So explain it to me like I'm five. It's still not settling in, even with this post from Sergovan from the Official Response thread:

Rule Question:

Leebo's pilot ability and Determination both trigger from when a face up damage card is dealt.

Can Leebo choose one of the two face up cards to keep, and if it is a pilot crit, then discard it using Determination or does the drawn card not count as a card dealt?

Both the initial card dealt and the additional card drawn both count as a faceup damage card being dealt. This does mean that with Determination, he can choose a Pilot trait damage card and then discard it.

Is the answer that, in fact, when suffering a critical damage Leebo draws an additional card after the first face-up one, can discard the non-Pilot critical and then use Determination to additionally discard a Pilot critical? So the net result is no critical cards occurring? Or are you still stuck with one non-Pilot face-up critical? I think it's the first option here.

Determination allows you to discard a pilot crit. Leebo allows you to draw an extra crit then discard down to the one you want so you have only one crit left. You essentially get to keep the lesser crit depending on your circumstances. If you have Determination, you can discard that remaining crit if it is a pilot crit.

An interesting solution, basically they have said that when using Leebo’s ability, you are “dealt” 2 face up damage cards, you choose 1 and discard the other, then if you have determination and the face up damage card you chose to keep is a “pilot” card you may now discard that also.

Seems clear enough, though leaves a loophole in the future for any card that triggers off of a critical damage card being “dealt” as technically you would get 2 triggers. (not that I want to start another debate about triggering events)

Okay.

1. One un-evaded critical ends up coming through to Pilot Leebo with Determination EPT
2. Leebo draws two face-up cards (as part of special pilot ability)
3. Leebo uses special pilot ability to discard one of the cards right away
4. Leebo then uses Determination to discard a Pilot critical (presuming at least one was dealt of the two cards drawn face-up)
5. Leebo mechanically giggles as no crits actually end up landing

Got it. Thank you. Not sure why it wasn't clearer to me.

Yeah there's no timing issue between the interaction of Leebo and Determination. Leebo doesn't tell you to resolve the crit immediately. It just says choose one TO resolve. As in after Leebo is all done. Then determination triggers because you queued it up to fire off second after Leebo.

What I took away from this is that "dealt" and "drawn" are the same. This would imply on another thread that "place" and "assign" are the same.

For fun: Leebo vs Maarek Stele. That's a timing mess too.

I don't see any timing issues.

Maarek happens first.

Maarek has a replacement effect that triggers when he deals a faceup card.

Maarek draws three cards and chooses which one he wants to deal to Leebo.

That card gets dealt to Leebo.

Leebo triggers upon being dealt the card decided by Maarek.

Leebo draws another card and then he gets to choose which one to resolve.

And if he's got Determination, yadda, yadda, yadda...

Which is why no one play Marrak

Speaking of Maarek, here is another ridiculous situation to think about considering the wording of Franks reply:

Maarek Steele deals 1 uncanceled crit to Lebo with Determination

As per Franks ruling both the original card and the drawn card are both dealt, so you then conceivably get this situation;

Crit dealt, Maarek trigger, draw 3 choose 1, Leebo trigger to draw (deal) another card.

Now seeing as Maarek is the one attacking and Leebo is being “dealt” another crit card, does Maarek trigger again on the as yet undrawn/dealt second card? Does the player controlling maarek then get to draw another 3 cards and select the card to be “dealt” from Leebo’s ability?

Normally I would have said no but Frank explicitly states that the second card is “Dealt” in doing so triggering Maarek once again.

I will leave that for everyone to think about

Speaking of Maarek, here is another ridiculous situation to think about considering the wording of Franks reply:

Maarek Steele deals 1 uncanceled crit to Lebo with Determination

As per Franks ruling both the original card and the drawn card are both dealt, so you then conceivably get this situation;

Crit dealt, Maarek trigger, draw 3 choose 1, Leebo trigger to draw (deal) another card.

Now seeing as Maarek is the one attacking and Leebo is being “dealt” another crit card, does Maarek trigger again on the as yet undrawn/dealt second card? Does the player controlling maarek then get to draw another 3 cards and select the card to be “dealt” from Leebo’s ability?

Normally I would have said no but Frank explicitly states that the second card is “Dealt” in doing so triggering Maarek once again.

I will leave that for everyone to think about

Oh, hey, an infinite combo.

The Maarek Stele card says "When your attack deals a faceup Damage card to the defender..."

We know that Leebo's ability and Maarek's both count as a card being dealt, but after Leebo's effect has kicked in, the dealt card is probably not considered to have been dealt by the attack anymore.

The Maarek Stele card says "When your attack deals a faceup Damage card to the defender..."

We know that Leebo's ability and Maarek's both count as a card being dealt, but after Leebo's effect has kicked in, the dealt card is probably not considered to have been dealt by the attack anymore.

So who's dealing that second damage card then?

Pretty sure Leebos not shooting himself and for something to be dealt there needs to be a source/giver (Maarek) and a receiver (Leebo).

