254 replies to this topic

[CataractCowboy]

Question

Is it possible for the icetromper to target itself with this effect when attacking in order to get the sacrifice?

Action: Sacrifice this unit to remove a target attacking non-Vehicle unit from an engagement. Then, deal 1 damage to that unit.

Nate French: Yes -- there is a valid target at the time you initiate the ability. Once initiated, the cost is paid (sacrifice), and by the time you would fulfill the effect, the target has left play, so nothing happens.

[TheJanitor]

Rule Question:
A Stinging Insult--Reaction: After you declare a [Smugglers and Spies] Character unit as an attacker, target an enemy unit. That unit must defend this engagement, if able.

Arcona Rumor Monger--While this unit is attacking alone, in order to declare any defenders, an opponent must declare at least 2 defenders.

I was wondering just how the cards 'A Stinging Insult' and 'Arcona Rumor Monger' interacted. I feel that the phrase 'if able' on 'A Stinging Insult' should be interpreted to mean that the target must be declared as a defender only if I chose to declare additional defenders, as it would not be able to defend alone. However, others in my group feel that it would force me the declare both the target of 'A Stinging Insult' and another unit of my choice as defenders, essentially interpreting 'if able' to mean that the availability of a second defender means that I am able to defend the engagement. Which of us is correct?

There is nothing that compels you to declare a second defender unless you desire to do so.

At bare minimum, you must attempt to declare the target of A Stinging Insult.

If it is the only unit you attempt to declare, the Rumor Monger will cause the declaration to fail.

Nate French
Senior LCG Designer
Fantasy Flight Games

[Scottie]

That one is actually pretty counter to the way I've been and seen that rare combo being played.

Seems pretty lame actually.

[Bolder]

Yeah that doesn't seem right.....even though it is coming direct from the source.....

The way my group has interpreted it was that "declaring" is something totally different than being forced/actioning to do something.

-Rumor Monger declared as an attacker
-Stinging Insult played on a ready enemy unit (therefore it "is able" to defend)
-Player is forced to defend with that unit but he is not "declaring" he's being forced therefore Rumor monger's text doesn't come into play

Just like actioning in backstabber against sleuths or blockades, we are in fact "defending" but we didn't "declare" Backstabber as a defender. Therefore the sleuths text doesn't come into play.

[Khudzlin]

I'd have gone with the defender being forced to declare the target and another unit if it was possible.

[dbmeboy]

Response to question about enhancements on cards that change control:

No, this (rule 2.6 in FAQ) does not apply to enhancements, at least not automatically.

First, the enhancement itself does not change control, it remains under the control of its original owner, functioning the same as any enhancement that has been played on an opponent's unit. This means that the player who gained control of the unit does not control the enhancement, if the enhancement has an Action, Reaction, or Interrupt, only its original controller can opt to trigger those abilities. Passive or constant effects that an enhancement provides are still "on" though.

Second, it is possible that the control change results in an illegal attachment state. For instance, if the enhancement read something like, "attach to a character you control," and the character changes control while the attachment does not, you have an illegal connection, and the enhancement is discarded.

[dbmeboy]

Some clarification on the exact timing of Protect and Shielding:

Protect is a replacement effect for when you actually try and place the damage token on the original target. The Interrupt on Lightsaber Deflection happens when you assign the damage, Protect interrupts when you go to actually place the damage on the target. As such, Lightsaber Deflection would happen first.

To the other case: Shielding is "When a unit with shielding is declared..." and Rendar's Wrath is "After an opponent..." Temporilly, 'when' comes before 'after,' so Shielding would happen first.

--
Erik Dahlman
Associate LCG Designer
Fantasy Flight Games

[AntaresCD]

In the highly unlikely (though possible) event that the first game in a tournament match goes to time, the scoring for the match is 2-2 (the second game is not scored).

From Nate:

Should be scored 2-2 for the round. Relevant text below (tourney rules, page 5):

The first game is played to its completion, and the remainder of the round then becomes the time limit for the second game. If a game reaches the time limit, play continues (from wherever it was at the call of time) to the end of the light side player’s turn. This is done to ensure that each player has an equal number of turns in each game. If no player wins the game in this period after time has been called, the game is scored as a draw, and each player earns 2 tournament points.

Note the following:
1) If the first game is not played to its completion, the remainder of the round never becomes the time limit for the second game. So the first game is the only game that can be scored.

2) The second sentence begins, “if a game reaches the time limit” rather than “if the second game,” so that time limit procedure and scoring may be enforced on either the first or the second game.

[AntaresCD]

Preemptive questions on General Crix Madine:

Rule Question:
The new unit General Crix Madine has the following text, "Reaction: After a fate card is revealed in an edge stack remove 1 focus token from this unit." (I'm not positive this is the *exact* text as I haven't seen the card firsthand, so my apologies there.)

