave a CIVILIAN there from time to time, you still offset points lost by The Higher... the Fewer et al. Current score rated at 2.7.
TOTAL: 10.6 (53%) Reached its peak soon after Q-Continuum came out, then started going down, down, down.
PICTURE: A little plain in the color department, but very cool. The main attraction is that we don't often get a personnel like this. He's on his side, disabled, missing a head. It's hilarious! Even better, the card sports one of the funnier easter eggs in the form of the large 911 written on the back wall of the transporter room. Lovely, just lovely. A 4.2.
LORE: A short and concise one-liner. Deadpan and funny in a dark sort of way, but too brief for a score higher than 3.
TREK SENSE: A lot of stuff to cover. The restriction is sensible - without his head, Data is disabled. His skills have been divided into the body and head with half of his Computer Skill going into the head. How the body actually contains Music, Astrophysics and the rest is beyond me, and more a dysfunction of Data's Head than of Data's Body. I'll get to it in due course. The Head doesn't enhance the ship if attached of course, since it is in effect enhancing the Body. The AU icon is here because Data could exist at the same time as his recovered body. Data's Body is not a persona of the genuine article. Data's Body can be seeded at your outpost, since, a bit like an artifact, he is found to have been there for years. Why the outpost though? That doesn't follow the show. They might have said Devidia II, but then anyone could have stolen and used the partial android since he is Non-Aligned (just get the Head). As for the attributes, Data's Body is only missing the Head's CUNNING. Ok, but I would have thought INTEGRITY was also a function of your brain. This was a hard one to translate, but a good try by the designers - a 4.
STOCKABILITY: Well, it's more a collector's card than a player's though I hear of people actually using Data's Body. What's good about it is, if they can get Data's Head, any affiliation can have a Data. I'll give you a trick though: Lore's Fingernail. An Event played from your hand is easier to pull than a Artifact to recover and bring into combination with a disabled personnel. With normal everyday Data, you don't get an AU icon (there are other sources), you can't seed him (but since it's gonna take a while to use him anyway...) and you can't turn his head into a ship booster at the drop of a hat. It's up to you. It's a fun card, but that's pretty much it. A 2.4.
TOTAL: 13.6 (68%) Data's Body reaches the average as a testament to Trek Sense and collector fun over playability.
PICTURE: Interesting! We get a close-up of Data's medals and it's up to us to match the medals' names in the lore with what we see in the frame Riker's holding up. All the medals are different and some sport some nice designs. I especially like the saturn-like pin in the upper left-hand-side corner. The "Federation icon" makes for a nice splash of color just where it's needed. The image is somewhat marred by an almost invisible (but controversial) Easter Egg of Gene Roddenberry's reflection in the glass. Points: 3.9.
LORE: A nice little list, but that's all it is. Interesting, but makes no effort to explain the card in terms of how it functions in the game. A 3.
TREK SENSE: Bleh. The title itself really shouldn't point to Data, especially given what follows. Are we to believe Data got all those medals for fighting? I don't think so. Gowron's Medals, sure. Data's, not so much. The rest, to be fair, works. You always get points for accomplishing some goal. Here, the goal is to win a battle. Only the leader gets the points since he or she probably commanded the mission (it requires a leader to battle). The medals are a very personal thing, so the points go away if you ever lose the personnel. Some sense, but they chose the card's title badly... a 3.1.
STOCKABILITY: Planning to battle? Put a couple of these in your deck to get rewarded for it. The Dominion, for example, are slow to start, but great fighters. They'll need those extra points to pass their enemies who probably have a headstart by the time the Alpha Quadrant is reached. And with Jem'Hadar, you're pretty sure of winning most battles. Now, replace the Dominion with any other affiliation and cut/paste this last paragraph, cuz even the Federation is looking at battling in a new light these days. A promising 3.5.
TOTAL: 13.5 (67.5%) Anything to do with battling has been getting hotter and hotter ever since the new personnel battle rules came out in First Contact. Can you imagine what Blaze of Glory will do to the game?
PICTURE: A very cool moment is paid hommage to on the card as, domino-like, the Klingon High Council turn their backs on dishonor. I think the picture frame was too small to show it well however, leaving the score at 3.6.
LORE: Best thing about the lore? The Klingon word at the begining. This is just the sort of flavor I want to see on species-specific cards. The explanation that follows is awsome as well and doesn't mince words. A very strong 4.2.
