That's not how hull points work.

I wonder why the FAQ would rule that Vader needs at least a singe hull to function and it doesn't seem to be related to needing to pay the full cost.

Edit: although other upgrades like Expose go against this. It's not unique, at least.

That's not how hull points work.

Please don't blame me for how FFG word their rules. I was merely correcting the earlier post that said you could use Vader in that situation.

Not blaming you. Sorry if it came off that way. That's one of the FAQ rulings that I just don't understand the logic behind.

I wonder why the FAQ would rule that Vader needs at least a singe hull to function and it doesn't seem to be related to needing to pay the full cost.

It lines up with the on-stress abilities that are ruled to not work if you don't actually take the stress. If the action is supposed to have a downside (you take meaningful damage) and the downside doesn't actually mean anything (you've already taken enough damage to destroy you) you can't benefit from it for free.

Edit: although other upgrades like Expose go against this. It's not unique, at least.

In the case of the have a single hull left, you still can't pay the printed cost if taking cards in excess of your hull value doesn't count as taking the damage for the pusposes of the Vader card.

Anyways, that's enough of a detour for a thread that's otherwise unrelated to my gripe about a FAQ entry.

In the case of the have a single hull left, you still can't pay the printed cost if taking cards in excess of your hull value doesn't count as taking the damage for the pusposes of the Vader card.

Anyways, that's enough of a detour for a thread that's otherwise unrelated to my gripe about a FAQ entry.

(For ease of wording, for the purposes of this post, treat "n hull remaining" as synonymous with "n fewer damage cards than hull points".)

The Vader crew restriction could still be in the framework of paying the full cost. Sure, a ship with one hull remaining doesn't have two hull remaining, but it can still take two damage, which a destroyed ship cannot.

In the case of the have a single hull left, you still can't pay the printed cost if taking cards in excess of your hull value doesn't count as taking the damage for the pusposes of the Vader card.

Anyways, that's enough of a detour for a thread that's otherwise unrelated to my gripe about a FAQ entry.

(For ease of wording, for the purposes of this post, treat "n hull remaining" as synonymous with "n fewer damage cards than hull points".)

The Vader crew restriction could still be in the framework of paying the full cost. Sure, a ship with one hull remaining doesn't have two hull remaining, but it can still take two damage, which a destroyed ship cannot.

Except that wording doesn't work because Direct Hit which is one card causing two damage, despite the fact that a lot of people flip it and deal an extra card, which is by RAW not how it should be dealt with, and screws up things like R2DCrew and Rexler.

You have to treat n hull remaining as n points of damage remaining before the ship is destroyed to account for Direct Hits.

The Vader crew restriction could still be in the framework of paying the full cost. Sure, a ship with one hull remaining doesn't have two hull remaining, but it can still take two damage, which a destroyed ship cannot.

Until a ship is removed from the table, it can continue to take damage.

Is being destroyed an effect that is controlled by the player of the destroyed ship for the purposes of timing?