I submitted a rules question to FFG regarding this scenario. I will post it once I receive a response.

I submitted a rules question to FFG regarding this scenario. I will post it once I receive a response.

Thank you I was actually about to ask if anyone has done that. It will be interesting to see what the verdict is. Even though I interpret it the way I see it I can honestly also see how it works the other way too.

I find myself agreeing

Ten's ability does not read: two of your <Crits> can not be canceled by defense dice, it says "one". And one is not canceled by defense dice.

It also does not read "One of your <crits> nullifies a defense result", or anything similar. In the case of CCHH vs 3 defensive dice, his ability is not going to come into play regardless of the resulting defensive roll. His ability guarantees one crit gets through (if he gets one), and sure enough, one does.

I don't think anyone is claiming that TN ability cancels two crits, merely that one of those crits couldn't be cancelled regardless of TN ability due to a lack of dice to cancel it with. So when TN ability does kick in it can prevent an evade dice being used to cancel the one remaining crit that had any chance of being prevented with defensive dice.

I don't think anyone is claiming that TN ability cancels two crits, merely that one of those crits couldn't be cancelled regardless of TN ability due to a lack of dice to cancel it with. So when TN ability does kick in it can prevent an evade dice being used to cancel the one remaining crit that had any chance of being prevented with defensive dice.

But no such rule exists. There's no concept of "too many hits to cancel them all" according to the rules, you just roll both sets of dice and compare the results. The fact that we know that four hits against three evade dice will always get a hit through doesn't mean that the fourth hit has some magic "can not be canceled" status attached to it.

i see it as matching dice

3 crit vs 1 evade

all 3 still hit becouse its about his abillity to cancle evade results from dice.

So how do you decide which crit is the "overflow" crit, and which one is the one that theoretically could be canceled but not by dice?

What you're saying is that when you have more crits than I have evades, you get to choose which ones my dice can cancel. You're saying you get to look at your crits, wall one off, say "You don't have enough dice to cancel this one, THAT one you can cancel. But Ten says you can't cancel it, so you can't cancel that one either."

There's pretty much nothing in the rules to support this, at all.

If you want to say "Ten says this die can't be canceled" in whatever form, that's fine. What you CAN'T do is pick which ones I get to cancel otherwise. So you pick A for Ten, I cancel B. You pick B, I cancel A. You delay picking, I cancel B, and then you say "Whoah, that's the only crit left, Ten protects it!" and that's fine. The end result is the same.

The way I have always delt with this is ( taking the cchh ) that one crit is put to the side then work with the rest of the dice. Of course that crit can still be removed if my opponent has tokens.

The assumption you are making, Glentopher, is that Ten's ability works on the "first crit" which it does not say or imply.

Consider this:

An X-Wing rolls C/C/H/H and a TIE rolls E/E/E. I could describe that roll by saying, "1 of my critical results cannot be cancelled by defense dice." It cannot be cancelled because there aren't enough dice to cancel it. It's the exact same phrase describing the exact same roll, just with a different ship. Ten's ability doesn't specify that one critical hit that would otherwise be cancelled by a successful evade result cannot be cancelled. One of them can't be cancelled in that attack, but we don't get to CHOOSE the one that would've been evaded.

I totally understand the confusion, and agree that it could be worded better, but the intent is pretty clear.

merely that one of those crits couldn't be cancelled regardless of TN ability due to a lack of dice to cancel it with.

But that doesn't remove the dice from play. Just because I only have 3 dice to cancel 4 attack dice doesn't mean you get to set one aside and say that die can't be canceled. All 4 dice are still valid targets to be canceled, with in the rule of [hit] before [crit].

The confusion seems to come from this idea that since one of the [crit] results can't be canceled naturally, it's somehow removed from the compare results step. But that's not true, it's still there.

Ten's ability does effectively let you do that however, you can remove 1 of the [crit] results because that one can't be canceled. That leaves 3 [evade] results to cancel the attack rolls.

I really can't see how anyone is having trouble with this. If I only score one crit from my attack, you could have 20 defence dice, you can't cancel that crit.add a second crit and yer go ahead cancel that one but you still can't touch the other.

To me it's more the fact that your saying you essentially rolled 4 defense dice when actually you rolled only 3. You dodge the first 2 shots and then you attempt to dodge a crit however my ability caused my shot to still get past your dodge so now you are going try and dodge again? To me that equals 4 tries with only 3 dice. Doesn't add up to me

in the case of hit hit crit crit vs evade x3, I'm of the mindset that only one crit gets through. This seems pretty obvious to me, because Ten Numb's ability is saying basically that one crit MUST get through, so if it happens to get through naturally then that is fine.

