I want to make sure I'm understanding the wording on the card correctly.

Is the 'stolen' commander effect considered to be the Yammosk's commander effect for game mechanics purposes? If so, since the War Coordinator ability only applies to allied commanders, the commander effect that is 'stolen' does not get its benefits, correct?

I can't remember what exactly is on the preview card, but this is the intent (and is still being worked on as we speak) :

-Yammosk may steal 1 CE from enemy squad, you may not change it mid way through the match. Faction specific CEs (like Princess Leia's, or Queen Amidala), are 'changed' to affect Yuuzhan Vongs
-YVWC applies to all SA that affect YV(the faction) allies, and to all allied CE including its own, for the rest of the skirmish

"Once per turn, each follower within 6 squares may reroll 1 attack at +4 Attack and +10 Damage. If the result of the rerolled attack is a miss, the attacking character is defeated. "

Sweet! If two sentences are two different CEs, you can take the first sentence and not the second. Nice!

you need to put the whole link in, not click on it. It did the same thing for me. THe whole thing is not a hyperlink just facebook.

Also, just to make sure people understand, this is also not a finished card. Obviously you can see how our changes occur, bit by bit as we fix things for QC and Rules until we get a final project. So what we're showing is more along the lines of what our process with the cards is. We're still having huge discussions today, in fact this figure is the one we've put the most work towards trying to get it just right ^_^

Hopefully someone has suggested splitting up the emplacement and limiting abilities. Perhaps giving it 'Emplacement' with something like 'Territorial - only one of this figure may be part of an squad per map/squad/###points/whatever'. So it would make the new ability more useful in the future.

This is a very interesting piece. I like it.

As a rules issue, I think "one per map" has potential for ambiguity in off-beat scenarios. It's fine, of course, for 99.9% of the scenarios you'd run into, but what if you run a scenario with one or 2 tiles added to the side? Do they count as another map? What if you run a match on some version of the 'paper maps' that Christopher West is coming out with, where instead of a standard map you have some number of 8.5x11 sheets put together. Is it allowed in Tile Wars at all? It takes place on tiles - not maps.

I think some rule based on total point cost or distance from other Yammosks would lead to fewer questions for people wanting to incorporate it into non-standard games. Options...

"No ally with War Coordinator may be placed within XX of this character" where XX is a large enough value that you can't fit a second one on a standard map.

"If more than one character with War Coordinator is in your squad, characters with War Coordinator may not constitute more than 10% of the squad's point total." So it would have to be a 300 point match to have a second Yammosk, and 450 for a third.

One advantage of "one per map" is that you can also say the Yammosk only affects the map. For non-standard games, though, I think it would be nice if standard squadbuilding rules could be applied even if the maps/tiles are non-standard. A clear definition of 'map' that takes into account the possibility of tiles, non-standard shapes, etc. could also do the job.

I just read through the Wookieepedia article and found that "the appearance of these animals was a distinctive bulbous head with an array of tentacles. Its only solid bodily structure was its single tooth which was hidden within its boneless flesh. Physically, yammosks resembled huge brains, kept in vats, which trailed thousands of tentacles."

So my new question is where is the DR coming from? The vat?

No clue, probably because of it's size? That's something to check with the Designers on. Possibly from the statement on Wookieepedia where it says "Shapers worked on trying to toughen them up" or something to that effect.

I realize that they're not official. I just think it would be nice to be able to go "off road" but still be able to use standard squadbuilding rules. The game is targeted to the competitive constructed 1-map game, but I think it's a strength that relaxing one rule doesn't require much change to anything else. From standard to removing faction rules - no other rules changes, just a different meta (and things like Affinity become useless). From standard to Tile Wars - no gambit and just a few changes to prevent major abuses (e.g. Override). To Dynamic Duo - minimal changes (e.g. Disintegration). From constructed to booster games - just eliminate Unique.

Going to a non-standard map would normally just require designating the start areas and (if applicable) the gambit zone. With Yammosk's squadbuilding rules, the definition of a map becomes important, which in almost all cases is obvious. I was just pointing out where a question might arise. Of course, with mass battles or non-standard maps there are probably enough other rules modifications that this issue is pretty minor.

For Tile Wars, I assume you could have one and only one in Tile Wars - I was only throwing that out there as an example of where the definition of 'map' might not be clear, even though I think the answer about the squadbuilding rule there seems obvious.