Except the character is *never defeated*

Yes, they are.

The rules reference disagrees with you.

Page 17, replacement effects, 2nd chance is LITERALLY the example they use.

It is the example they use, but it's not saying what you think it's saying. Pay close attention to the wording: "the character is never considered to have been defeated." It doesn't actually say they were never defeated. Because, YET AGAIN, being defeated is the trigger for Second Chance. The character must, at some point, be defeated in order for Second Chance to do anything. What that line actually means is that other effects which might trigger from a character being defeated, such as Grievous stealing one of your upgrades, don't have the opportunity to trigger because the replacement effect takes precedence.

This is actually made clear in the actual rule above the example, which says the original effect is considered to have not resolved . Again, pay close attention to the wording: It says it doesn't resolve, not that it never happens. The rule about excess damage applies as part of the conditions for "defeat" being met, but the results of being defeated never resolve .

This is not an open question, it is not an unknown, there is no debate. As I mentioned previously, this question has been answered by the designer himself. My goal here was to try and correct the misunderstanding around how this works, but it's getting old fast. Here's the link, you'll probably have to join the group to see it, so I've copied it for anyone willing to trust that I'm not making it up.

Lukas Litzsinger You ignore excess damage, and then heal instead of being defeated. So you'all always end up at 5 less damage than your health.

Thread:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/swdestiny/permalink/1855379868017954/?match=bHVrYXM%3D

Lukas's response:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/swdestiny/permalink/1855379868017954/?comment_id=1855489274673680&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R8%22%7D

Except the character is *never defeated*

Yes, they are.

The rules reference disagrees with you.

Page 17, replacement effects, 2nd chance is LITERALLY the example they use.

It is the example they use, but it's not saying what you think it's saying. Pay close attention to the wording: "the character is never considered to have been defeated." It doesn't actually say they were never defeated. Because, YET AGAIN, being defeated is the trigger for Second Chance. The character must, at some point, be defeated in order for Second Chance to do anything. What that line actually means is that other effects which might trigger from a character being defeated, such as Grievous stealing one of your upgrades, don't have the opportunity to trigger because the replacement effect takes precedence.

This is actually made clear in the actual rule above the example, which says the original effect is considered to have not resolved . Again, pay close attention to the wording: It says it doesn't resolve, not that it never happens. The rule about excess damage applies as part of the conditions for "defeat" being met, but the results of being defeated never resolve .

This is not an open question, it is not an unknown, there is no debate. As I mentioned previously, this question has been answered by the designer himself. My goal here was to try and correct the misunderstanding around how this works, but it's getting old fast. Here's the link, you'll probably have to join the group to see it, so I've copied it for anyone willing to trust that I'm not making it up.

Lukas Litzsinger You ignore excess damage, and then heal instead of being defeated. So you'all always end up at 5 less damage than your health.

Thread:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/swdestiny/permalink/1855379868017954/?match=bHVrYXM%3D

Lukas's response:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/swdestiny/permalink/1855379868017954/?comment_id=1855489274673680&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R8%22%7D

I would just like to point out that second chance specifically says. Before attached character "would" be defeated. Which means they are not defeated. It comes to the game state where you would check to see if the character is defeated or not, and second chance stops them from being defeated.

Are you trying to argue that they are or are not defeated? Becouse your lukas quote proves he is not defeated.

It's difficult to use the exact wording on this combo to make a ruling because the RRG says when you do dmg to a character place that much dmg on the character card. This would imply that over dmg can be done so so second chance could be counted in this scenario.

It also says when the dmg on a character is equal to health the character is immediately defeated, therefore if a character has 10 health and 9 dmg and I resolve 2 dmg taking him to 11 he can never be defeated unless he heals one dmg.

I think the RRG will be updated to say either place dmg tokens on one at a time or if dmg is equal to or greater than health the character is defeated.

Either way the excess dmg would still apply after second chance unless the rules state once a character is defeated remove excess dmg or stop applying dmg.

I would just like to point out that second chance specifically says. Before attached character "would" be defeated. Which means they are not defeated. It comes to the game state where you would check to see if the character is defeated or not, and second chance stops them from being defeated.

Are you trying to argue that they are or are not defeated? Becouse your lukas quote proves he is not defeated.

<shrug> Fine. The net effect of the difference in phrasing is exactly zero. The construct in my head is different from yours, and the rules don't actually provide a sufficient framework for either.

However you want to phrase it, the trigger can't happen until sufficient damage has actually been placed on the character, because up until that point anything could stop it. The excess damage from that will then be lost, and the requirement for being defeated has been met. Second Chance will trigger, none of the effects of being defeated happen, you get your 5 life back, and you're done. I mentally split this into "met condition" and "effect", if you think "would be but never is" works better, fine - but either way, the argument being made in this that the "excess damage still counts because it's only wiped out when you're defeated" is wrong.

Either way the excess dmg would still apply after second chance unless the rules state once a character is defeated remove excess dmg or stop applying dmg.

Fortunately for everyone involved, the rules do actually say exactly this.

I would just like to point out that second chance specifically says. Before attached character "would" be defeated. Which means they are not defeated. It comes to the game state where you would check to see if the character is defeated or not, and second chance stops them from being defeated.

Are you trying to argue that they are or are not defeated? Becouse your lukas quote proves he is not defeated.

<shrug> Fine. The net effect of the difference in phrasing is exactly zero. The construct in my head is different from yours, and the rules don't actually provide a sufficient framework for either.