Or look at it like this - You roll 2 hits and 2 crits. you PICK the first crit as the one that cannot be cancelled. Then your opponent cancels the other one.

Doesn't add up to me

That's because you clearly don't understand how the compare results step works. There is no 'attempt to dodge a crit' as you put it. You don't assign an [evade] to a [hit] or [crit] and then lock those into place, then say "this one can't be canceled, so you lose that evade dice.", that's not even close to how it works.

I use two [evade] results to cancel your two [hit] results. That leaves 2 [crit] results and one [evade] result. Normally I'd cancel one of those two [crit] with my remaining [evade]. Ten says that one of his [crit] results can't be canceled by dice. But in this case that doesn't really mean anything because no matter how you arrange them, 2 dice is more then 1, so either way 1 crit is going to get though. That fulfills Ten's ability.

Some people seem to be thinking either that because there's 4 attack dice that somehow one of them gets removed from the step since it can't be evaded. This is not true, all 4 are still part of the compare results step.

Others seem to think that you assign a die to die, and then Ten gets to decide which [crit] counts, again this isn't true. Because in the case of 2 [crit] results you effectively pick one, then I get to cancel the other one. At no point do I lose an evade dice because I picked the wrong [crit]

The only time Ten's ability really comes into play is when I have enough [evade] results to cancel all of his [crit] results.

I took another look at the rules, just to make sure I wasn't missing something. I think I see where some of the confusion comes from.

There seems to be this idea, and it's actually part of the example... That you assign [evade] dice to [hit] and [crit] results to cancel them.

But that's not how it actually works. You actually treat the attack dice as a pool, and the defense dice as a second pool.

Subtract one [evade] result and one [hit] result from both pools. You do this until either you run out of [hit] or [evade] results. Then if there are any [evade] or [crit] results left, you subtract 1 [evade] and one [crit] result from the pool.

In the case of Ten, you will always end up with at least 1 [crit] result left in your pool, no matter how many [evade] results there are. Unless of course I have an evade token, in which case I can use that to cancel a [crit] even if it's the last one remaining.

But at no point in that step do you ever 'assign' dice to each other. So it doesn't matter which dice Ten protects, because we're dealing with simple subtraction here, not some sort of 'this die canceled that die' process.

To me it's more the fact that your saying you essentially rolled 4 defense dice when actually you rolled only 3. You dodge the first 2 shots and then you attempt to dodge a crit however my ability caused my shot to still get past your dodge so now you are going try and dodge again? To me that equals 4 tries with only 3 dice. Doesn't add up to me

I don't understand this at all--that is, I don't understand what you mean by this paragraph. There is no point where 4 defense dice are rolled, and no point where extra [evade] results are introduced.

At the risk of repeating myself: after canceling [hit] results, we have CC vs E. Ten Numb's ability says that one of those [crit] results can't be canceled, which to me means that one of those crit results can be canceled.

Your interpretation leads to the conclusion that, despite the fact that I have an uncanceled [evade] result, I can't use it to cancel either [crit] result. That's the inequality I'm struggling with: the idea that Ten's text could lead to two crits that can't be canceled.

For this example to deal two critical damage, Ten's ability would have to read something like "One of your {crit} results cancels an {evade} result without being cancelled itself."

A rephrasing of Ten's ability might be "if you roll any (crit)s on your attack roll the minimum damage for your attack after dice are rolled but before tokens are spent is one (crit)." This is pretty obvious. it isn't negating evades it is setting a minimum result pending evade tokens.

That's the inequality I'm struggling with: the idea that Ten's text could lead to two crits that can't be canceled.

It all seems to be based on some very incorrect concussions about how the compare results step actually works. With things like assigning evade dice to attack dice and having them locked in place or other similar concepts.

The way that I see it, is that when you get a situation like the one described.

HHCC vs EEE.

There are going to be three cancels and one cannot be cancelled. Now when you say "I'm using Ten's ability and you can't cancel Crit 2(The second crit in the sequence). Then that still leaves the first Crit to be cancelled, because it is still in the sequence of cancelling dice. Even if you used his ability on the first Crit, the second Crit would fall back into the dice pool to be cancelled just like any other dice.

Demonstration Below

HHCC vs EEE

3 Dice results will cancel

H1 and H2 cancelled by E1 and E2

C1 and C2 are left with E3

C1 cannot be cancelled because of Ten's ability, As declared by the user.

