All I think you show is your naivety. You don't see a problem, probably haven't looked for any interactions that might be weird and so you assume its all gonna work out how you imagine it. Doesn't it give you pause when the 2 rules guys, who have poured over the rules idiosyncrasies for the last 5 years in every design team, show trepidation when a rules change is requested. Clearly, you lack respect for what the Vset team has tried to do, have no faith that it will turn out in the manner you desire and so poke the bear because you..... i dunno... have nothing better to do?

This game is so complex that often no-one understands that there is a weird interaction until someone comes along and abuses it (thanks, Jason). Haunting ghosts was possible under WotC, you could've haunted ghost anakin with Obi, or Yoda with Ani, no-one did it, probably no-one thought of it, now its a sith thing. Jason makes a transfer essence build were ghosts are target, could've happened in WotC with certain sealed builds or betrayal builds but it was odd enough until someone thinks outside the box and uses it.

So now everyone wants it changed because its "stupid". (even though, leaving this kind of synergy hurts shooters more than it hurts jedi which is kind of what the majority seem to want; can't hurt the ghosts without force; i wonder what kind of piece might be able to kill the ghosts while actually standing toe to toe with a big melee piece; jedi possibly?). Force ghosts arn't living, are you dumb!?!?!?! they are dead, that's what being a ghost is!!! unless you accept that its just a game definition, it isn't the dictionary definition of living, its the game definition. It doesn't mean that its not a spirit in the game, or dead, its just not a droid or a mounted weapon. Exar Kuhn transferring his whole essence into an uggie, increasing the biological mass of the uggie, altering the form of a vronskr, or a mastiff, managing to drag his lightsaber and crab armor through the process (non-living from living?) is this a major step from turning a pure essence of force into a living being? Seem like you would need to pull biological mass out of thin air in either case. Alter the chemistry and physics of an entity through the force in both cases. But one is apparently OK and the other is OMGWTFBRokEn!!!!!!

So we expand the definition to non-living to include light spirit, dark spirit, eternal sith spirit, holograms and whatever else just to keep some kind of relevance of the game definition of living to the dictionary definition of living regardless of what odd interactions might occur, if any actually do.

I'd hazard a guess you've not looked into any rules issues. So guess who it falls to? Glad they get payed for this.....oh wait.

So the question in my mind is, is this really worth it? We KNOW how spirits function in a living sense, we don't know how they function as non-living pieces. It irked me when I faced Jasons ghost transferring although it was his recovery 60 that cost me the game (nerf recovery!!!!) but i got over it. Just like i got over non-melee lightsabers, or the weird targeting rule that only lets you shoot the closest guy if he has cover (why can't i shoot the other guy, i have LOS to them? Because rules! blast it!).

Among all the weird rules there is actually a decent game that I like, and a few other people like enough to still play; and a fig using the force to transfer from one spot to another into a figure 3 x smaller than or a figure that is supposed to be a pure essence of force isn't likely to break it for me. Otherwise i would have given up the ghost long before WotC dropped it.

One more think I'd like to address is the fact that this sort of mentality comes into play every single time a new pieces is made. You have no idea how creating a CE will affect the game. Yet, when it comes to making pieces, there are playtests and rulings based on results. This is the same situation, but on a broader scale, where we the players, whether casual or tournament, are essentially playtesting abilities that we stack together. Why can't there subsequently be a ruling, as is the case when V-Sets are created? It seems odd that designers are willing to take the risk for stunting the game when it comes to designing new pieces, but when it comes to ambiguous wording on SAs, suddenly we're too afraid to do anything because it might harm the game. That same level of risk/reward happens every time a new piece is created

Fair points, but again, no one has been arguing to do it for a flavor basis. The entire point of this thread was that billiv justified the existence of the current wording based on flavor. The OP was indicating that, if we're going to base it on lore, the lore still contradicts the actual force power.

But the same can be said about errata'ing cards, which we've already done. What if someone doesn't have the errata'd Daala? What if someone doesn't know that CDO is banned? In these situations, it's okay to change things with the understanding that people may be confused, but here it's different?

But out of everything I've read, this is what makes the most sense, so cheers to that.

Pretty sure he meant Essence of Life.

lol, you guys are so funny.

Ever since I saw there was a balance team, I have yet to say, "they aren't listening." and it's not something I've said in this thread.

Personally, if I were going to change how ghosts work, I would stipulate that the means by which they are defeated as spelled out on the card are the ONLY way they can be defeated, and said defeat cannot be prevented (except via the built-in save mechanism vs enemy banishment). I'd probably want to include removal of a host from play (via Versatility, Pellaeon etc) as taking them out as well.

That would not eliminate every interaction possible from them counting as living (like Levitate), but it would solve some of the issues. Freedon Nadd, DFS had to be toned down because of the MTB, for example.

Thanks! I missed these.