In a recent game this issue came up: If Keyan Farlander has a stress and rolls no focus can he still spend the token?
I would think so as the cost is removing the stress and even though you get no use out of it you can still do it because you can pay the cost.
Edited by CaptainAceYes!
You can spend focus tokens to flip 0 eyeballs to hits.
You can spend a target lock to re-roll 0 dice.
Keyan Farlander can spend a stress token to flip 0 eyeballs to hits.
Edited by KlutzCorrect.
When attacking, if Keyan Farlander has a stress token, he can use his ability even if he hasn’t rolled any results; in this case, no dice are modified but 1 stress token is removed.
FAQ page 9.
Edited by FunkletonI would think so as the cost is removing the stress and even though you get no use out of it you can still do it because you can pay the cost.
X-wing does not have any concept of "cost" for an effect. There are simply effects. In this case, Farlander spends (removes) one stress token to get the effect of changing any (0 or more) eyeballs into hits. That's the full effect, and you complete all of it just fine.
Edited by BuhallinThank you all for the quick response!
X-wing does not have any concept of "cost" for an effect. There are simply effects. In this case, Farlander spends (removes) one stress token to get the effect of changing any (0 or more) eyeballs into hits. That's the full effect, and you complete all of it just fine.
As per the FAQ:
If, through his pilot ability, Captain Yorr intercepts a stress token that is part of the cost of triggering an ability on another ship (such as Soontir Fel or Opportunist), that ability’s effect does not resolve. If Captain Yorr intercepts a stress token that was the result of an ability (such as Push the Limit), that ability resolves, then Yorr receives the stress token.
It would seem you're quite mistaken.
Edited by WonderWAAAGH
X-wing does not have any concept of "cost" for an effect. There are simply effects. In this case, Farlander spends (removes) one stress token to get the effect of changing any (0 or more) eyeballs into hits. That's the full effect, and you complete all of it just fine.
As per the FAQ:
If, through his pilot ability, Captain Yorr intercepts a stress token that is part of the cost of triggering an ability on another ship (such as Soontir Fel or Opportunist), that ability’s effect does not resolve. If Captain Yorr intercepts a stress token that was the result of an ability (such as Push the Limit), that ability resolves, then Yorr receives the stress token.
It would seem you're quite mistaken.
X-wing does not have any concept of "cost" for an effect. There are simply effects. In this case, Farlander spends (removes) one stress token to get the effect of changing any (0 or more) eyeballs into hits. That's the full effect, and you complete all of it just fine.
As per the FAQ:
If, through his pilot ability, Captain Yorr intercepts a stress token that is part of the cost of triggering an ability on another ship (such as Soontir Fel or Opportunist), that ability’s effect does not resolve. If Captain Yorr intercepts a stress token that was the result of an ability (such as Push the Limit), that ability resolves, then Yorr receives the stress token.
It would seem you're quite mistaken.
"Cost" is not defined in X-wing, at least not in relation to abilities. The only use of the word in the core rulebook is in for the points cost of ships. The one and only appearance of the word in the FAQ is the one you managed to find to quote.
Yes, they use the word "cost". No, that doesn't make it a defined term or concept in X-wing, any more than that entry makes "intercept" a meaningfully defined term. In fact, the one correct example cited there (Opportunist) explicitly phrases the "cost" as part of the effect - "Receive one stress token to roll..." But the reason Yorr affects it as he does is because you don't meet the requirements of receiving the stress token in order to complete the rest of it. For even more evidence that it's not trying to define "cost" even in some backhanded way, consider that Fel is the other example - there's absolutely nothing in Fel's ability that could even remotely be considered paying a cost. It's just a reaction to the stress token being gained.
I'm quite used to your petty little attacks at this point, but could you maybe avoid being quite so misleading in the process?
I don't think there's anything petty, or anything that constitutes an attack, about making an observation. When you're right, you're right. Have a nice day. 
Love that actress 
"Cost" is not defined in X-wing, at least not in relation to abilities. The only use of the word in the core rulebook is in for the points cost of ships. The one and only appearance of the word in the FAQ is the one you managed to find to quote.X-wing does not have any concept of "cost" for an effect. There are simply effects. In this case, Farlander spends (removes) one stress token to get the effect of changing any (0 or more) eyeballs into hits. That's the full effect, and you complete all of it just fine.
As per the FAQ:
If, through his pilot ability, Captain Yorr intercepts a stress token that is part of the cost of triggering an ability on another ship (such as Soontir Fel or Opportunist), that ability’s effect does not resolve. If Captain Yorr intercepts a stress token that was the result of an ability (such as Push the Limit), that ability resolves, then Yorr receives the stress token.
It would seem you're quite mistaken.
