Kind of a weird question but imagine this.

We have a bomber that activates and drops a proximity mine directly on a TIE fighter. It immediately rolls for damage because the mine lands on the TIE fighter. It rolls 1 crit, which they flip over to show a thrust control fire, the ship gains 1 stress token. Other ships move, then it is time for the TIE fighter to move, it flips up a red K-turn and it is already stressed. Does the other player still change the maneuver dial to another maneuver I take it? That is the normal thing to do when assigning a red maneuver to an already stressed ship, but with the way that is set up it has me believing that it is intended to give the opponent an advantage because you made a mistake... here it is just the odds being against you more than anything else.

Anyways I am probably over thinking this. Opposing player still assigns a dial here, right?

Anyways I am probably over thinking this. Opposing player still assigns a dial here, right?

Yes, as there's simply no other way to resolve it. Sucks for the player in question, but what can you do?

The odds of it happening are ridiculously small, but as DR4CO said, there's no other way to resolve it. The player assigned a red maneuver, but wasn't stressed at the time, so that part's legal. There's no way he could've predicted getting stressed after assigning the maneuver, but before revealing the dial. He'd lose his maneuver to the opponent, and that's just the luck of the draw.

Might be worth asking ffg to clarify in their next faq update.

Might be worth asking ffg to clarify in their next faq update.

Can't see why. Like I said the odds of it happening are ridiculously remote. There's a roughly 1/16th chance of pulling that card, IF you get a prox mine dropped on you before you make the red maneuver you had dialed in. Ludicrously small chance.

It's not likely to be a Frequently Asked Question. The closest you'll get is an email response that's likely to say what already been said here.

If you reveal a red maneuver while stressed, you hand your dial to the opponent.

It doesn't actually matter if you were unstressed when you revealed your dial.

This isn't always a bad thing, as I explore in this post.

Might be worth asking ffg to clarify in their next faq update.

Can't see why.

Because handing your dial to your opponent is a BIG deal, and they seem to have gone out of their way to make sure players are never forced into it. It wouldn't surprise me if, once FFG are made aware of the possibility, we dont get a FAQ but rather full on errata to prevent it from being possible.

Why should it be errata'd? You just follow the rules and deal with a bad luck situation. This game has plenty of them. Should we errata all of them?

Might be worth asking ffg to clarify in their next faq update.

I can't see FFG holding anyone to passing their dial if the stress was received. The point of passing the dial is to punish a player for selecting an illegal maneuver that cannot be modified to a legal maneuver without risking that player deriving an advantage. A previously unstressed 7 hull YT-1300 being flown off of the table as opposed to doing a k-turn after it gets hit with a proximity mine seems would be a huge windfall.

Might be worth asking ffg to clarify in their next faq update.

Can't see why. Like I said the odds of it happening are ridiculously remote. There's a roughly 1/16th chance of pulling that card, IF you get a prox mine dropped on you before you make the red maneuver you had dialed in. Ludicrously small chance.

It's not likely to be a Frequently Asked Question. The closest you'll get is an email response that's likely to say what already been said here.

Though I do agree with you, that's the luck of the draw, hand it over and take what's given.

I can't see FFG holding anyone to passing their dial if the stress was received. The point of passing the dial is to punish a player for selecting an illegal maneuver that cannot be modified to a legal maneuver without risking that player deriving an advantage. A previously unstressed 7 hull YT-1300 being flown off of the table as opposed to doing a k-turn after it gets hit with a proximity mine seems would be a huge windfall.

I can't see FFG changing the way revealing a red maneuver and having stress at the time works. The chances may be small but why alter a rule for something so uncommon? If a ship get stressed between setting a maneuver and executing that maneuver then something amazing has already happened.

Might be worth asking ffg to clarify in their next faq update.

I can't see FFG holding anyone to passing their dial if the stress was received. The point of passing the dial is to punish a player for selecting an illegal maneuver that cannot be modified to a legal maneuver without risking that player deriving an advantage. A previously unstressed 7 hull YT-1300 being flown off of the table as opposed to doing a k-turn after it gets hit with a proximity mine seems would be a huge windfall.

• be playing Proximity Mines;
• must hit the YT-1300 with one;
• must win approx 1/9 odds to deal at least 1 critical damage;
• must then win some more less-than-stellar odds to get exactly Thrust Control Fire*;
• the YT-1300 must have been assigned a red maneuver;
• and finally the YT-1300 must be positioned in such a way that sending it off the board is even possible.

It reminds me of Dash pulling Munitions Failure, and then attacking killing the person who just attacked him at range 1. I doubt FFG intended for that to be a thing, either, but the odds of it happening are so remote that it was never considered an issue. Same thing here.

Have had this exact scenario almost happen. Soontir moved into range 1 of Dash, didn't turtle up because he couldn't be shot. Redline shot off Dash`s HLC, Dash shot and killed Soontir.

Maybe the described situation IS uncommon... but using R3-A2 stressbot isn't. So, if you receive stress from the R3-A2 or tactician and then reveal your red manouver - you have to hand over the dial to your opponent?

Do I have to always remember to be careful with "reds" when I'm facing stressbot or tactician or anything else that gives me stress before I reveal my dial?

But that would never happen, as the stress-bot and Tactician happen in the combat phase, after all dials have been revealed.

So you could never get a stress from either of them while your dial is already set.

