Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

Search Articles

* * * * -

The OBSELETE Smuggler's Den's unofficial Star Wars LCG FAQ

The Official FFG FAQ is AVAILABLE!!


I will update this FAQ later to comment on what the official rulings are.

The Smuggler's Den and SoCal Star Wars LCG League Rulings

Well with so much debate on various forums regarding a number of interactions and us hosting a league and impending tournament, we've been forced to make a number of rulings without the help of an FAQ. Feel free to disregard these rulings but they seem like a reasonable place for the community to start from before the FAQ shows up. We have not covered these on the podcast because these are not official rules, but interpretations that we are forced to make. As such, of course disregard this list in its entirety as soon as the FAQ drops! And remember these are the interpretations of the cast of The Smuggler's Den and not the opinions of FFG.

1. Protect and Shielding (Specifically Jedi Guardian) - A character cannot accept more damage than their damage capacity allows, even if shielded. Thus if a Jedi Guardian has a shield and 3 damage is incoming, only 2 damage may go to the Guardian (less if the unit is damaged). Shields on the Jedi Guardian can be used to absorb damage from other sources.

Personally I do not think this is the intent, but the wording seems clear on damage capacity. I think this ruling will actually stand in the FAQ.

2. Trench Run - Rebel Assault cannot be used on Trench Run, I received this ruling from FFG. Unopposed damage, Target of Opportunity, and Wookiee Navigator can all be used when targeting Trench Run.

I actually think this will not be how the FAQ rules these interactions, I think only unopposed damage will count. However a very active playtester is adamant that these do work so that's how we are ruling them.

3. Refresh Phase - The "Any effect with the text "after you refresh" can be used after completing this step" is moved to after step 2 is completed instead of after step 1 is completed. This solves the issue of placing shields with cards like Fleeing the Empire and having them removed in step 2.

4. Tie Attack Squadron - If a Twist of Fate is played by the owner of Tie Attack Squadron, a fate card was indeed played and it gains its icon and targeted strike. (Of course targeted strike is a keyword which is defined as attacking only.)

5. Secrets of Yavin 4 - Each objective can only be engaged once. Therefore, if Secrets of Yavin 4 is attacked its response cannot be triggered as it has already been engaged. Moreover, Secrets of Yavin 4's interrupt can only be triggered once. If another objective is attacked and Secrets of Yavin 4 triggers its interrupt, the original objective has not yet been engaged (and may be engaged again) since that attempt was interrupted.

6. Targeted Strike + Shii-Cho Training - These two abilities are mutually exclusive. You may not spread out damage over multiple targets if using targeted strike.

7. Grand Moff Tarkin - The moment Tarkin enters play his passive ability is in effect. Therefore, if an objective has 4 damage on it and its damage capacity was previously 5, the objective immediately blows up.

8. Darth Vader's reaction and cancelled events - If an event is played and cancelled, Darth Vader can still trigger his reaction.

This is one I'm really hoping FFG changes but the wording seems clear for now.
  • WWDrakey, Toqtamish, PlebeianMaw and 1 other like this


i agree with all except 8, the even is never fully played, but the cancel is a interrupt and they Happen before the thing they interrupted, the event never reaches the played state.

darth vaders ability is a reaction, which happens after a event is played. which never happed as it was canceled
I applaud both your effort and wanting to have some mutually agreed ground for cards while waiting for a FAQ. Good work.

From the way FFG rules tend to work I doubt your interpretation on 8. is correct (usually a card is considered to have been played, only if it has been played succesfully... see Deathbound in AGoT for an example), but without concrete examples for SW existing it's hard to be sure, so your guess is as good as mine. I'm also a bit on the fence regarding 5. and 1., but arguing intent with FFG rules tends to be pretty futile... :)
As far as 8 is concerned I may well be wrong but I see nothing in the rulebook stating that a cancelled event didn't happen. Should that be the case? Of course and I hope they make that clear in the FAQ .

The issue for me revolves around the wording in the rulebook which states that to play an event you pay it's cost. Then it says an interrupt can cancel the effect. What it does not do is make the statement that the card is no longer considered to have been played.

