So, because I hate myself, I'm subbed to /r/starwarsarmada. Came across this post over there, and I have to say, while I can't imagine that you get to keep counting tokens for Devastator even after you get them back from Tagge, I can't find any rules support one way or the other. Am I missing something, or do we need to get the email sent off to try and get it into the Wave 3 FAQ?

For the lazy:

A discarded token counts as discarded, even if it is recovered afterwards. Thus you could get a total of 6 extra blue dice (usable at long range) out of the front arc once per activation.

So, because I hate myself, I'm subbed to /r/starwarsarmada. Came across this post over there, and I have to say, while I can't imagine that you get to keep counting tokens for Devastator even after you get them back from Tagge, I can't find any rules support one way or the other. Am I missing something, or do we need to get the email sent off to try and get it into the Wave 3 FAQ?

For the lazy:

A discarded token counts as discarded, even if it is recovered afterwards. Thus you could get a total of 6 extra blue dice (usable at long range) out of the front arc once per activation.

And people wonder why I avoid Reddit...

You won't find anything in the Rulebook. Because there was no "Recover Discarded" mechanic in the original Rules... It was all Wave 2. (Both Devestator and Walex Blissex .

How do you define "Discarded ".

Discarded is when the token is picked up and placed back in the Pool.

Okay, while its discarded, you get it...

How you do define "Recovered"? then...

Can something be Discarded AND Recovered, or is it Discarded THEN Recovered...

How many States can a Token have?

I honestly believe a Token can only have 1 State at a time.

Readied -or- Exhausted -or- Discarded

Because when a Token is Recovered, it is Readied . (as per Walex Blissex FAQ)

Until someone can point out that a token can be both Discarded and Readied at the same time....... I'd argue against it.

As a corollary, if all you need to do to define a defense token as "Discarded" is to place it in the Supply, at all... Then Needa would count his replaced token as Discarded, and y'know what, the FAQ says otherwise on that point too!

So, because I hate myself, I'm subbed to /r/starwarsarmada.

Also, you make me hate myself too... But I'm not subbing

Thanks for the answer, but I'm not sold on your reasoning here. There is no more than tangential rules support for this. Which is great, and I agree with your conclusion, but I do think it's founded pretty heavily on RAI rather than RAW. Which, in my mind, is the standard for "does this need an FAQ?".

And people wonder why I avoid Reddit...


You won't find anything in the Rulebook. Because there was no "Recover Discarded" mechanic in the original Rules... It was all Wave 2. (Both Devestator and Walex Blissex .


How do you define "Discarded ".

Discarded is when the token is picked up and placed back in the Pool.

Discard is the action you took to do so, but I don't know that you can extrapolate from that that by discarding you have conferred some kind of defined game state "d iscarded" that ceases to apply to the token when it is recovered .

Okay, while its discarded, you get it...

How you do define "Recovered"? then...
Can something be Discarded AND Recovered, or is it Discarded THEN Recovered...

How many States can a Token have?

I honestly believe a Token can only have 1 State at a time.

Readied -or- Exhausted -or- Discarded

Returns again to the ambiguity of the writing. Is the phrase "is discarded" being used as a hypothetical present progressive verb phrase, or a being verb + adjective? It's unclear. This exact kind of sloppy writing in Rieekan's "is destroyed" is what precipitated the need for a large portion of his extensive FAQ.

Because when a Token is Recovered, it is Readied . (as per Walex Blissex FAQ)

Until someone can point out that a token can be both Discarded and Readied at the same time....... I'd argue against it.

Contingent upon the being verb + adjective interpretation of "is discarded."

As a corollary, if all you need to do to define a defense token as "Discarded" is to place it in the Supply, at all... Then Needa would count his replaced token as Discarded, and y'know what, the FAQ says otherwise on that point too!

Not exactly. Needa is replace , not discard , and the specific mechanics of replace (e.g., "place it in the discard pile" or "return it to the supply") are not spelled out anywhere. Not that they should probably need to be, but RAW there's technically no reason to think the replaced token goes to the supply or interacts with discard in any meaningful way.

I agree, it should be FAQ'd.

But we've got a couple of Months before we can do that, if they don't do it at Release.

They've previously stated its ~ 1 Month after Release, they start answering questions based on that New Release.

Agreed.

Either way, email sent. May as well get the question out there early.

Is there really a problem here?

If it's discarded it's discarded. If it's no longer discarded, it's no longer discarded.

Is there really a problem here?

If it's discarded it's discarded. If it's no longer discarded, it's no longer discarded.

The argument being:

"But I discarded it, and I get +1 blue die for every one of them I've discarded. So if I discard all 4, get one back at 3, and one at 5, and discard them, there's +6 in Round 6! Doesn't matter that I got it back, I discarded it in the first place!"

Ah, so another one of those contrived ones :-)

I suppose it deserves a mail. Poor FFG staff...

Is there really a problem here?

If it's discarded it's discarded. If it's no longer discarded, it's no longer discarded.

The argument being:

"But I discarded it, and I get +1 blue die for every one of them I've discarded. So if I discard all 4, get one back at 3, and one at 5, and discard them, there's +6 in Round 6! Doesn't matter that I got it back, I discarded it in the first place!"

Just so.

Again, just to reiterate, I do not agree with this argument. I just don't have a solid rules basis to back my position, and thus think an FAQ--or at least e-mail response--is warranted.