The likelihood of this situation happening is very slim due to the low competitive nature of Maarek but as I mentioned in an earlier post, the wording of the ruling opens a can of worms for any other ability in the future that involved crits being "dealt".

So who's dealing that second damage card then?

Leebo is. His ability says to "draw 1 additional Damage card, choose 1 to resolve, and discard the other"

Pretty sure Leebos not shooting himself and for something to be dealt there needs to be a source/giver (Maarek) and a receiver (Leebo).

Porkins can be both the source and receiver of the damage card, so why can't Leebo?

So let's assume that leebo is dealing himself the face up damage card, notice anything strange about that? Oh yeah his text says "whenever leebo is dealt a face up card etc. Etc. Etc it creates an infinite loop where he keeps dealing damage to himself hence why the language in the original ruling is flawed

So let's assume that leebo is dealing himself the face up damage card, notice anything strange about that? Oh yeah his text says "whenever leebo is dealt a face up card etc. Etc. Etc it creates an infinite loop where he keeps dealing damage to himself hence why the language in the original ruling is flawed

Except you get the "once per activation clause" kicking in and stopping the infinite loop.

So let's assume that leebo is dealing himself the face up damage card, notice anything strange about that? Oh yeah his text says "whenever leebo is dealt a face up card etc. Etc. Etc it creates an infinite loop where he keeps dealing damage to himself hence why the language in the original ruling is flawed

Except you get the "once per activation clause" kicking in and stopping the infinite loop.

So let's assume that leebo is dealing himself the face up damage card, notice anything strange about that? Oh yeah his text says "whenever leebo is dealt a face up card etc. Etc. Etc it creates an infinite loop where he keeps dealing damage to himself hence why the language in the original ruling is flawed

Except you get the "once per activation clause" kicking in and stopping the infinite loop.

They're different activations. Each effect replaces the card with a newly-dealt one, so it's a new trigger opportunity.

Ah, I see. So we have our first confirmed infinite loop. The question is, what do we do about it?

I can see it now. I was picturing it as one whole clause that had to complete from beginning to end but Mace's view is also valid.

Ah, I see. So we have our first confirmed infinite loop. The question is, what do we do about it?

Well, that depends.

If you're a reasonable player, you probably just don't trigger Maarek off Leebo's draw.

If you're a rulesmonger, you chalk up an "I told you so" as the contortions they go through to justify their intent bite them yet again.

If you're one of our fun new "anything legal is justified" competitive crowd, you kill one ship, start the loop, and shuffle cards for the rest of the hour until you win on time. You can do this because the previous text about resolving infinite loops was removed from the FAQ.

If you're an actual player, you shrug, because who ever runs Maarek anyway?

More seriously, I suspect the answer will be that Leebo's second card is dealt by him, not by Maarek, thus breaking the potential for the loop.

Of course, that'll have implications for Rexlar too, but a nobody-knows-him Defender won't rate the kind of "Needs to be awesome" that a known, novelized Outrider pilot will, so Rexlar will just have to be sad.

Alternatively, it isn't an infinite loop at all.

Maarek deals a face-up damage card to Leebo, activating his ability. Maarek DRAWS the top 3 cards, and deals one of them to Leebo.
Then, Leebo's ability triggers. He DRAWS a second card, and chooses one of them to deal to himself.

Maarek didn't deal the second card, and his ability doesn't trigger again.

So let's assume that leebo is dealing himself the face up damage card, notice anything strange about that? Oh yeah his text says "whenever leebo is dealt a face up card etc. Etc. Etc it creates an infinite loop where he keeps dealing damage to himself hence why the language in the original ruling is flawed

I agree with this one. Leebo allows you to draw a damage card, Frank says a drawn card counts as a dealt card, Leebo triggers off of a dealt card.

The discussion is purely for fun of course, obviously the intent is not for it to be an infinite loop, but the way I see it, Leebo generates the loop all by himself, no need for Maarek at all.

Frank's wording: Both the initial card dealt and the additional card drawn both count as a faceup damage card being dealt.

If we are really going to nitpick Leebo's text, it never says that the second card is face-up and his ability only triggers when a card is dealt face-up. Also, there is nothing that indicates that the Leebo player gets to see what the card does before choosing to resolve it in lieu of the card that had been dealt face-up. The Leebo player is essentially making a gamble that whatever is on card number two is less bad than the original card.

If we are really going to nitpick Leebo's text, it never says that the second card is face-up and his ability only triggers when a card is dealt face-up. Also, there is nothing that indicates that the Leebo player gets to see what the card does before choosing to resolve it in lieu of the card that had been dealt face-up. The Leebo player is essentially making a gamble that whatever is on card number two is less bad than the original card.

By that logic, I'm choosing whether to take this crit, or to take a facedown damage, and am therefore Chewbacca.

It's not an infinite loop. The situation is specifically mentioned in the FAQ under Leebo's entry.