The point of passing the dial is to punish a player for selecting an illegal maneuver that cannot be modified to a legal maneuver without risking that player deriving an advantage.

Which is exactly what's happening here.

Whether it was intentional or not is completely irrelevant. Given the current game state, which is all that matters, the game state at the time the dial was set is again irrelevant, the revealed maneuver is illegal.

Why simply doesn't matter in the least. FFG should not be changing the rules to account for why... Because that means creating exceptions for given cases and that's simply never a good way to make rules. Especially when in this case there's no need for an exception.

But that would never happen...

Yeah there is currently very, very few ways to get a stress between setting your dial and revealing it.

But that would never happen, as the stress-bot and Tactician happen in the combat phase, after all dials have been revealed.

So you could never get a stress from either of them while your dial is already set.

(loud sound of slapped forehead)

Of course you're right. I shouldn't post anything after 8 hours workday

The point of passing the dial is to punish a player for selecting an illegal maneuver that cannot be modified to a legal maneuver without risking that player deriving an advantage.

Which is exactly what's happening here.

Whether it was intentional or not is completely irrelevant. Given the current game state, which is all that matters, the game state at the time the dial was set is again irrelevant, the revealed maneuver is illegal.

Why simply doesn't matter in the least. FFG should not be changing the rules to account for why... Because that means creating exceptions for given cases and that's simply never a good way to make rules. Especially when in this case there's no need for an exception.

I agree with VanorDM, it's that way with many sports. Whether a footballer (soccer player for us Yanks) meant to trip his opponent or not (i.e. it was incidental) is irrelevant. I ref youth soccer and I'd say 60% of the time, when I call a foul, the violator says something along the lines of, "But I didn't mean to trip him." Same thing here, the bombed player didn't mean to break the rules, the fact that they did was incidental but rewriting the laws of the game to accommodate a very rare, incidental fluke isn't called for.

Great imagination though. Now, if I EVER see that, I'll recall this thread and be more the wiser.

...

I can't see FFG holding anyone to passing their dial if the stress was received. The point of passing the dial is to punish a player for selecting an illegal maneuver that cannot be modified to a legal maneuver without risking that player deriving an advantage. A previously unstressed 7 hull YT-1300 being flown off of the table as opposed to doing a k-turn after it gets hit with a proximity mine seems would be a huge windfall.

In order for this YT-1300 to be sent off the board the opponent must:

• be playing Proximity Mines;
• must hit the YT-1300 with one;
• must win approx 1/9 odds to deal at least 1 critical damage;
• must then win some more less-than-stellar odds to get exactly Thrust Control Fire*;
• the YT-1300 must have been assigned a red maneuver;
• and finally the YT-1300 must be positioned in such a way that sending it off the board is even possible.

To say this is an unlikely scenario would appear to be an understatement. It reminds me of Dash pulling Munitions Failure, and then attacking killing the person who just attacked him at range 1. I doubt FFG intended for that to be a thing, either, but the odds of it happening are so remote that it was never considered an issue. Same thing here.

...

Outrider pulling Munitions Failure is breeze compared to the "stress between setting and revealing maneuver" situation. It's basically as difficult as having the MF land on the Outrider although having that turn into the amazing coincident where that now enables a lethal R1 attack is far less common.

They need to keep the punishment for double reds not only as a punishment and easy fox for the scenario when someone double reds, but also to provide an incentive to be careful when PtL'ing off of advanced sensors and BB-8.

If we didn't have this rule, what, do I then get to change the dial from red to something else after I've seen everything that you've done? Immediate disqualification for cheating? No, we simply hand the dial to the opponent and allow them to do a non-red with the ship in question. I don't see what the issue is.

They need to keep the punishment for double reds not only as a punishment and easy fox for the scenario when someone double reds, but also to provide an incentive to be careful when PtL'ing off of advanced sensors and BB-8.

If we didn't have this rule, what, do I then get to change the dial from red to something else after I've seen everything that you've done? Immediate disqualification for cheating? No, we simply hand the dial to the opponent and allow them to do a non-red with the ship in question. I don't see what the issue is.

You know, this is a great example of who getting stress between setting and revealing a maneuver dial can have a massive effect. The game doesn't care where the stress comes from and how you got it but if you have it when you reveal your dial you suffer the consequences if it is a red maneuver.

If you're allowed to keep your red maneuver and perform it normally, or even worse change your dial yourself, if you happen to pick up a Stress from something an opponent did (although you could bomb yourself!) then the Advanced Sensor thing would be no different.

The player with the red dial should remember that his opponent has a ship with a proximity mine that will be moving before his...

The general run of this thread seems to be that getting hit by this would be incredibly bad luck (which it is), whereas I'm seeing it from the other side. For the bomber pilot, it's incredibly good luck. Not only did he inflict damage, but he gets to steer the opponent into potentially a better position for himself to inflict even more damage.

It's a total corner case, that I doubt we'd even see happen, but if someone was to actually pull this off, I'm pretty sure that they'd have the bragging rights for years.

They need to keep the punishment for double reds not only as a punishment and easy fox for the scenario when someone double reds, but also to provide an incentive to be careful when PtL'ing off of advanced sensors and BB-8.

Minor quibble, but it's actually impossible to unintentionally illegal red yourself with BB-8/PtL shenanigans, as a green maneuver is required to trigger them.