C2 is left in the pile with E3 because E3 is still able to cancel it. Due to Ten's ability changing it's cancel target from C1 to C2.

C2 is cancelled by E3.

You are left with 1 crit that got through.

Then that still leaves the first Crit to be cancelled, because it is still in the sequence of cancelling dice. Even if you used his ability on the first Crit, the second Crit would fall back into the dice pool to be cancelled just like any other dice.

That's exactly how it should work.

The only way it could work like some people are trying to say is if you did the following.

Assign EE to HH which leaves CC vs E

Assign E to C#1 at which point Ten says "Ha that's the [crit] I'm protecting, you just lost your [evade].

Then there are no more [evade]s left, so both [crit]s get though.

But again, and I don't know if I can stress this enough. That is not how it works. You don't assign dice to other dice, and then they're locked together, so if you somehow remove the attack dice the evade dice is stuck.

That's something you can do in MtG, if you pull a defender out the attacker is still considered blocked. But that is not how it works in X-Wing.

You also do not set aside a [hit] or [crit] result just because there's not enough defense dice to account for them. You have a pool of dice and subtract dice from it on a 1 to 1 ratio. Then when one pool is empty you know if the ship is hit or not, and for how much damage.

Then that still leaves the first Crit to be cancelled, because it is still in the sequence of cancelling dice. Even if you used his ability on the first Crit, the second Crit would fall back into the dice pool to be cancelled just like any other dice.

That's exactly how it should work.

The only way it could work like some people are trying to say is if you did the following.

Assign EE to HH which leaves CC vs E

Assign E to C#1 at which point Ten says "Ha that's the [crit] I'm protecting, you just lost your [evade].

Then there are no more [evade]s left, so both [crit]s get though.

But again, and I don't know if I can stress this enough. That is not how it works. You don't assign dice to other dice, and then they're locked together, so if you somehow remove the attack dice the evade dice is stuck.

That's something you can do in MtG, if you pull a defender out the attacker is still considered blocked. But that is not how it works in X-Wing.

You also do not set aside a [hit] or [crit] result just because there's not enough defense dice to account for them. You have a pool of dice and subtract dice from it on a 1 to 1 ratio. Then when one pool is empty you know if the ship is hit or not, and for how much damage.

You are not taking away his E, though.

All Ten's ability does is that it changes the target of the E cancel to another crit. Think about it this way, if you could use Ten's ability like the way you say. You are essentially cheating the defender out of an evade dice, you are telling them. "That might as well be blank, because even though you said you would use it to cancel my crit. I used Ten's ability to tell you that you couldn't".

That is a blatant cheat in my book, next up is that the rules state clearly. The attacker modifies his dice after he rolls them, this means using Ten's ability. You are modifying the dice so it cannot be cancelled, this is done in your dice modify phase. You can't just modify your dice after the defender as already done his cancelling. That would again be cheating the system, and cheating the defender.

The rules state this is the process.

Roll Attack Dice - Result is HHCC

Modify Attack Dice (During this step players may resolve ABILITIES and spend tokens that allow them to modify attack dice.) - You declare Ten's ability that one Crit cannot be cancelled.

Roll Defense Dice - Rolls EEE

Modify Defense Dice - Has no modifications

Compare Results (Cancelling dice.)

HHCC - Minus one C because of Ten's ability declared earlier.

So you are left with

HHC cancelled by EEE

Trying to use Ten's ability any other way is a blatant cheat in the rules.

My process follows the rules exactly, which is why it is correct. I didn't type it out by every word but I can fix that.

Trying to use Ten's ability any other way is a blatant cheat in the rules.

I think you misunderstand what I said. I was sorta playing devils advocate.

Trying to use Ten's ability any other way is a blatant cheat in the rules.

I think you misunderstand what I said. I was sorta playing devils advocate.

It wasn't directed personally at you, I was saying in general. If you try to use ability outside the way the rules explain. That is cheating, no worries.

C1 cannot be cancelled because of Ten's ability, As declared by the user.

Do you actually declare one particular die as impossible to cancel? I am under the impression that you cannot distinguish the two crit dice. You can cancel any of them. Just not all.

Hoping to close this thread.

I received a response from FFG, and the correct ruling is that 1 critical hit would remain after using Ten Numb's ability. After much thought, I misunderstood the interpretation of the card and rules and now that I've had a chance to go back and think about it, it does make perfect sense.

I'm glad FFG was extremely timely in their response.