Snip. Never mind. Misread that.

Gotta go finish my coffee.

------------------------

Ok, got a weird scenario:

Attacker: Wedge with Cool Hand.

Defender: Rear Admiral Chiraneau with Rebel Captive and Hotshot Co-Pilot

When Wedge receives the stress from Rebel Captive, is he required to discard Cool Hand to get a focus token to spend?

Interesting one. Going by prior rulings in similar situations, no, but if he chooses to use Cool Hand to gain a focus, he must spend it.

Someone should write all of these edge cases down and submit them as a rules question. This one's a doozy...

I'd say that he isn't based on the response I got regarding Biggs forcing the use of optional abilities.

I arrived at the same conclusion as spaceinvader. Although the attacker has a choice of which to resolve first, resolving AC first leads to an illegal game state by not doing what the HSCP card says. Thus the focus token must be spent first.

That's my opinion anyway. I'm happy to wait until a post-release FAQ before it ever occurs on my tabletop.

RE: the part I bolded.

I don't believe this is accurate. HSCP tells you to spend a focus if able. It specifically allows for the possibility of not being able to spend a focus, which can be caused by any number of effects such as not having a focus, or not being allowed to modify dice due to Accuracy Corrector or Omega Leader. Whether you could have modified your dice before the limiting effect triggers or not is immaterial as long as they share a timing window and you decide to apply AC first.

I don't believe this is accurate. HSCP tells you to spend a focus if able.

You're right, there is no illegal game state, because HSCP does have an escape clause of sorts... The 'if able' part.

I'll buy the idea that maybe you have to spend the focus token ASAP to avoid getting around it somehow. But it's not because you can create an illegal game state by not spending it.

Just wanted to point out that there is no way to have Omega Leader stop HSCP.

There is no way to have Omega Leader equipped with HSCP and attacking a ship she has locked. She doesn't have a crew slot.

And if Omega Leader is defending against a ship with HSCP... well she doesn't stop herself from spending a focus token so...

Hehehe

I'll buy the idea that maybe you have to spend the focus token ASAP to avoid getting around it somehow. But it's not because you can create an illegal game state by not spending it.

If that's the case, then:

• The card is very poorly worded as there is nothing to indicate that
• Am I forced to spend my focus token before my TL???

Everyone agrees, and thinks it's perfectly normal for Carnor Jax to block HSCP or Inquisitor to disable Autothrusters. Yet people seem to think that Accuracy Corrector stopping HSCP is bad?

I'm confused, not by the card, but by people's arguments

Snip. Never mind. Misread that.

Gotta go finish my coffee.

------------------------

Ok, got a weird scenario:

Attacker: Wedge with Cool Hand.

Defender: Rear Admiral Chiraneau with Rebel Captive and Hotshot Co-Pilot

When Wedge receives the stress from Rebel Captive, is he required to discard Cool Hand to get a focus token to spend?

Interesting one. Going by prior rulings in similar situations, no, but if he chooses to use Cool Hand to gain a focus, he must spend it.

Someone should write all of these edge cases down and submit them as a rules question. This one's a doozy...

I'd say that he isn't based on the response I got regarding Biggs forcing the use of optional abilities.

Just wanted to point out that there is no way to have Omega Leader stop HSCP.

There is no way to have Omega Leader equipped with HSCP and attacking a ship she has locked. She doesn't have a crew slot.

And if Omega Leader is defending against a ship with HSCP... well she doesn't stop herself from spending a focus token so...

Hehehe

That was an example of not being able to modify dice, not of a specific interaction with HSCP.

Besides, you know that the TIE/fo will gain a crew slot once Grandma Sabine paints it up in a future wave and Rebels will probably get a pilot with a similar ability for it.

Besides, you know that the TIE/fo will gain a crew slot once Grandma Sabine paints it up in a future wave and Rebels will probably get a pilot with a similar ability for it.

Yeah, probably... "Sabine's Totally-Not-Omega Leader"

I maintain that the enemy ship retains the right to activate abilities in any order, and the choice of using or not any "may" abilities.

It makes all future rulings simple, and does not rely on any RAI and personal opinions.

This is the most sensible thing I've read in all three hotshot copilot topics. I'll bow out here.