TREK SENSE: Perhaps the card bites off more than it can chew. I think the game text trivializes what, to the Klingons, is worth null-and-voiding an entire family for generations. First, there are certainly more dishonorable things than surviving a losing battle. The proof is in the pudding: with the pounding the Empire has received from the Dominion, there would be no Klingon warriors left to fight the war! I don't see Martok being discommended for losing an eye against a Jem'Hadar. Discommendation should be the result of treacherous behavior. "Plays on a Klingon who has just participated in Espionnage" or "killed a personnel with no hand weapon" or something like that. Next part: the dishonored Klingon becomes Non-Aligned (being non-existent to Klingon society), loses its Honor (logical) and points (the Klingon has failed in its species-generic goal of being honorable). I find no problem here. Of course, the disgraced warrior doesn't bring its progeny into it. If Worf (Son of Mogh) is dishonored, shouldn't Alexander be to? A 1.4 in all.
STOCKABILITY: How does an Interrupt or Event become binder fodder? By having too many requirements, especially those that are brought to the table by your opponent. That's the case with Discommendation. To use on your opponent, he must be playing with Klingons. He must also lose a battle and have surviving personnel. And what do you get for your trouble? A 5 point difference between you and said opponent, whose personnel loses Honor (if it had it in the first place) and becomes Non-Aligned. Is it so bad to be NA? The Klingon can still use Klingon-specific cards since it still retains its race. So it can't staff a Klingon ship alone, or attempt a Klingon mission alone. It wasn't your only Klingon right? If it couldn't MIX with your Klingons, THEN, that'd be something... What? You were wondering if you could play it on yourself? Well sure, you could render a personnel targeted by Assimilate Counterpart untouchable (sacrificing 5 points), but that would involve it surviving a losing battle! Combine Honor Challenge, Genetronic Replicator... WAITAMMINIT! Are we serious here? For a "just in case" scenario? Verdict: 0.9.
TOTAL: 10.1 (50.5%) Such a strong start, but had to discommend it at the end.
PICTURE: As good as the show's special effects allow it to be, or maybe I should say "as bad". Security guards trying to bust through a miniature Q-Net on the bridge. It doesn't even look like they're pushing! A dinky 0.9.
LORE: A line from medieval Q. Goes with the picture, and in an odd way, with the game text. we have to read more metaphorically. You "stay where you art" in the game, unable to advance because you've lost a key doorway. Simple and elegant. Verily, I give it a 3.4.
TREK SENSE: There's nothing Q can't do, so how can I blast any Q-card apart? It is certainly within his power to close any doorway in the game. Would he use a Net though? The small one pictured would fit over Ready Room Door and Airlock, and a larger Q-Net would readily close a Space/Time Portal and such, but why Net his own Tent? It's all a matter of effect though, as he could certainly shut off access to his "own" doorways (the Tent and Flash). The nullifyers don't hold up as much, but work in their own way. There are three ways to get rid of Door-Net: An AU Door (in another universe, Q never closed the doorway - passes the justification test, but not by much), 2 Diplomacy from hand (given that your hand is conceptually the game's future, it's odd that those personnel can affect the present - I do like the relationship with Q-Net's requirements, but this one's iffy) or any Q-Flash (Q gets bored and reopens the doorway). Q can do anything, but what can really stop Q? The card's fuzzy in that second regard... a 3.
STOCKABILITY: Fairly stockable in your Q-Continuum side-deck actually. As one of many effects to hit an Away Team or crew, it's not powerful, but not the only thing that'll hit. And as long as your opponent has at least one Doorway in play, it'll hit. Killing an AU Door can limit reporting. Killing the Q-Flash protects you from such shennanigans. Q's Tent cuts your opponent off from his powerful and/or last-ditch defense cards. The list goes on and on as most doorways are worth playing. Either close the only one he or she has in play, or make him or her sweat by having to choose which one gets to close. Then Revolving Door his other one! Note that the requirements to shut down Door-Net aren't very hard to muster, limiting it score to 3.2.
TOTAL: 10.5 (52.5%) The card so nice I'd do it twice... yeah, whatever ;-)
PICTURE: Two Picards sort of cooperating is NOT what Doppleganger is all about. This is the original Nemesis icon! We should have gotten Picard with his own dead body, or shooting himself (if such a frame exists). As it is, the card's a little dull and certainly low on drama. A 1.4.