Yes, they use the word "cost". No, that doesn't make it a defined term or concept in X-wing, any more than that entry makes "intercept" a meaningfully defined term. In fact, the one correct example cited there (Opportunist) explicitly phrases the "cost" as part of the effect - "Receive one stress token to roll..." But the reason Yorr affects it as he does is because you don't meet the requirements of receiving the stress token in order to complete the rest of it. For even more evidence that it's not trying to define "cost" even in some backhanded way, consider that Fel is the other example - there's absolutely nothing in Fel's ability that could even remotely be considered paying a cost. It's just a reaction to the stress token being gained.
I'm quite used to your petty little attacks at this point, but could you maybe avoid being quite so misleading in the process?
Wait what? WonderWAAAGH was totally correct, you were being misleading in stating there is no "cost" for abilities. Just because the rules don't call them a cost, that's just what they are. You spend (spend means there is a cost) a focus to turn eyes to hits. That's a cost. If I spend $1 for a coffee, how much did it cost? Nothing? Because they didn't say "coffee costs $1"? That just makes no sense.
You need to be able to take criticism when you make a false statement dude. Accept that you were wrong, and move on.
Wait what? WonderWAAAGH was totally correct, you were being misleading in stating there is no "cost" for abilities. Just because the rules don't call them a cost, that's just what they are. You spend (spend means there is a cost) a focus to turn eyes to hits. That's a cost. If I spend $1 for a coffee, how much did it cost? Nothing? Because they didn't say "coffee costs $1"? That just makes no sense.
You need to be able to take criticism when you make a false statement dude. Accept that you were wrong, and move on.
The issue is not about "cost" as a concept. The issue is about "cost" as a game term, with a defined meaning and impact in the rules.
"Cost" as a game term would be something like the SWLCG defines it. The term appears 34 times in the main rulebook, and 26 in the FAQ. It includes specific rules for what constitutes a cost, who can pay a cost, distinctions between costs and effects, when you pay a cost vs. when you get the effect, what happens to the costs for a canceled effect, and restrictions on paying a cost for an effect which won't do anything (among other things).
X-wing has none of these things. As I said above, the term appears a grand total of one time throughout all the rules of X-wing, and even there it makes no sense, because "Receive one stress token to..." and "When you receive a stress token..." are both described as "costs". It's used in the conceptual sense, not the game rule element sense.
If you want to think about it as a cost conceptually, that's fine. But there is nothing in the game rules that defines or distinguishes any part of an effect as a "cost". To try and keep this a little on topic, that's part of what the OP was suggesting: that you can pay the cost for an ability even though you won't get an effect from it. But what's the cost? What part is the effect? None of that is defined, much less anything that says whether you can do something like pay the cost for no effect. And it's not how it works in X-wing. There's no defined cost component to an ability, you just activate the ability when the trigger is met, and do what it says.
I can understand where we come at this from different directions, because you seem to pretty much start and stop at the concept, without worrying about the actual rules. And again, there's nothing that stops you from thinking of it as a cost. But that doesn't have any actual grounding in the rules of X-wing, certainly not in any way that relates to the way the OP was trying to apply it.
The issue is not about "cost" as a concept.
Edited by ForgottenloreX-wing does not have any concept of "cost" for an effect.
To try and keep this a little on topic, that's part of what the OP was suggesting: that you can pay the cost for an ability even though you won't get an effect from it. But what's the cost? What part is the effect? None of that is defined, much less anything that says whether you can do something like pay the cost for no effect. And it's not how it works in X-wing. There's no defined cost component to an ability, you just activate the ability when the trigger is met, and do what it says.
Just to be clear, you can clarify Keyan's ability substantially by imposing a cost-and-effect framework. The cost is a stress token (that is, the stress token is spent) and the effect is changing all of the [eye] results in the attacker's dice pool to [boom] results. With the clarification that "all" explicitly includes zero, you now know everything you need to know to adjudicate Keyan's ability correctly and consistently.
The problem is that framework doesn't exist in the rules, and adding it probably isn't feasible: it would require rewriting not only the rules but a large number of pilot abilities and upgrade cards.
Sorry, possibly a poor choice of words in the original, which should have more explicitly said "X-wing's rules do not have any concept of cost".
Then again, I suspect that those who seem so eager to jump on me over this one know that I pretty much always discuss things here in terms of the rules. I'd really expect that after my response, it should have been obvious to CaptBooYah that I was specifically discussing the rules.
Let's be honest about this. It's not some minor, innocent misunderstanding. It's a couple of people who really dislike me jumping on what they think is a gotcha opportunity, and they're doing a lot to confuse the actual question at hand in order to do so.
The OP suggested Keyan's ability would be determined by some distinction related to having paid a cost. There are no rules for covering that, which is what I pointed out. Nobody even tried to actually address the issue or clarify what a cost might actually be, or address the OP's suggestion. Instead, we got this, which I'm pretty sure helped absolutely nobody learn anything about the actual rules.
The problem is that framework doesn't exist in the rules
I would say rather that it doesn't "explicitly" exist...
The problem is that framework doesn't exist in the rules
I would say rather that it doesn't "explicitly" exist...
The problem is that framework doesn't exist in the rules
I would say rather that it doesn't "explicitly" exist...
