Looks like most common questions were answered. Only ones I think we're missed were moving from planet to hq = move for homing beacon and shadowsun being able to drop gun drones from discard pile.

Only ones I think we're missed were moving from planet to hq = move for homing beacon

Entry 3.3 says "Routing, retreating, and deploying are not considered to be 'moves.'" So it is addressed in the FAQ, and it seems fairly clear that unless the effect uses the word "move," it is not a move.

Anyway, the LTP makes it pretty clear that when a battle ends, surviving units are placed in the HQ, so when units "return to HQ" at the end of a battle, the rules already say this is considered a "placement" by the game, not a "move."

shadowsun being able to drop gun drones from discard pile.

The answer to the question, " Can I deploy a Gun Drones (Core Set 158) using Ambush Platform’s (Core Set 168) Combat Action? " contains the statement, " This would not work if the Ambush Platform put an attachment into play from your hand. " Since Shadowsun's reaction is clearly a "put into play" (as opposed to a "deploy") effect, I'd say the FAQ addresses this one, too.

Can someone explain the ruling on Sicarius's Chosen vs Syren Zythlex?

I would have thought that the reactions happen in order- the Chosen’s reaction comes first. Syren moves over, and then her reaction triggers. The Chosen is already deployed at that planet in the previous "step".

Just to clarify - I follow the logic they present in the FAQ, of which the main part is " The opportunity to react to this move is passed by both players, and they continue with reaction opportunities to the original triggering condition, which was the deployment of Sicarius’s Chosen at the planet Barlus ."

I guess I want to know where this comes from, and whether there are other examples in the game that can help me reconcile this in my own head.

I would have thought that the reactions happen in order- the Chosen’s reaction comes first. Syren moves over, and then her reaction triggers. The Chosen is already deployed at that planet in the previous "step".

Yes. This is true. The bit in the FAQ about passing on opportunities to react to Zythlex's move is an acknowledgement of the fact that reactions to reactions are nested. Here's how that example diagrams out (assuming the Space Marines player has initiative):

1. SM player's deployment action: Chosen is deployed at Planet A

1A. Chosen reacts to Deployment in #1 by moving Zythlex from Planet B and deals 1 damage.

1Ai. SM player has the opportunity to react to Zythlex's move in #1A. He passes.

1Aii. DE player has the opportunity to react to Zythlex's move in #1A. He passes.

1B. Zythlex reacts to Deployment in #1 and exhausts SC.

1C. SM player's next opportunity to react to Deployment in #1. He passes.

1D. DE player's next opportunity to react to Deployment in #1. He passes

2. DE player's deployment action....

Another example would be a Starbane vs. Shadowsun Command Phase. Assume that the Eldar player has initiative when the two warlords commit:

1. Both warlords commit. Starbane to Planet A, Shadowsun to Planet B.

1A. Elder player's opportunity to react to Commitments in #1. Plays Foresight and moves Starbane to Planet B.

1Ai. Eldar player's opportunity to react to Commitments in 1A. Uses Starbane's ability to exhaust a unit at Planet B

1Aii. Tau player's opportunity to react to Commitments in 1A. Passes.

1Aiii. Elder player's opportunity to react to Commitments in 1A. Passes.

1B. Tau player's opportunity to react to Commitments in #1. Uses Shadowsun's ability to put an attachment into play at Planet B.

1C. Elder player's opportunity to react to Commitments in #1. Uses Starbane's ability to exhaust a unit at Planet A. (Yes, that's right. Even though Starbane is no longer at Planet A, he can still exhaust a unit at "that" planet he committed to in #1.)

1D. Tau player's opportunity to react to Commitments in #1. Passes.

1E. Elder player's opportunity to react to Commitments in #1. Passes.

2. Resolve Command Struggle at Planet 1....

Make more sense? Essentially, the extra wording in the FAQ is just there to say, "Don't forget that since reactions to reactions are nested, resolve any reactions to moving Zythlex before going back and playing more reactions to deploying Chosen."

Thanks ktom, it certainly helps. I've summarised what your are saying into "they aren't actually deployed until all of the possible reactions are finished. Is that a fair summation?