PS: Wedge has been around since wave 1!! I just picked him cause his ability has no impact at all in this scenario, and I wanted a pilot with an EPT slot.

PS. Wedge may have been around that long but I haven't! If the pilot ability is irrelevant are there no generic pilots with EPT slots?

I maintain that the enemy ship retains the right to activate abilities in any order, and the choice of using or not any "may" abilities.

It makes all future rulings simple, and does not rely on any RAI and personal opinions.

This is the most sensible thing I've read in all three hotshot copilot topics. I'll bow out here.

PS: Wedge has been around since wave 1!! I just picked him cause his ability has no impact at all in this scenario, and I wanted a pilot with an EPT slot.

PS. Wedge may have been around that long but I haven't! If the pilot ability is irrelevant are there no generic pilots with EPT slots?

Don't complain about another poster's choice of card unless it is a choice that would be illegal in a game. This game had a steep learning curve. Take this as an oppotrunity for progress. If you see something you're not familiar with, look it up. If you don't understand it, ask in a forum. Here's a link to help you get started: http://xwing-miniatures.wikia.com/wiki/X-Wing_Miniatures_Wiki

As for the Hotshot Copilot issue, it seems like a lot of these arguments are skewed in the interest of getting a benefit out of a card without that benefit existing in the card text or the rules. Hotshot Copilot does not speicfy a step on the timing chart at which the token must be spent, only that it must be spent during the attack. It does not say "during the modify dice step" or "immedistely after rolling" or anything else that mandates a specific step. It does not say anything about determining the sequence of events for an opponent's modify dice step. The card does not say you must use another card ability to be assigned a focus token if able.

If I use Wampa to attack a ship equipped Hotshot Copilot, I can still choose to cancel all dice results. You can't spend a focus on dice results that no longer exist.

If I use Accuarcy Corrector, my dice cannot be modified again.

If my wingman is Esege Tuketu at range 1-2, then I must spend Esege's token.

If I am Poe Dameron, then crap, I have to spend my focus token, but just out of spite for Hotshot Copilot, I am going to trigger my pilot ability first, then spend the token because I am left with no way to exploit Hotshot Copilot's "if able" condition.

"If I use Wampa to attack a ship equipped Hotshot Copilot, I can still choose to cancel all dice results. You can't spend a focus on dice results that no longer exist. "

Sure you can. You're allowed to spend a focus token to modify 0 dice.

"If I use Wampa to attack a ship equipped Hotshot Copilot, I can still choose to cancel all dice results. You can't spend a focus on dice results that no longer exist. "

Sure you can. You're allowed to spend a focus token to modify 0 dice.

True, but not after the dice have cancelled. There is no scenario anywhere in the game in which you can modify a cancelled result.

"If I use Wampa to attack a ship equipped Hotshot Copilot, I can still choose to cancel all dice results. You can't spend a focus on dice results that no longer exist. "

Sure you can. You're allowed to spend a focus token to modify 0 dice.

Wampa triggers in the compare results step, doesn't he? He doesn't cancel the crit as soon as you roll it. You'd still have all of your results when you would spend the token.

"If I use Wampa to attack a ship equipped Hotshot Copilot, I can still choose to cancel all dice results. You can't spend a focus on dice results that no longer exist. "

Sure you can. You're allowed to spend a focus token to modify 0 dice.

Wampa triggers in the compare results step, doesn't he? He doesn't cancel the crit as soon as you roll it. You'd still have all of your results when you would spend the token.

You are correct. I forgot about the errata. Good catch.

"If I use Wampa to attack a ship equipped Hotshot Copilot, I can still choose to cancel all dice results. You can't spend a focus on dice results that no longer exist. "

Sure you can. You're allowed to spend a focus token to modify 0 dice.

True, but not after the dice have cancelled. There is no scenario anywhere in the game in which you can modify a cancelled result.

Why wouldn't I be allowed to modify dice after the results have been cancelled?

- Roll 3 attack dice: [hit, crit, blank]

- Cancel all results: [ ]

- Spend focus to modify the 0 remaining results

How is that different from:

- Roll 0 defense dice: [ ]

- Spend focus to modify the 0 results

?

In the second scenario the Focus Token is spent in accordance with existing rules. No argument there.