LORE: See? The lore tells it like it is. No frills, but no mistakes. Could have used an explanation as to why Picard killed his duplicate though. A 2.7.
TREK SENSE: Well... I can't argue with the AU. And it does, in a way, explain how two players can have the same personnel out and in play, conceptually in the same universe. More or less. Doppleganger speculates that when the duplicates meet each other, they somehow catch up to one another and one disappears or dies or what have you. If duplicate personnel are in play through some means other than time travel (for example, they are clones), then there's no problem. If Doppleganger is not in play, where do duplicates come from? Maybe they're part of some Bluegill conspiracy or something. And why aren't personae "duplicates". If Picard meets Galen, he still meets himself, no? I'm ready to accept that is due to the nature of the duplication in the show ("Time Squared"). In it, the duplicates were from two very near points in time. Premiere Picard and FC Picard are not. The card attempts to work with something that makes no trek sense in the first place (unless you use the "optional rules"). Still, a 2.8.
STOCKABILITY: Like I said earlier, this is the ancestor of the nemesis icon. But nemesis icons aren't that useful. They're a bonus (or a danger) in case a certain personnel makes its appearance on the table. If it never does, no big deal. But playing an overarching nemesis icon as your standard card play defies logic. If you're playing this, you must have reason to believe that your opponent will play with the same personnel you are. With as many affiliations as we have, there's no reason to believe there's actually going to be much duplication, even among the Non-Aligned. Worse, personae, even those with the exact same card title, are not considered to be duplicates. So it's possible for your opponent to escape the discard by switching personae on you. This is what happens when a card has a potentially too powerful effect (slightly better than the nemesis icon since it doesn't wait til end of turn to have an effect), it gets loaded with too many limitations to balance it out. I don't even see why two extra counters had to be made for this (Clone Machine and Pulaski). A dreadful 1.4.
TOTAL: 8.3 (41.5%) I pray I never get a duplicate Doppleganger.
PICTURE: A flashy picture, but one I have problems about. In a sense, it's not Decipher's fault, but I'm not above criticizing Paramount for their role in what makes a card any good ;-). Why was the moving Q-Net ever pictured as a ball of colorful energy? Why can't it look like a sphere made of Q-Net links? Like I said, the problem lies with the show's creators, not the card's. Unless... The ball of energy is actually a manifestation of Q himself, pursuing the Enterprise, playing a cat and mouse game. It's not the Net at all. Q simply creates a Net at whatever point he catches up to the ship, but that glowing ball is him. So it could be there is no such thing as a Drag Net. NOW, it becomes a problem with the card's design. Tongue-in-cheek aside, it's not the best picture. A 2.4.
LORE: The lore supports the moving net idea over the Q manifestation theory. Doesn't go all that well with the game text as we will see. Nice pun in the title though. Average: 3.
TREK SENSE: Ok, it gives Q-Nets the further ability to move around. The show supports this (in fact, we could have cards that do anything at all as long as the letter Q was on there). Unlike the show though, the Net doesn't follow a ship. 1) It could be moving around all by its lonesome (why would it though? Q needs someone to pick on). 2) It can't catch up to a ship with any kind of decent RANGE, as "one location" isn't that far away. Perhaps as a Q-icon card, they could have made it a little more acurate. Built on a strong premise, but lacks the finer points of what was seen on the show. A 3.2.
STOCKABILITY: Bah. While Q-Nets are useful, they're not as useful as they once were. Diplomacy is often included in decks if only to pass Shaka and such. The Feds will fly through a Q-Net as if it were Kleenex, and the other affiliations have access to some fine diplomats as well (in general). So adding the ability to change the Q-Net's location is only as strong as the Q-Net's weakest link. If you get it to stick though, you can reap a number of rewards. Careful timing and strategy can keep enemy ships in pollution heavy territories (Gaps, Tetryon Fields, Warp Rifts), dangerous Badlands or out of a Quadrant (by blockading the Wormhole). While all of these may work with Q-Net alone, Drag Net gives you the flexibility you need to react to your opponent's decisions. Say a crucial ship gets separated from its Diplomacy personnel, your Q-Net(s) can move in and trap that ship. Its doable, but not a sure-shot. Overall, a 3.
TOTAL: 11.6 (58%) Speaking of dragging...
< Home............................................................................................................................Next 20 >
Contact me if you wanna talk about any of these :-)