It still erks me from a "flavour" point of view ' How can she exhaust him when he's already there? I'll get over it though and continue to manipulate that annoying woman's board position (is it obvious that I am a SM player that hates Syren?).

Sometimes it feels like the game (and other LCGs like AGOT) can be broken down into insanely detailed segments in some parts and then other times the answer seems to be "because I just can, that's why". Not complaining though, love Conquest and FFG's other LCGs. As long as it is consistent (which it is) everything is green.

Only ones I think we're missed were moving from planet to hq = move for homing beacon

Entry 3.3 says "Routing, retreating, and deploying are not considered to be 'moves.'" So it is addressed in the FAQ, and it seems fairly clear that unless the effect uses the word "move," it is not a move.

Anyway, the LTP makes it pretty clear that when a battle ends, surviving units are placed in the HQ, so when units "return to HQ" at the end of a battle, the rules already say this is considered a "placement" by the game, not a "move."

shadowsun being able to drop gun drones from discard pile.

The answer to the question, " Can I deploy a Gun Drones (Core Set 158) using Ambush Platform’s (Core Set 168) Combat Action? " contains the statement, " This would not work if the Ambush Platform put an attachment into play from your hand. " Since Shadowsun's reaction is clearly a "put into play" (as opposed to a "deploy") effect, I'd say the FAQ addresses this one, too.

I understand and agree with the rulings. I have just had people argue it. Would have been nice to see it faq.

The moving back to hq thing came up at a recent store champ. And I was quoting you from the cgdb site and they said that they asked one of the designers at world's last year. Oh well

Thanks ktom, it certainly helps. I've summarised what your are saying into "they aren't actually deployed until all of the possible reactions are finished. Is that a fair summation?

No. It's not. Remember that we are dealing with reactions here, and reactions take place after the triggering condition has occurred. So the deployment, and the Chosen's arrival at the planet, are complete before any reactions are triggered - his or hers. The more accurate summary is that "If reaction #1 to a triggering condition creates a new triggering condition, resolve all possible reactions to the new triggering condition before finishing up reactions to the old one."

It still erks me from a "flavour" point of view ' How can she exhaust him when he's already there? I'll get over it though and continue to manipulate that annoying woman's board position (is it obvious that I am a SM player that hates Syren?).

I would think, from a flavor point of view, that it's more like, "Now that we're both here, I can knock you down."

May I please ask about the utilization of the Homing Beacon? (Tau support card)

How is it exactly triggered? I assume that as soon as (for example) units that are placed into HQ from Planet 1 (due to winning the battle, no battle being fought, etc) trigger it, but am simply confused on this matter?

Thanks in advance.

The rules (in the LTP and RRG) for returning units to HQ after a battle, uses the word "placed," not "moved." So like routing, retreating and deploying, units returning to the HQ after a battle at the first planet are not moved.

Homing Beacon can only be used after a unit "moves" to HQ. Since deploying, routing and retreating (during or after a battle) are not moves, you cannot use Homing Beacon after winning the battle at the first planet.

There are no "built in" game mechanics that allow you to use Homing Beacon because there are no "built in" game mechanics that count as "moving" your units to the HQ. Homing Beacon is used solely after an effect that uses the word "move" sends a unit to the HQ. The most common of these are the "Forced Reactions" on the Ethereal units.

There are no "built in" game mechanics that allow you to use Homing Beacon because there are no "built in" game mechanics that count as "moving" your units to the HQ. Homing Beacon is used solely after an effect that uses the word "move" sends a unit to the HQ. The most common of these are the "Forced Reactions" on the Ethereal units.

I see.

Going by this interpretation, Homing Beacon is by far one of the least useful cards in the game, no?

Going by this interpretation, Homing Beacon is by far one of the least useful cards in the game, no?

Well, maybe one of the most situational cards in the game. It's unlikely to do anything for you in a Shadowsun deck; however, it is clearly designed to take advantage of Aun'shi's Forced Reaction. Hopefully, you are attacking with Aun'shi, and using Homing Beacon when you do. So in an Aun'shi deck, it can be useful - at least in the sense that you will have plenty of opportunity to use it.

