BSG

Weapons Control? I thought you would go to CIC, where plans are more powerful. Why hit the basestar once when you can hit it twice??

BSG

Because that would cost me a card and we will be short on cards due to Anders' weakness, or so it has gone in the past.

Pass on interrupts

Pass on interrupts.

BSG

That's true; we did have issues before.

All right, fine, here's your plan (SP-4): aim and shoot.

BSG

Pass on interrupts.

BSG

We have an SP. Now, ah... Um. Where did I put my dice? Has it been that long? Looks like we need a stand-in. This one's mottled red and black, with blue numbering. Let's see if it likes you:

Die roll: 7 + 2 = 9. Hit! And we have a... Critical Hit! One more hit will finish off this basestar.

Not to mention that Admiral Adama apparently took all the wimmenz with him! Jeez, look at this sausage-fest.

That doesn't seem right, does it? The omen of the fleet certainly don't think so. They've demanded to know why no women are in the opening credits! Will they listen to the Chief's mansplaining? Chief Tyrol's Crisis is:

Unfair Bias
Skill Check (12 YGP)

Possible interrupts: Investigative Committee, Scientific Research, Reckless. Everyone, please pass or play. You can also send me COs for the check itself.

If you wish, you may also vote to TANK. This vote means that you believe the crew should not even attempt the check, bu let it fail. If all human players vote to TANK, I will simply reveal Destiny (plus any relevant COs) and resolve the check. If anyone does not want to TANK, the check plays out as normal. Voting to TANK does not prevent you from playing into the check if it goes ahead.

BSG

Die roll: 7

CURSES.

Critical Hit!

WISHES.

Pass on interrupts.

I can only help a little on this check, unfortunately. And, uh, we really don't want Chief to lose all his cards! He has more than any of us!!

BSG

Pass on interrupts.

I can help a good deal with the check.

BSG

I can help a good deal with the check.

This is a good point to make sure everyone understands the secrecy rules concerning what you can say about a skill check. (Your statement is fine, it just reminded me.)

When playing into a skill check, you are limited in what you can say about your contribution to saying that you can help a lot or a little (or not at all, of course), or other binary descriptions (e.g. high/low). If you are playing multiple cards into a check, you may say you are playing a medium amount. It's not appropriate to add further descriptors, such as "fairly high" or "a very little". You may NEVER identify which cards, by number or colour, that you played/are playing into a check.

Outside of a check, where a particular card effect is relevant to a discussion, you may state whether or not you have it (e.g. when the Chief was deciding what to do, Apollo was permitted to offer an SP for attacks against the basestar. When planning for a check, you can discuss whether anyone has an IC to play. And so on.) You may not use this simply o list the cards in your hand, nor may you state the value of the card in question. (It's common sense - if the card's effect is relevant to the current discussion, it's ok.)

0-value cards are in an odd position. They are played into a check, which means you cannot state that you played/are playing them. On the other hand, they are played for heir effect, and it's ok to discuss whether you have a card whose effect is relevant to the current discussion. Generally, I would rule that it's ok to discuss whether a check could benefit from a given 0-value card, but the standard rules apply about the cards you play in - you can't identify, before or afterwards, any cards that you did or didn't play into a check (including the 0-value ones).

BSG

Quick aside: Billytea, can you use the gmail address to send me stuff? That one gets forwarded to my phone, but I can't check the other one at work.