If there's an implicit rule, it's too non-uniform to be really helpful.
The respective designers of some upgrades clearly had a cost-and-effect framework in mind. But the FAQ ruling for Captain Yorr makes clear that implicit framework doesn't apply to all upgrades: it distinguishes between "a stress token that is part of the cost of triggering an ability", and "a stress token that was the result of an ability". Push the Limit fits conceptually into a cost-and-effect framework (the cost is a stress token, and the effect is an extra action), but the FAQ explicitly says it doesn't work that way.
So even if cost-and-effect is indeed an implicit feature of the game, it's an interpretive framework that works only sometimes, without an easy way to tell in which cases it ought to apply.
Edited by Vorpal SwordI tend to agree with Buhalin that there isn't really a concept of "cost" in the rules.
I also don't think one is required to analyze the rules.
My interpretation of the rules is built around triggers, effects, conditions, restrictions and may-clauses.
Push the Limit has:
Opportunist has:
Of course, none of these "keywords" I just made up are explicitly part of the rules, and there are probably some cases where they are not sufficient to analyze the rules.
And, while the simultaneously effect/trigger bit of Opportunist might be more simply called a cost, I like having as few conceptual building blocks as possible. 
[deleted]
Edited by Quarrel
X-wing does not have any concept of "cost" for an effect. There are simply effects. In this case, Farlander spends (removes) one stress token to get the effect of changing any (0 or more) eyeballs into hits. That's the full effect, and you complete all of it just fine.
Check out the FAQ entry for Captain Yorr.
If, through his pilot ability, Captain Yorr intercepts a stress token that is part of the cost of triggering an ability on another ship (such as Soontir Fel or Opportunist), that ability’s effect does not resolve.
If Captain Yorr intercepts a stress token that was the result of an ability (such as Push the Limit), that ability resolves, then Yorr receives the stress token.
Clearly, even FFG is operating under the idea that costs, at least as a concept, exist implicitly within the game.
If FFG were "clearly" operating under the idea that costs existed as a concept, the term might be used more than one place in 43 pages of rules, or we might be able to see the impact of that idea in other rulings. But we don't have any of that - literally, not another reference to it at all. So either they're working very hard to hide its existence, or there really isn't such an idea, at least not in any way that affects the actual rules.
"Cost" is used there, IMHO, conversationally. It's wording that really shouldn't be taken quite that literally. Even if we try and make it a rule, the inclusion of Fel as an example of a "cost" makes it basically impossible to define it in any logical way.
Please, if someone has an idea of how we could define cost in a way that fits both Opportunist and Fel, please suggest it. If there are rulings I'm missing that indicate that a cost is separate from the effect of an ability, again, please remind me. If there's some cost-related reasoning that makes Opportunist have a cost while Push the Limit doesn't, I'd love to hear it. But this whole "They said cost in one ruling so you're wrong!!" thing is kinda getting silly.
Sorry, possibly a poor choice of words in the original, which should have more explicitly said "X-wing's rules do not have any concept of cost".
Then again, I suspect that those who seem so eager to jump on me over this one know that I pretty much always discuss things here in terms of the rules. I'd really expect that after my response, it should have been obvious to CaptBooYah that I was specifically discussing the rules.
Let's be honest about this. It's not some minor, innocent misunderstanding. It's a couple of people who really dislike me jumping on what they think is a gotcha opportunity, and they're doing a lot to confuse the actual question at hand in order to do so.
The OP suggested Keyan's ability would be determined by some distinction related to having paid a cost. There are no rules for covering that, which is what I pointed out. Nobody even tried to actually address the issue or clarify what a cost might actually be, or address the OP's suggestion. Instead, we got this, which I'm pretty sure helped absolutely nobody learn anything about the actual rules.
Nobody was jumping on you, you were just flat out wrong. And then you turned around and maligned me with a personal attack, so who is really jumping on who?
And now to lighten the mood with a custom meme:
Clearly, even FFG is operating under the idea that costs, at least as a concept, exist implicitly within the game.
Which is the problem with the rules in general. There are any number of concepts that seem to exist implicitly, but that the designers haven't bothered to actually define and so we keep having to make deductions as to the general principles based on rulings of specific instances.
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
Would perhaps defining "cost" help you?
Cost: "(of an object or an action) require the payment of (a specified sum of money) before it can be acquired or done."
By this definition you can the see that the requirement you must fulfill in order to perform some action is referred to as a "cost".
"Spending a focus" is a requirement that must be fulfilled in order to change eyes to hits. Ergo, "spending a focus" would be considered a cost.
Just get over it, your explanation of "FFG does not use that word" is not a valid argument. It's just a term. Whether they chose to write it doesn't mean it's not a concept found in the rules...
Edited by Cptnhalfbeard...who is really jumping on who?
Those puppies are jumping on each other, wrestling over a sock they liberated from the laundry. But you can't stay mad at them because, c'mon, Corgi puppies.