Too many "what ifs?" on newer releases these days.

Good news is they often (though not always) seem go have that bulk interactions down. Just not everything nailed down tight enough for us rules hounds.

Good news is they often (though not always) seem go have that bulk interactions down. Just not everything nailed down tight enough for us rules hounds.

They'll never have anything tight enough for us!

Good news is they often (though not always) seem go have that bulk interactions down. Just not everything nailed down tight enough for us rules hounds.

They'll never have anything tight enough for us!

I'm going to have to agree with WWHSD and nigeltastic on this...

The fact that you may or may not have an opportunity latter on to spend that token doesn't mean you have to spend it at the first opportunity that comes up. Which could in fact mean you don't have to spend it.

It could be that you do in fact have to spend it on the first opportunity to do so, that would be the cleanest way I think. So immediately after you start step 3.ii Attacker resolves abilities that modify attack dice you have to spend the focus token to modify X dice, and then can modify the dice with other effects.

But as it stands the rules/FAQ doesn't say that so until it does I'd have to rule that you aren't forced to spend the focus token until the end of step 3.ii which could in fact mean you have no ability to do so.

Another option could be that after step 3.ii you simply discard the focus token regardless if you spent it or not... Which could be how the RAI if the intention was that you are allowed to spend the focus token for some effect rather than simply losing it like with Kaa'to.

The question with Accuracy Corrector is not whether or not the focus can be spent to modify results after Accuracy Corrector has been used (because it clearly cannot be), but whether or not HSCP compels a player to resolve effects in such an order that permits the token to be spent.

It's this example that made me think that HSCP might actually be a cost because that is much easier to apply. Take the example of a possible future card:

"When you are hit by an attack and there are one or more uncanceled [CRIT] results, you may spend a focus token to change one [CRIT] into a [HIT]."

If a ship with that ability is being fired on by a ship with HSCP there is a window of opportunity to spend a focus tokens that lasts until the end of the attack. However, no one will know if there is going to be a result that permits the token from being spent. Is the defender forced to spend the token earlier because it may not be possible to spend it later? Or can the defender hang on to his token until it is too late to spend the token if there end up not being any eligible results?

A cost for attacking or defending is simple to figure out how things interact.

First off, are there even any cards that allow you to spend a focus token during an attack either:

• as a defender, after the "defender modifies defense dice" step?
• as an attacker, after the "attacker modifies attack dice" step?

Also, in your hypothetical example, the person being forced to spend the token is the defender and, once we're at the "defender modifies defense dice step", we do kind of know if there are going to be any uncancelled critical hit results.

Your argument of it being a cost to attack because it is "that is much easier to apply" doesn't hold much weight, IMO. If it was a cost, there would be much simpler and clearer ways to word it.

Eg:

When you declare the target of a primary weapon attack, the defender must discard 1 focus token if able*.

When an enemy declares you as the target of an attack, they must discard 1 focus token if able.

* Ignoring the dumb problem of having 2 steps called "Declare target", you know what I mean and that'a whole other discussion. ;-P

And if we're going to go into hypothetical abilities, what if a card was worded along the lines of "... discard a focus token to ..."? Would that count as "spending" a token, since the card says "discard"? With hypothetical cards, we can find all sorts of loop holes!

I would not be surprised to see a FAQ entry for the card that states something along the lines of:

When attacking with a primary weapon, the defender must spend 1 focus token if able during the defender modifies defense dice step.

When defending, the attacker must spend 1 focus token if able during the attacker modifies attack dice step.

Also, in your hypothetical example, the person being forced to spend the token is the defender and, once we're at the "defender modifies defense dice step", we do kind of know if there are going to be any uncancelled critical hit results.

If the attacker has Crackshot you wouldn't.

We can make the fictional ability one that the attacker would have if more separation helps. Here we have the pilot ability for a fictional Defender Pilot, Drexlar McGrath:

"When you perform an attack that deals a facedown damage card to the defender, you may spend a focus token to flip that card faceup."

This card still happens inside of the attack sequence but during the Modify Attack Dice step there is no telling if a facedown card will be dealt or not.

Your argument of it being a cost to attack because it is "that is much easier to apply" doesn't hold much weight, IMO. If it was a cost, there would be much simpler and clearer ways to word it.

Eg:

When you declare the target of a primary weapon attack, the defender must discard 1 focus token if able*.

When an enemy declares you as the target of an attack, they must discard 1 focus token if able.

* Ignoring the dumb problem of having 2 steps called "Declare target", you know what I mean and that'a whole other discussion. ;-P

I think that there are better ways to word it with either interpretation. If the card said "discard" instead of "spend" I'd have no doubt that it was intended to be a cost. With the way things are worded I'm about 80% sure that it isn't a cost. How messy things are with it not being a cost is what keeps that other 20% niggling at me.

First off, are there even any cards that allow you to spend a focus token during an attack either:

• as a defender, after the "defender modifies defense dice" step?
• as an attacker, after the "attacker modifies attack dice" step?

I'm not sure. I couldn't think of one but I don't see any reason that there couldn't be. That's why I made one up.

With the way things are worded I'm about 80% sure that it isn't a cost. How messy things are with it not being a cost is what keeps that other 20% niggling at me.

Agreed, I don't think it's intended to be a cost, or to make you discard the focus token. I think it's saying you have to spend it on something, so you don't have it latter.

The problem is, there's not always an option to spend it and right now we don't know what exactly is supposed to happen. I think RAW if you can set up a situation where you can't spend the focus token, then you don't have to.

I a different thread about HSCP... I was posting about this and decided to look up the text.

Per http://xwing-miniatures.wikia.com/wiki/Hot_Shot_Co-Pilot and assuming that's a picture of the released card... The whole issue is already resolved, because it says "if able" in the text. Which means AC is already covered.