Q: When damage is redirected by the Protect keyword ("if a friendly card in play with the trait specified by a “Protect” effect would take damage, the controller may instead place any amount of that damage on the card with the “Protect” keyword"), Lightsaber Deflection ("Interrupt: When damage is dealt to a friendly non-Vehicle unit, deal 1 point of that damage to another target unit instead.") or Shien Training ("Interrupt: When enhanced unit would be dealt damage, focus this enhancement to deal that damage to another target unit instead.") considered to have been dealt by the original source of the damage or the redirecting effect? If the original source is still dealing that damage, this would mean that IG-88B (Reaction: After this unit uses targeted strike to damage a unit, that unit is now participating in this engagement on its controller's side) can pull the new recipient of the damage into an engagement, and also that The Droid Revolution ("Droid units you control that are not participating in an engagement cannot be damaged by enemy card effects or combat icons.") does not make units immune to damage redirected this way. If the damage is considered to be dealt by the redirecting effect, neither of these interactions works.
A: The damage is still considered to have been dealt by the original source. Protect, and replacement effects that redirect damage, change how the damage is dealt, they do not deal new damage on their own.
Is the ability of Dice Ibegon ("Interrupt: When you would declare an engagement, target an eligible enemy objective instead. Your opponent must declare defending units first, if desired. You must then declare at least 1 attacking unit, if able. Engage the targeted objective. (Limit once per turn.) ") considered to be declaring an engagement against the targeted objective, or just engaging it without declaring an engagement? If it is considered to be declaring an engagement, the card text doesn't say to skip the regular steps of declaring attackers and defenders - it merely adds new steps before declaring the engagement. If it isn't considered to be declaring, a player could use Dice Ibegon's ability to engage an objective and, after that engagement has ended, declare a regular engagement against that objective since an engagement hasn't been declared yet. Which is the correct interpretation?
A: “When you would declare an engagement” indicates that you are declaring the engagement, and then interrupt the declaration with a replacement as to how the process of declaration is handled, namely:
“Your opponent must declare defending units first, if desired. You must then declare at least 1 attacking unit, if able.”
This subverts the standard process of declaring an engagement, and re-arranges the order of operations to:
1) Target objective.
2) Opponent must declare defending units, if desired.
3) Declare attackers. (You must declare at least 1 attacker.)
The final line of text establishes that, upon completion of the above process, the engagement is now declared against the target objective. At this point, proceed to step 4 of the engagment resolution process, “Fight Edge Battle.”
Senior Game Designer
Fantasy Flight Games