This is what the Rules Reference states for Cancel: "When a die result is cancelled, a player takes 1 die displaying the cancelled result and physically removes the die from the common area. Players ignore all cancelled results."

The last sentence is the key difference between modifying 0 dice rolled and modifying cancelled results. If ALL results were cancelled (even 0) then the players must ignore all the results. Therefore, there is nothing left to modify. A focus token may not be spent on something the players have been directed by the rules to ignore.

You're reading too much into it...

I wouldn't be spending the token to modify the canceled results, I'd be spending it to modify the (0) results that are left.

If I had an ability that had me cancel 1 die result, I'd be allowed to spend a token to modify the remaining results. So:

- I roll 3 dice, cancel 1, spend token to modify remaining 2. This is ok.

- I roll 2 dice, cancel 1, spend token to modify remaining 1. This is ok.

- I roll 1 die, cancel 1, spend token to modify remaining 0. This is not ok for some reason?

You're reading too much into it...

I wouldn't be spending the token to modify the canceled results, I'd be spending it to modify the (0) results that are left.

If I had an ability that had me cancel 1 die result, I'd be allowed to spend a token to modify the remaining results. So:

- I roll 3 dice, cancel 1, spend token to modify remaining 2. This is ok.

- I roll 2 dice, cancel 1, spend token to modify remaining 1. This is ok.

- I roll 1 die, cancel 1, spend token to modify remaining 0. This is not ok for some reason?

If you cancel all results are you left with zero results or null results?

I would read it the player must use a focus token if able.

Therefore he is blocked from using Accuracy Corrector (which makes him unable to spend a focus token), until he spends a focus token.

You're reading too much into it...

I wouldn't be spending the token to modify the canceled results, I'd be spending it to modify the (0) results that are left.

If I had an ability that had me cancel 1 die result, I'd be allowed to spend a token to modify the remaining results. So:

- I roll 3 dice, cancel 1, spend token to modify remaining 2. This is ok.

- I roll 2 dice, cancel 1, spend token to modify remaining 1. This is ok.

- I roll 1 die, cancel 1, spend token to modify remaining 0. This is not ok for some reason?

If you cancel all results are you left with zero results or null results?

Per accuracy corrector, it must be zero results otherwise the rest of accuracy corrector would fail.

I would read it the player must use a focus token if able.

Therefore he is blocked from using Accuracy Corrector (which makes him unable to spend a focus token), until he spends a focus token.

Is there any kind of precedent for this?

I.e anything that overrules the general rule that a player with multiple effects that share the same timing trigger can be resolved in any order?

I would read it the player must use a focus token if able.

Therefore he is blocked from using Accuracy Corrector (which makes him unable to spend a focus token), until he spends a focus token.

Is there any kind of precedent for this?

I.e anything that overrules the general rule that a player with multiple effects that share the same timing trigger can be resolved in any order?

There isn't.

For some reason people don't seem to want Accuracy Corrector to "counter" Hotshot Co-Pilot. I don't get it.

I would read it the player must use a focus token if able.

Therefore he is blocked from using Accuracy Corrector (which makes him unable to spend a focus token), until he spends a focus token.

Is there any kind of precedent for this?

I.e anything that overrules the general rule that a player with multiple effects that share the same timing trigger can be resolved in any order?

There isn't.

For some reason people don't seem to want Accuracy Corrector to "counter" Hotshot Co-Pilot. I don't get it.

Good choice of words.

AC doesn't 'break' HSCP, it merely counters it.

Accuracy Corrector does to Hotshot Co-Pilot what the inquisitor does to Autothrusters.

I would read it the player must use a focus token if able.

Therefore he is blocked from using Accuracy Corrector (which makes him unable to spend a focus token), until he spends a focus token.

Is there any kind of precedent for this?

I.e anything that overrules the general rule that a player with multiple effects that share the same timing trigger can be resolved in any order?

It comes down to you being able to spend a focus at the start of the attack. It says you MUST spend it if you are able too.... And at a point in the attack you are able to.

It's the equivalent to your mum telling you you must go down the shops to pick up some milk. And you saying I'm sorry I can't do that because since you told me to do that I've flushed the door keys down the lavvy.

There really is no kind of precedent for this card. has any card before said, you must spend a token in this period of the game. It's terribly vague, and could be read a variety of ways.