Is it obviously implied that cancelling the effects also reverts it to an unplaced status? Probably, but FFG often is counter intuitive in these instances. So I didn't feel comfortable reading their mind in this matter.
    • Toqtamish likes this
I'm with Drakey. I don't think Vader can trigger his reaction for an unsuccessful attempt to play an event. I'm also dubious about 1 & 5.

I suspect you're right about how FFG will rule on 6 but I think it should go the other way.
    • Kennon and holliday88 like this
I agree with Tiny on 8. Rules say all you need to do is play an event and play is clearly defined as is in the rules.

6 is pretty obvious and should not go the other way, would be way too powerful the other way.
    • snagga and talism like this
Actually, after a bit of digging through the rulebook for Issue #8, I think this may actually be covered by the rules... The definition of "Play" in the rules (p. 13) is:

Play describes an action where a player pays the resource
cost of a card in hand and transfers it into play (for a unit
card or an enhancement card) or resolves its effects and
then discards it (for an event card).

Notice the part about resolving effects? Now, interrupting says:

An interrupt effect is considered to be resolved before
the triggering condition is allowed to complete -- often
cancelling or changing the outcome of the triggering

These two would together imply (NOTE: Not directly state, so I can still see this being argued), that interrupts (that cancel) in fact stop the effect from resolving, and if the effect is not resolved the event card is not considered to be played.
    • Kennon, talism, Xpander and 1 other like this
“unofficial FAQs” are worthless. While in such an early state any game group needs one, making a public version from people respected in the scene is not only confusing, it also will hurt the game. We saw this with lord of the rings uFAQ, when practically the entire document was just incorrect and led to massive divisions in the gamers … then contradicted by the official faq, and email rule clarifications from the designers had a billion versions produced leaving tons of outdated copies floating about with wrong rules. Sure for a game group you have to make one to get games running but the entire point of a faq is because the debate is raging among the player base, there is zero reason why your opinions on these rules are correct.. unless you have a direct reply from the designers though the email system at FFG, and again we have seen that can mean little for when official faqs are released we have seen even these email replies contradicted. The reason these are in question is because there is simply no real hard logic to support one argument over another.. apart form it just works more for you or me.. When the competitive scene starts to build up (I hope) the ufaq is of course invalid.. and in any torny scene ONLY the official faq is valid.. nothing else.. This document is basically a complete waste of time and while worthy of a thread in the forum (where rules can be easily discussed, shouldn't be posted on the front page like it means something, because when it gets down to it.. these are just your own opinions and have nothing to do with how the rules should be interpreted.. putting it in a document like this implies resolution.. and there isn't any. (yet)
Can one of you guys point me to the rule book where is says units cannot accept more damage than their capacity allows?

Can one of you guys point me to the rule book where is says units cannot accept more damage than their capacity allows?

page 25 under Protect.
    • holliday88 likes this

page 25 under Protect.

Hey thanks Toqamish.

I appreciate your concern. In this document I clearly state the goals it is only a fillin and should be tossed as soon as a FAQ shows. I will also make thins clear on my podcast. However in the meantime something is needed.
    • Toqtamish likes this
Feb 08 2013 05:49 PM
To wade in to the battle about 8.
In terms of the cancels available at the moment, C-3PO and Counter-Strike, both have the wording,

...cancel the effects of that event card.

Unlike Thrones cancels, where most cancel the event outright, such that it's like it was never played. In these cases for SW, the event is played and the effects of cancelled. The event is still played. As such, Vader's Reaction only requires that a Sith event is played, not that it's effect are felt on the board. If the wording on the cancel was "cancel an event", then I would say that does not trigger Vader's reaction.
    • Toqtamish likes this
My only point of contention is regarding Secrets of Yavin 4. While the game rules say you can only engage an objective once per turn, Secrets of Yavin 4 is a card effect which can over rule the base rules. Had Secrets of Yavin 4 had the text "if able" I'd agree with you, but without it I believe the Golden Rule could and would apply.
As I said on the geek, I do not agree with your interpretation on 5, mainly because Cards overrule rules. Good job, anyway.
Scottie and Geki you certainly may be right. My thought is there is nothing about Secret of Yavin 4 that makes me think it would override the rules of the game. My thought was if it had said something like Trench Run where it specified that it somehow was acting not according to the rules for objectives then the golden rule would be in effect. But if a card doesn't say that I'm tempted to assume standard rules are in effect. In this FAQ I'm trying to make as few assumptions as possible while realizing that they may also mean many of the interpretations will be ruled as incorrect.
Do you guys have a ruling / opinion on whether Protect changes the source of damage?