However you want to phrase it, the trigger can't happen until sufficient damage has actually been placed on the character, because up until that point anything could stop it. The excess damage from that will then be lost, and the requirement for being defeated has been met. Second Chance will trigger, none of the effects of being defeated happen, you get your 5 life back, and you're done. I mentally split this into "met condition" and "effect", if you think "would be but never is" works better, fine - but either way, the argument being made in this that the "excess damage still counts because it's only wiped out when you're defeated" is wrong.

Either way the excess dmg would still apply after second chance unless the rules state once a character is defeated remove excess dmg or stop applying dmg.

Fortunately for everyone involved, the rules do actually say exactly this.

The excess damage doesn't matter, its all done at the same exact point and used at the same exact point, which is before second chance activates.

As I said, in this case, it would be like you are resolving a 6 dmg side of a die. All six dmg plops onto the character at the same exact time, not individually. You may of only needed 1 dmg to defeat the character, but all 6 dmg hit at the same exact time. Then second chance triggers and the yellow character gains 5 health. There isn't a question of "What happened to the other 5 dmg?" because there was no such thing as 5 other dmg, only 6 dmg all hitting at the exact same time and gone.

From the defeated characters section of the RRG I would lean towards excess dmg is not allowed and the deal damage section needs to be reworded to place dmg tokens one at a time until the health value is reached.

I can see how the rules can be interpreted both ways however as bassed on the current wording the OP scenario is allowed as all 6 dmg is placed at once and the excess dmg would stop an opponent from resolving a second or third dmg dice to the already defeated character. This is important if we get card effects or abilities that trigger each time you dmg an opponent

There is an ability that triggers each time you deal damage - Count Dooku. If the 6 Damage (2Ranged +2Ranged +2Ranged) was being dealt to Dooku his player would be able to discard 1 card to give him 1 shield as it is 1 source of damage. If Dooku already had six damage tokens and no shields then the shield would block one damage, four would be placed on him and then the remaining one would be ignored. Dooku would then be defeated.

The RRG is quite clear on excess damage from one source.

Furelli

This is the 'three shields on QGJ' conversation all over again. It seems like the mechanics of 'before' are being interpreted differently.

Stop wasting your time those who actually READ rules. You've done your service to humanity. Twenty detailed and well cited explanations should be enough.

Okay, ruling from the designer, case closed.

I still think the rules are written in such a way that it's not 100% clear, and I'd like to see some kind of clarification in the next version. But at least the specific question is answered.

Not to beat a dead horse but lets say im using vader with 2 dice against han solo with second chance and with 8 damage on him. I roll and get a 2 melee damage and a 3 melee damage. If i were to resolve them both in the same action with the 2 damage resolving first would that trigger hans death thus triggering second chance healing him to 5. Would the other 3 melee damge go through taking han back to 8 damage or would it be counted as excess damage?

Not to beat a dead horse but lets say im using vader with 2 dice against han solo with second chance and with 8 damage on him. I roll and get a 2 melee damage and a 3 melee damage. If i were to resolve them both in the same action with the 2 damage resolving first would that trigger hans death thus triggering second chance healing him to 5. Would the other 3 melee damge go through taking han back to 8 damage or would it be counted as excess damage?

You didn't even read the thread OR the rulebook, did you?
As already quotet on page 1 damage is considered to NOT be done at the same time with the exception of +damage sides. So you are correct. Of course.

Some folks seem to be struggling with a paradox, because of FFG's decision to use the word "before" as a trigger.

Second Chance triggers "before" a character is defeated, in that it happens before they are removed from the game, their upgrades/dice are removed, and something like Bala-tik triggers.

It does not, however, trigger "before" damage is dealt -- if it was, then the defeat would never happen, so a "before defeat" state couldn't exist. As we have examples (provided here, even) of "before damage" abilities, we know there is a written difference (not that that is gospel with FFG, but it works as a reference here).

The reason why the character is never considered to be defeated after is because, otherwise, they'd still have to lose their dice/upgrades/let Bala-tik do his thing, even after gaining the 5 health from Second Chance.

I'll offer one caveat, for the other side -- this wouldn't be the first time that FFG ends up creating a timing window chart that fundamentally changes the game.

However, under current rules, there isn't grey area, just poor wording. No excess damage is kept for post-Second Chance health, Finn ends up with 5 health. If you have non-modifier dice results left over, that's a different story, but not the case in the OP's example.

I feel like people get this wrong all the time. Assume Finn is alive with one health remaining. You deal 6 ranged damage using 2, +2, +2 die facings. Finn takes 1 damage with the remaining 5 ignored and then is defeated. If you have Second Chance... You deal 6 ranged damage using 2, +2, +2 die facings. Finn takes 1 damage, with the remaining 5 ignored and then is about to be defeated. Instead of being defeated, Second Chance kicks in and heals him back up to 5 health.

Now... for a fun situation, let's say you have 2, 2 and +3 damage facings. You would do this...

1. Declare that you are resolving dice, using the ranged damage facing.
2. Resolve one of the dice showing a 2.
3. Finn takes 1 damage, ignoring the second point of damage and would be defeated.
4. Before he is defeated, Second Chance kicks in and he is healed back up to 5.
5. As part of the same resolve dice action, resolve the other 2 and the +3 modifer.
6. Finn takes 5 damage and is defeated.

It's possible to kill a character with Second Chance in one action using damage dice. You just need to be able to resolve 5 damage against him after Second Chance goes off.

They changed the wording in the RRG so that the interaction is slightly more clear now. TL;DR: you can't invalidate Second Chance with a single die + modifiers.