Wait. . . I am confused. A ship shows you exactly how many tokens it can have (currently 2 to 4 tokens) you can't recover a token and suddenly be at 5 tokens

But its reddit .

But its reddit .

He is.

But its reddit .

You speak as though the commenter in question is not also a user here.

He is.

I don't doubt it.

But I would hide behind the fact that the issue was raised there, and not here, to begin with...

I also sub to r/starwarsarmada. For what it's worth, I think it's a pretty cut and dried thing: every token that has been discarded contributes to Devastator. I can't imagine that they'd create this commander without being fully aware that it makes Devastator even more powerful.

Otherwise, losing tokens on rounds 2 and 4 would be potentially offset before the Imperial player could use the ability. This would take a ship players already find difficult to use properly and make it essentially unplayable with this commander.

Tagge is may, not must. If for some reason you wanted to use both tagge and devastator, you could without meaningfully impairing its effectiveness. Not a great choice, but so what? Ozzel is nearly worthless in conjunction with vics, barring weird zero to two shenanigans, that didn't prevent ffg from adding ozzel to the game. Likewise, 80s see no benefit from mothma, but it's entirely possible to run an all 80 fleet with mothma as your admiral. There is no reason to believe ffg wants all admirals to make sense with all ships, but plenty of reason to believe the opposite

A star destroyer rolling 16 would be getting a 100% increase in frontal firepower off its title. edge case, sure. Has a downside, sure. But there's no way I'm believing that's intended absent word from the devs

Tagge is may, not must. If for some reason you wanted to use both tagge and devastator, you could without meaningfully impairing its effectiveness. Not a great choice, but so what? Ozzel is nearly worthless in conjunction with vics, barring weird zero to two shenanigans, that didn't prevent ffg from adding ozzel to the game. Likewise, 80s see no benefit from mothma, but it's entirely possible to run an all 80 fleet with mothma as your admiral. There is no reason to believe ffg wants all admirals to make sense with all ships, but plenty of reason to believe the opposite

A star destroyer rolling 16 would be getting a 100% increase in frontal firepower off its title. edge case, sure. Has a downside, sure. But there's no way I'm believing that's intended absent word from the devs

That can only happen during a shot in turn 6. I don't see a balance problem if you narrow that situation down to turn 6 only.

It also makes Needa a better proposition for abusing TRCs as Imperials.

I think that the fact that you can't "count" how many tokens you have discarded after you have recovered them should matter. You are relying on both players to remember how many tokens were originally discarded without having a physical "token" on the board to show the correct number.

Another way to look at it, there are two pools of defense tokens; Discarded and available. A token can't be in both pools, and a token can't be marked as recovered. There is no recovered token state, only available. Therefore, once a token is recovered, it is no longer discarded, but available.

Comes back to the ship card. There are X tokens. No more, and possibly less. You can't have more tokens at any point than you started with.

Let's use Needa for this as well. Needa Replaces a token. Does that mean you lost the original token? (no)

I address Needa above. Needa is "replace," not "discard." Not the same mechanic, and not relevant.

I agree that it should be FAQd. While I agree that from a logical point of view the assumption that discarged is an either/or state of a defense token as Dras put out, it is not written anywhere. The argument that keeping track of discarded tokens would require paper and pen if the mentioned assumption would not be true does nothing to actually verify it.

Again, its a problem with interaction between waves. Walex was rebels only, and they - yet - are lacking a mechanic that gives advantages based on discarded tokens. With wave 3 there is an imperial guy knocking at the door who allows recovery of tokens, and wave 2 brought devastator .

FFG should hire some of the meanest rules lawyers from reddit or elsewhere, people no sane mind would play with more than once, just to troubleshoot upcoming rules.

I was about to play Devils Advocate (out of boredom) but after reading and writing a paragraph, I think there is less wiggile room. Devastator triggers for each discarded token, when recoved it is no longer discarded. Now if it said "for each token you have discarded..." then it would still work, but the verbiage of "for each discarded token" removes the argument of it being previously discarded. After being recovered it is no longer discarded. I would not be suprised if they FAQ, but I think it's verbiage prevents stacking.

If Tagge said "gain a defense token" or "If you gave discarded a defense token, you may gain a defense token" I'd side with the reedit post.

To my eyes, though, "recover" means "un-discard."

If Tagge said "gain a defense token" or "If you gave discarded a defense token, you may gain a defense token" I'd side with the reedit post.

To my eyes, though, "recover" means "un-discard."

I agree, or if he said "gain a token you have discarded" because then the discarded token would still be gone. But you are are replacing it, just getting the same one back.

Let's start with the card text of Devastator itself: "Once per round, while attacking from your front hull zone, you may add one blue die for each of your discarded defense tokens"

So the difference really comes down to the following: Is "discarded" an act by the player or an ongoing status that can change.

There are no clear examples set in the Rules Reference Guide. The closest it comes to saying anything is "When a card is discarded or flipped facedown, its effect is no longer active in the game" (Effect Use and Timing). And it's explicit that is in regards to cards, not tokens.

The issue is that Recovering a token is unclear. Does this mean that the token was always there but unavailable, or was it brought back after completely leaving the game?

My argument is that the act of discarding the token gained the benefit. A token that was discarded can still be recovered, but it was still discarded. If we start saying that discarded tokens stick around, then it does strange things to token management and statuses. For example, what happens when you discard a command token as a result of critical damage or effects?