My understanding of the controversy:

If it doesn't, you can Shield protected damage, but Boba Fett can also Capture a protector who takes the damage... if it does then you cannot Shield damage you elect to redirect via Protect, but your protector is also immune from Capture by the redirected damage.
Feb 10 2013 09:20 PM
Tiny, you are everywhere! I can understand the sentiment of Booored: the danger of being a precident setter ... ;)
It is more about the arogence that it takes to make a post trying to force opinions on cards rules onto the entire community when the discussion on these rules is still in full swing. That and the very real damage it dose to the scene.. just look at the uFAQ in LoTRlcg.. what a disaster.

It is more about the arogence that it takes to make a post trying to force opinions on cards rules onto the entire community when the discussion on these rules is still in full swing. That and the very real damage it dose to the scene.. just look at the uFAQ in LoTRlcg.. what a disaster.

If it offends you so much just ignore it. They were trying to be helpful, has nothing to do with arrogance or forcing their opinions on others. I really think you are taking it a bit personally.
Feb 11 2013 12:41 AM
It's just a guide to follow to address possible scenarios so people don't have to think through all the possibilities. Here are 8 biggest issues thus far. Read. Digest. Or ignore. As much as Tiny is arrogant, he is only trying to be helpful.

We've heard through the grapevine that FFG themselves are still actively having all the rules debates we are having and that's why a FAQ has yet to drop.
    • holliday88 likes this
In what way are they forcing anything on anybody?

You call it a complete waste of time, but for what reason? Currently anyone looking to run an Organized Play for this game has to guess at a tournament format, and frankly an FAQ. Having something for a TO to point to and say, "Hey here is how we are going to handle these sticky issues until we get a real FAQ" is invaluable. Having one made up by a source that is not the TO is even better as it takes any bias away from the issue. You don't even need to agree with these interpretations, just make use of them so everybody is on a level playing field.

If I try to get my LGS to run a tournament, I'd be stuck as head judge. There is no way I can rule on these blatant issues as both a player and judge. Either I rule in a way the benefits myself or I spite myself for no good reason to avoid the possibility of bias. Now I have at least something that is made by an uninvolved party to avoid that whole issue.

What you are taking offense to here is really beyond me, and others apparently.
It has nothing to do with arrogance, but rather a bunch of guys who have played games and have shared their house rules with us in order to avoid any awkward situation.

Of course there is a chance that the official FAQ rulings will be different but for the time being these rules are sufficient to enable the enjoyment of the game.

I agree with pretty much all the rulings you shared. Yavin 4 being the awkward one. I agree with the previous post where the text of the card overrules the rulebook. Personally, I think you can redirect to the card regardless of whether it has been attacked already.

I could be wrong though. I often am. :D
Personally, I think Tiny and Ben are doing a great job. I don't see any arrogance whatsoever, just a willingness to help the community figure out some sticky rulings. If nothing else, they are consolidating the top 8 discussions happening across various forums in one place so FFG can quickly get an idea of how their players are feeling.
Feb 11 2013 07:32 PM
I haven't even played enough to know the current rules issues in the game. Thank you for bringing them to my attention, and providing insight. Now I'll think about whether or not I agree with your opinions.

Time Not Wasted III
I have zero issues with coming up with an unofficial FAQ when a game has enough questions about how cards work within the confines of the rules. Some of us agree and some of us do not agree with them, but that doesn't mean it isn't appropriate to have a central area of all the questionable cards and rules that many people come across. I think it's at least a wonderful place to look to get a frame of reference and see how other players feel cards should work.