And the rules for that is found... where? @Florian Hanke is correct, though I'm asking for where the rules are stating a specific thing rather than arguing for something and not accepting a "because I said so" answer.
Actually, I’d go by the intro to the States section: “A State is a game rule that represents the different conditions, positive or negative, in which a Trooper or Game Element can be in[...]”. Technically, it does not state outright that you can’t cumulate the same marker more than once. It’s still clear though: markers are only used to represent the fact that that state is positive. If you are already IMM-B and some other effects makes you IMM-B, you’re still just IMM-B, the rule above is clear that this is an on/off situation.
I don't agree they do. Entering IMM-B state twice would have you be in the IMM-B state twice, applying the effects of IMM-B twice, etc unless the rules say otherwise. It's not a case of putting a marker twice, as that is just a short-hand, but each time you fail against a Carbonite you enter IMM-B. While it makes sense for "enter the IMM-B state" to refer to a single possible instance of a specific state, I would argue we have reached the point in world wide gaming lingo where such can not be assumed because of how often it is simply not mechanically correct. And as a small petty detail, even if it were, that's the lowest of low of game design to rely on tiny grammatical minutia like that.
When you "meet the requirements", you ACTIVATE a state. You are "activating the effects". It is different.
I disagree with you, because positive/negative states implicitly exclude levels. I don’t disagree that this should be made explicit instead. And I don’t disagree with your approach, but I would argue there is a lot more wrong than minutia with the C1 rules, at least in the context of what they are supposed to achieve - ie, bring more players in. Every single issue I had with the N3 rule book is present here as well, this will not make he game more palatable to newcomers. I thought of posting about it but then it’d be one long rant. But I understand that most posters here, being experienced players, would go straight into the coherence of the mechanics.
Are you going to call it "grammatical minutia" when the rules consistently refer to each of the concrete states as singular? You should notice lots of places where the rules say "the X state" when referring to one of the named states (like Disconnected, Dead, Camouflaged), but use "a Y state" when Y is "Null" or "Marker". Really, stop for a moment and look at Prone. Then find someone to walk through the following steps with: 1. Deploy a trooper and activate the Prone state on it. 2. Spend an order on that trooper from step 1, declare a Move skill, and say the words aloud "I want that trooper to go Prone." If your result is that you now have a trooper with two Prone tokens on it, you may need to relax, and take a break.
This clearly means that any State is a binary on/off switch. You can have many states, but EACH once, either on or off.
Well, except Disposable or trooper with more than one Disposable equipment (such as Jujak Engineer) will behave weirdly
You’re obviously quite right. But look at it from the perspective of a new player: can I immobilize a unit twice so that it will need two rolls to free itself? That’s not a crazy question in any way, but every answer to the contrary is inferred from whether some text is plural or not, the semantics of the word “different”, whether this makes sense for other states, etc. It’s not crazy to say that States could be much better defined, with some clear rules in how they should be managed.
It seems clear to me that you're in a state or not in a state, with no "triple immobilized" or "extra special marked". But if you're Immob A and Immob B at the same time, can you dodge or reset since each only allows you to get out of theirs?
Both disallows you to declare the skill required to get out of the other, so you should be unable to declare Reset due to IMM-A and unable to declare Dodge due to IMM-B and will be at mercy of an Engineer reaching you just like N3's IMM-1.
You need to hope to pass your relevant freeing roll when you are going to get the second state, otherwise you are a beautiful statue!
When people are having to call back to the prior edition of the rules to clarify content in the “new player friendly” rulebook that was just released, something may be amiss.
Even if you are in IMM-B several times, the rules just say “if you’re in IMM-B, do this”. That block of text doesn’t have anything that’s dependent on the number of times you’ve been placed there. It’s written in a binary fashion - either you are or you aren’t.