That said, a good Aun'shi deck is probably not having too much trouble with the command phase, so the Tau player probably doesn't need to find extra sources of cards or resources. If Homing Beacon is not a "useful card" in an Aun'shi deck, it's probably more because it's effect doesn't add much than that there is little to no opportunity to trigger it.

Right. It just seems that 4 Eternal Envoys + warlord + 2 units through Eternal Wisdom are the only cards that would trigger the Homing Beacon, which is rather limiting imo. But then again, the Support card is only cost 1, so I guess I shouldn't put too much emphasis into its utilization.

Anyways, thanks for answering.

So can Ambush platform Deploy Shadowsun's Stealth Cadre? Because that one has never been clear to me.

Only ones I think we're missed were moving from planet to hq = move for homing beacon

Entry 3.3 says "Routing, retreating, and deploying are not considered to be 'moves.'" So it is addressed in the FAQ, and it seems fairly clear that unless the effect uses the word "move," it is not a move.

Anyway, the LTP makes it pretty clear that when a battle ends, surviving units are placed in the HQ, so when units "return to HQ" at the end of a battle, the rules already say this is considered a "placement" by the game, not a "move."

shadowsun being able to drop gun drones from discard pile.

The answer to the question, " Can I deploy a Gun Drones (Core Set 158) using Ambush Platform’s (Core Set 168) Combat Action? " contains the statement, " This would not work if the Ambush Platform put an attachment into play from your hand. " Since Shadowsun's reaction is clearly a "put into play" (as opposed to a "deploy") effect, I'd say the FAQ addresses this one, too.

But would it work if the gun drones are put into play as a unit not an attachment?

So can Ambush platform Deploy Shadowsun's Stealth Cadre? Because that one has never been clear to me.

Yes. The Cadre can "enter play" as an attachment, so any effect that makes an attachment "enter play" can be applied to the Cadre (even though its printed type is "unit"). This includes both "deploy" and "put into play" effects that work on attachment cards.

Specifically:

1. "Deploy an attachment" effects, like Ambush Platform, works on Gun Drones (because it can specifically be "deployed" as an attachment) and Stealth Cadre (because "deploying" an attachment makes that attachment "enter play").

2. "Put an attachment into play" effects does not work on Gun Drones (because it can only be "deployed" as an attachment), but does work on Stealth Cadre (because "putting an attachment into play" makes that attachment "enter play").

But would it work if the gun drones are put into play as a unit not an attachment?

Yes. You don't need any special text or extra permission to use a "put a unit into play" effect on a unit card.

But would it work if the gun drones are put into play as a unit not an attachment?

Yes. You don't need any special text or extra permission to use a "put a unit into play" effect on a unit card.

I think I missed something. Are you saying that Ambush Platform can be used to deploy Gun Drones as it's own unit rather than an attachment?

I think I missed something. Are you saying that Ambush Platform can be used to deploy Gun Drones as it's own unit rather than an attachment?

Maybe I missed something.

No, I am not saying Ambush Platform can be used to deploy Gun Drones as a unit. Since Ambush Platform only deploys attachments, that would be a downright silly answer on my part.

The original beginning of the discussion was effectively, "The FAQ clarifies that Gun Drones can be deployed as an attachment by Ambush Platform, but it doesn't say anything about whether Gun Drones can be put into play by Shadowsun's ability," which was followed by, "Sure it does; it says Gun Drones cannot be 'put into play' as an attachment, and Shadowsun is a 'put into play' effect; hence, it doesn't work."

From what I can tell, that was followed up today with, "But Gun Drones can still be 'put into play' as a unit by an effect that puts units into play, right?" The answer to that, of course, is, "Yes."

Now, maybe I misunderstood today's question. Maybe it's asking whether Shadowsun's ability can put Gun Drones into play as a unit instead of an attachment. That never even crossed my mind before the follow-up because, of course, Shadowsun's ability only puts attachments into play. I just can't see how anyone could read, "Put an attachment into play" as "Put Gun Drones into play as a unit."

The Chosen vs Zythlex example still bugs me out. I'm doing my best to follow the explanations above and the overall reactions nesting rule, but fail desperately:) Here's my vision of the case:

1. The Chosen is deployed. As ktom stated, this action should be resolved completely in order to proceed to the reactions.