I have two questions regarding this ability that I want to preemptively ask to save some time and headaches:

1) In the situation where my opponent's edge stack has 2 fate cards and my own has 1, will I be able to trigger the reaction once, twice, or three times (i.e. this can trigger once per edge battle, once per edge stack - since they are all revealed at once, or once per fate card in any given edge stack regardless of how many fate cards are in the edge stack)?

2) If multiple edge stacks are revealed for a player (due to Twist of Fate), will this reaction trigger on the new sets of edge stacks (and with what, if any restrictions)?

Thanks,

~<redacted>

Answers (no surprises, really):

1) You could react to each Fate card that is revealed once. (Each is considered its own triggering condition.)

2) Yes, each Fate card in the new edge stacks is also considered its own triggering condition.

Nate

[Ragnarok357]

How I expected everything to work, but worth clarifying before regionals. Questions on some edge cases arising from the Echoes of the Force Fate card and units "considered" committed to the Force:

I have several questions relating to the interaction of the Fate card "Echoes of the Force" and units which are "considered" dedicated to the Force via game text (examples - Phase I Dark Trooper, Mara Jade with attached Mara Jade's Lightsaber). Both the Fate card and the relevant unit game text seems to be outside of the definition of commitment within the rulebook, leading to some areas of potential conflict.

1) Are such units considered valid targets for the "commit/remove from Force" effect of Echoes?

Example: LS player wishes to use Echoes to cause the DS player to commit a copy of Phase I Dark Trooper to the Force (thereby causing him to waste a Force card for no additional result). Is this permissible? Would it be permissible to remove that unit from the Force instead?

2) May a player use Echoes of the Force to voluntarily remove his own unit from the Force struggle (in contravention of the rulebook statement that commitment cannot be voluntarily removed), whether that unit is committed in the usual way or by game text which "considers" them committed?

3) Does order of operations matter in determining a unit's Force commitment state?

Example: DS player has Mara Jade in play and committed to the Force. During the player's deployment phase, Mara Jade's Lightsaber is played from their hand and attached to Mara Jade as an enhancement. During the Conflicts phase, the DS player places Echoes of the Force into an Edge stack, and the effect resolves. Can the DS player recover their Force card from Mara for use elsewhere? If they do, is Mara still considered committed to the Force due to the lightsaber's text?

Nate's replies:

1) A unit that is committed to the Force cannot be committed a second time. A unit that is considered committed would not be eligible to be committed.

An attempt to remove a unit that is “Considered committed to the Force” would fail, in that the textual constant effect that causes it to be “considered committed to the Force” would still be active after the removal attempt resolves. Note that blanking the text box of such an effect would effectively remove the unit from the Force.

2) Yes, you may remove your own unit from the Force via a card effect. The “players may not voluntarily remove Force cards from their units” rule is there to prevent players from doing this on their own, without any effects.

3) Yes: a unit that is “Considered committed to the Force” could not be committed a second time. However, a unit that is committed may receive a “Considered committed” effect on top, at which point there is redundancy. So, committing Mara with a Force card, and then giving her the lightsaber, is fine. There is nothing that automatically removes the Force card at this time, but an effect like Echoes can be used to remove it. She would still be considered committed because of the lightsaber. Note that if she has the lightsaber first, and is already considered committed, she could not be committed a second time via a Force card.

[holliday88]

Shifty Lookout and DS reserve value:

Q: Does the card "Shifty Lookout" text count against the DS player's reserve value? The card text says "While this unit is ready, each opponent is considered to have 1 additional card in his hand."

Nate: "Yes, when drawing up to his reserve the Shifty Lookout will cause the DS player to hit the reserve 1 card sooner."

[SmokeyJ]

Shifty Lookout and DS reserve value:

Q: Does the card "Shifty Lookout" text count against the DS player's reserve value? The card text says "While this unit is ready, each opponent is considered to have 1 additional card in his hand."

Nate: "Yes, when drawing up to his reserve the Shifty Lookout will cause the DS player to hit the reserve 1 card sooner."

That's awesome, it's like Vader's Fist on a stick!

[BobaFett]

Shifty Lookout and DS reserve value:

Q: Does the card "Shifty Lookout" text count against the DS player's reserve value? The card text says "While this unit is ready, each opponent is considered to have 1 additional card in his hand."

Nate: "Yes, when drawing up to his reserve the Shifty Lookout will cause the DS player to hit the reserve 1 card sooner."

