More importantly this clearly states that the ship still owns the component but you are spending it.

Funny how people make up rule by stating false reference to try to prove their point.

No where in the Spend rule is it clear that it still own it.

SPEND

When a ship spends a token or other component,

that component is removed from the ship and

returned to the supply. A ship cannot spend a

component that is assigned to another ship unless an

effect specifies otherwise.

Related Topics: Card Abilities

In fact no where in the rule do they define owner of token or effect. The only reference is about player owning something.

And like I stated in bold previously, Shara even state that they own her token when using it.

or it means that you can treat it as your own, and have it not be your own. Like if I loaned you my TV and said, treat this as your own, you could do stuff with it, but it still belongs to me.

If it was worded "After your target lock is spent" then it would trigger for Shara when an ally spends her token. The way that it is actually worded "After spending your target lock" has an implied subject.

or it means that you can treat it as your own, and have it not be your own. Like if I loaned you my TV and said, treat this as your own, you could do stuff with it, but it still belongs to me.

Seriously at this point this is clear trolling.

- Nowhere in the rule is ownership of token in relation to pilote is defined, so this can't even be used as an argument for now.

- Moreover we already read that Shara say to treat it as your own.

- R5-K6 don't even care about ownership.

- And now people against R5-K6 triggering now try to bring real life ownership to defend there point in a rule of game.

Right now this is behond stupidity. There is no rule reference tangible that would contradict the fact that Shara say in printed text to treat it as your own, and do whatever the game let you do with a Target Lock. Fine wait for an FAQ as always. For now I'll play as the card say to play.

Seriously at this point this is clear trolling.

- Nowhere in the rule is ownership of token in relation to pilote is defined, so this can't even be used as an argument for now.

- Moreover we already read that Shara say to treat it as your own.

- R5-K6 don't even care about ownership.

- And now people against R5-K6 triggering now try to bring real life ownership to defend there point in a rule of game.

Right now this is behond stupidity. There is no rule reference tangible that would contradict the fact that Shara say in printed text to treat it as your own, and do whatever the game let you do with a Target Lock. Fine wait for an FAQ as always. For now I'll play as the card say to play.

I'm not sure what you are getting at. R5-K6 needs to be on the ship that is spending the target lock to trigger.

R5-K6 on Luke Skywalker would trigger when he uses Shara's ability to spend her target lock.

R5-K6 on Shara would not trigger when Luke uses her ability to spend her target lock.

Seriously at this point this is clear trolling.

- Nowhere in the rule is ownership of token in relation to pilote is defined, so this can't even be used as an argument for now.

- Moreover we already read that Shara say to treat it as your own.

- R5-K6 don't even care about ownership.

- And now people against R5-K6 triggering now try to bring real life ownership to defend there point in a rule of game.

Right now this is behond stupidity. There is no rule reference tangible that would contradict the fact that Shara say in printed text to treat it as your own, and do whatever the game let you do with a Target Lock. Fine wait for an FAQ as always. For now I'll play as the card say to play.

Seriously, I'm probably just lost in translation, between other subject. Some one was arguing a couple post over that Shara was always the owner of the Target Lock even when someone else spend it... And I got mixed up with another conversation where there is an arguing that:

"R5-K6 on Luke Skywalker would trigger when he uses Shara's ability to spend her target lock."

is not true

Sincerly, I don't see the point of bringing ownership of the token in this converstion about Shara R5-K6 triggering when another ship use the target lock...

Sorry if I mixed up everything there.

Sincerly, I don't see the point of bringing ownership of the token in this converstion about Shara R5-K6 triggering when another ship use the target lock...

The point is that R5-K6 does care about ownership ("After spending your Target Lock"), and in the case where the droid is on Shara but the Target Lock is being spent by Luke, if it's not hers at that point because it's being treated as Luke's, then that is another reason this doesn't work. Basically it's another piece of evidence to try to convince people who aren't already convinced by the fact that "After spending your Target Lock," is not the same as "After your Target Lock is spent".

"R5-K6 on Luke Skywalker would trigger when he uses Shara's ability to spend her target lock."

is not true

Shara Bey

"When another friendly ship at Range 1-2 is attacking, it may treat your blue target lock tokens as its own."

R5-K6

Luke has R5-K6 and he spends Shara's token to reroll his attack dice. You check to see if R5-K6 triggers. It has two conditions:

1. Did you spend a target lock token.

2. Was it yours.

Obviously #1 is met because Luke spent a token. #2 is met because Shara's ability specifies that he may treat Shara's token as if it were his own.

I'm not arguing against that, I said that some where arguing...

If you read this conversation, there is people that are still believing that is not the case:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/224922-shara-bey-and-r5-k6-who-really-owns-your-target-lock/?hl=r5-k6

To make it clear, YES I believe that this is TRUE: "R5-K6 on Luke Skywalker would trigger when he uses Shara's ability to spend her target lock."

But some people in the post I linked imply that no this is not the case and are "waiting" for an FAQ when there is no need for it.

I thought this conversation was also derailing to that when I seen arguing over ownership and I got carried away...

Sincerly, I don't see the point of bringing ownership of the token in this converstion about Shara R5-K6 triggering when another ship use the target lock...

The point is that R5-K6 does care about ownership ("After spending your Target Lock"), and in the case where the droid is on Shara but the Target Lock is being spent by Luke, if it's not hers at that point because it's being treated as Luke's, then that is another reason this doesn't work. Basically it's another piece of evidence to try to convince people who aren't already convinced by the fact that "After spending your Target Lock," is not the same as "After your Target Lock is spent".

Well, I think like you on this one, an R5-K6 on Shara will not trigger if someone else spend the Lock...

Seriously at this point this is clear trolling.

- Nowhere in the rule is ownership of token in relation to pilote is defined, so this can't even be used as an argument for now.

- Moreover we already read that Shara say to treat it as your own.

- R5-K6 don't even care about ownership.

- And now people against R5-K6 triggering now try to bring real life ownership to defend there point in a rule of game.

Right now this is behond stupidity. There is no rule reference tangible that would contradict the fact that Shara say in printed text to treat it as your own, and do whatever the game let you do with a Target Lock. Fine wait for an FAQ as always. For now I'll play as the card say to play.

We can disagree on topics, without being disagreeable. Insinuating someone is a troll or is stupid simply because they disagree with your logic isn't helping at all.

Seriously at this point this is clear trolling.

Go away then, no one is asking you to be here.