2. SM player uses the Chosen's reaction to move Zythlex to his planet.

3. DE player trying to use Zythex's ability... but wait, look back at point 1: SM was already deployed at the planet before she came to him, thus making such reaction attemp completely illogical.

Also I've played with a random guy at a local club, and he was like: "Hey, here's my Homunculus and I have 7 resources so I'm empowering him with +7 ATK as a single ability use to one-shot your warlord". My reasoning that the ability clearly states +1 ATK per ability use and +7 ATK may be gained only after 7 turns had no effect on him:) The game wasn't in my favour though, so I let him finish off the warlord just to end it, but I definitely won't play with such an expositor again.

The Chosen vs Zythlex example still bugs me out. I'm doing my best to follow the explanations above and the overall reactions nesting rule, but fail desperately:) Here's my vision of the case:

1. The Chosen is deployed. As ktom stated, this action should be resolved completely in order to proceed to the reactions.

2. SM player uses the Chosen's reaction to move Zythlex to his planet.

3. DE player trying to use Zythex's ability... but wait, look back at point 1: SM was already deployed at the planet before she came to him, thus making such reaction attemp completely illogical.

In #3, you are reading Zythex's ability from Chosen's point of view. You need to read it from Zythex's point of view. And, more to the point, you read it from Zythex's point of view at the time the reaction is triggered , not from what her point of view would have been when the triggering condition was created. When you trigger Zythex, she is effectively asking herself, "Are we in the reaction step for a unit being deployed at the planet where I currently am ?" Since the answer to that is "yes," it doesn't matter that she wasn't there when the deployment itself completed.

My reasoning that the ability clearly states +1 ATK per ability use and +7 ATK may be gained only after 7 turns had no effect on him:)

You are correct that it does take 7 different actions, but he was correct that he could trigger all 7 of those actions before his next attack.

Remember, in combat, the order is:

1. Players take turns triggering actions (until both have no more actions).

2. Player with initiative attacks (or passes on attack if he has no ready units).

3. Players take turns triggering actions (until both have no more actions).

4. Player without initiative attacks (or passes on attack if he has no ready units).

5. If neither player has any ready units, proceed to #6. Otherwise, go back to #1.

6. Ready all units; Players may retreat units; Go back to #1.

So it sounds like what your opponent was doing was triggering the Homunculus 7 times in either #1 or #3 (before his attack in #2 or #4). That's perfectly legal. Of course, he should be giving you the opportunity to trigger your own action (or pass) between each use of the Homunculus (i.e., his Homunculus Trigger #1, you trigger something, his Homunculus Trigger #2, you pass, etc.), but it sounds like you didn't have any actions to take.

End result: You are correct that he cannot pay 7 resources and get 7 effects with 1 trigger of Homunculus, but he can trigger Homunculus 7 separate times before his next attack.

Since the answer to that is "yes," it doesn't matter that she wasn't there when the deployment itself completed.

Ok, rule-wise this might sound reasonable. Logic-wise, this is absolute nonsense.

You are correct that he cannot pay 7 resources and get 7 effects with 1 trigger of Homunculus, but he can trigger Homunculus 7 separate times before his next attack.

That's clear to me, I just was against the 7-at-a-single-use interpretation.

Since the answer to that is "yes," it doesn't matter that she wasn't there when the deployment itself completed.

Ok, rule-wise this might sound reasonable. Logic-wise, this is absolute nonsense.

You can shoot people who suddenly show themselves at your location. I can teleport people (involuntarily) to my location and shoot them.

When I teleport you to my location (involuntarily) and shoot you, are you saying it makes no sense that you can shoot me, even though from your perspective, I suddenly showed myself at your location?

That's clear to me, I just was against the 7-at-a-single-use interpretation.

Did you have other actions to do between his 7 triggers? Because if not, isn't the result the same.

Did you have other actions to do between his 7 triggers? Because if not, isn't the result the same.

I did. Eldars always have tricks in their pockets. Otherwise I wouldn't focus so much attention of this occasion.

With all my respect, Siren's ability explicitly reads after. SM was there before . After ≠ before. At least in my universe. Case closed.