How about join me on shifty lookout lol

[AntaresCD]

In regards to whether or not attachments on a card leaving play go simultaneously or after (matters for discard pile order in certain cases):

Question:

Rule Question:
When any card with attachments leaves play, does the parent card (the one everything is attached to) leave play first, then all the attachments, or does everything leave play simultaneously?

This matters in a few cases where you care about what the order of the cards in your discard pile are. In the first possibility, the parent card must be placed in the discard pile first then the attachments in any order (since the rulebook specifies that the owner of cards placed simultaneously may be placed in any order). In the second possibility, the parent card and its attachments can be placed in any order since they all left play simultaneously.

Thanks you for your time.

~<redacted>

Answer:

The enhancements and the card they are attached to all leave play simultaneously, so the controller may determine the order in which they are placed in the discard pile.

Nate French
Senior LCG Designer
Fantasy Flight Games

[KennedyHawk]

Rule Question:
Question about the interaction between Clearing House and Holding all the Cards came up at last night.

I ruled it as though Holding all the Cards is resolved by the LS player, even though it involves DS action (drawing two cards) to complete resolution. Thus it did not trigger clearing house to remove extra tokens. Is this correct?

Response:

The player who initiated the effect is the one who is resolving it. So in this example, it is the LS player who is resolving the effect, and Clearing House could not be triggered.

Nate French

[KennedyHawk]

Rule Question:
With the new FAQ section 3.6 how does this effect abilities targeting your hand in 2 vs 2 matches? If I have no characters or droid in my hand but my partner has one in the common reserve can I still use the Falcon's ability to put that unit into play?

It seems since your hand and the common reserve are different play areas you may not pass the check to see if the action can be completed step. I thought I saw a ruling for Get Me Solo that made it so units in the common reserve were protected from this target because it targets a different area.

Response:
The rules for the common reserve state that a player may use a card in the common reserve as if it were in his hand. Use would entail playing the card, or placing it in an edge stack.

For other the purpose of the Falcon, cards in a common reserve are not considered in your hand, and could not be put into play via the Falcon’s effect.

Nate French

[chiller087]

My question: Are fate cards considered "resolved" if the fate card has an optional effect that says "You may..." (Such as Battle of Hoth), and player chooses not to use its effect?

Nate's answer: The Fate card is considered resolved whether the "may" choice is taken or not. (The effect grants the choice, then the player decides what to do with that choice.)

[KennedyHawk]

Rule Question:
Another question on ruing for FAQ section 3.6. There used to be a loop with Questionable contacts where you could damage the objective, protect it to a moisture farmer, and then protect it to a guardian, then use the objective ability to move that damage.

Based on the new ruling you would need to ensure the effect could be completed (or partially completed) prior to initiating the action. So, if I have no damaged units I can not complete this loop. In the sequence of completing an action the select targets step (5) takes place after this check. So in this case if I have another damaged unit I can still choose to use this protect cycle to move it off of the guardian, but if I do not have a damaged unit I can not begin the effect at all.

Nate's answer: You are correct that checking the legality that something may resolve for the 3.6 ruling is only a check. You are not committing to how targets (or other choices) need to be made at the time of the check. If something in the game state changes by the time you are choosing targets or resolving the effect, you may do so differently than you would have done at the time of the 3.6 check.

[SmokeyJ]

Kennedy asked this at the regional held at FFG this past weekend, but here is the "official" ruling from Nate French via the rules question form
Rule Question:
With re: to Commando Operations and the Rebel Commandos, does a fate card that has it's effect cancelled by the objective "resolve"?

Nate's Answer:
The objective prevents fate card effects from resolving (“do not resolve”), so while it is active the fate cards do not resolve, and you could not put the Commando into play.

[KennedyHawk]

Question
Deploy the Fleet question...

Action: Damage this objective to reduce the cost of the next Capital Ship unit you play this phase by 1.

With 3.6 do you need a capital ship or need for it to be in the deployment phase to use this effect. Say I want to blow up my own Deploy the Fleet (this could give me a clear Death Squadron command and a new objective when I refresh). Can I do this during say my opponents force phase?

It reduces the cost of the next capital ship but I am not sure if you are required to have one etc, etc.

Nate's Answer:
Deploy the Fleet creates a lasting effect that will reduce the cost of the next Capital Ship you play in that phase. The creation of that lasting effect can be successful even if no Capital Ship is ever played to take advantage of it. So you may initiate the effect and not actually play a ship.

As a hypothetical counter example to make the point more clear, imagine a card with an ability that read, “The cost to play cards cannot be reduced.” If that card were in play and the ability active, then it would be impossible to create the lasting effect that Deploy the Fleet is attempting to create, and the ability could not be triggered because of the 3.6 ruling.


My comments: ...I want a DS version of a card that says the cost to play cards cannot be reduced. Preferably in scum, make this happen.