Question 1) When you use Cunning does the opponents die have to be in play or can just the card be in play.

Question 2) When you trigger Cunning on a die such as Black One or BB-8 do you just get the effect or do you also roll the opponents die?

Question 3) If you roll the die, does the opponent then get to put the die in play?

Question 4) If you roll the die and the die remains in play, does the card become exhausted or does it stay readied if it hasn't activated yet?

Thank you very much for your time, the card is confusing me.

1) Just the card.

2) You just get the effect. I believe you also re-roll the Cunning die, as that's the die being resolved.

3) No.

4) See 2-3.

1) Just the card.

2) You just get the effect. I believe you also re-roll the Cunning die, as that's the die being resolved.

3) No.

4) See 2-3.

Agreed. You're not playing his die. Your playing your cunning die as if it was another special. The only time it effects your opponents upgrad in play is if the special is a discard effect

Question: Cunning sais "on another card in play" Can I use it on my own cards?

The text "as if it were your card", brings in some doubt as to whether it can be used on a card that is already 'your card'. However, I would play it as being able to be used to resolve a special that is on one of your other cards. I would read the purpose of the text ' as if it were on your card ' as being inclusive rather than exclusive. The purpose being to explicitly include your opponents cards in pool of eligible cards for this special, rather than to exclude your own cards from being eligible choices.

Certainly could have been made clearer, but I think different wording might have been used had the intent been to exclude your own cards. Something like " Resolve a special ability on an opponents card in play... "

Question: Cunning sais "on another card in play" Can I use it on my own cards?

yes

Blue yellow cunning holocron deck... here I come!

1) Just the card.

2) You just get the effect. I believe you also re-roll the Cunning die, as that's the die being resolved.

3) No.

4) See 2-3.

On #2, You do not get to re-roll Cunning. You are resolve the Cunning die to get the cunning ability, which is to trigger another cards ability. If you trigger an ability that references itself, none of that happens to cunning. So targeting Thermal Det, make that detonator explode, targeting your own holocron swaps the holocron, and targeting your own BB-8 will re-roll the BB-8 as well. Some of things still happens when you target your opponants stuff, and some of them don't. You can never have an opponants card in your hand or deck, so targeting their holocron does nothing.

The text "as if it were your card", brings in some doubt as to whether it can be used on a card that is already 'your card'. However, I would play it as being able to be used to resolve a special that is on one of your other cards. I would read the purpose of the text ' as if it were on your card ' as being inclusive rather than exclusive. The purpose being to explicitly include your opponents cards in pool of eligible cards for this special, rather than to exclude your own cards from being eligible choices.

Certainly could have been made clearer, but I think different wording might have been used had the intent been to exclude your own cards. Something like " Resolve a special ability on an opponents card in play... "

If it were my card , then to resolve its special, I'd also need to have the associated die on its special side, right?

No... the reason it says "as if it were your card" is only to clarify that it's the player using Cunning who gets the benefit of the special ability. If it just said "Resolve a special ability on another card in play", it could be argued that the owner of the card gets the benefit, not the player using Cunning.

1) Just the card.

2) You just get the effect. I believe you also re-roll the Cunning die, as that's the die being resolved.

3) No.

4) See 2-3.

On #2, You do not get to re-roll Cunning. You are resolve the Cunning die to get the cunning ability, which is to trigger another cards ability. If you trigger an ability that references itself, none of that happens to cunning. So targeting Thermal Det, make that detonator explode, targeting your own holocron swaps the holocron, and targeting your own BB-8 will re-roll the BB-8 as well. Some of things still happens when you target your opponants stuff, and some of them don't. You can never have an opponants card in your hand or deck, so targeting their holocron does nothing.

Are you sure?

Nothing I've found in the RRG supports either ruling conclusively, and in the absence of an FAQ I think it's fair to say that "This die" refers to the die being resolved, which in this case is the Cunning die.

The "Self Referential Effects" heading only covers cards, not dice.

SELF-REFERENTIAL EFFECTS

When a card’s ability text refers to its own card type, such as “this upgrade” or “this character,” it refers to itself only, and not to other copies (by title) of the card.

I obviously agree that "this card" always refers to the actual card with the played ability, rather than Cunning's card. That's supported by the recent FAQ clarifying that cards like Thermal Detonator are discarded. What's not so clear is whether "this die" refers to the die associated with the card, or refers to the die being resolved.

Until that's clarified I think re-rolling Cunning is kosher, since that's what the resolved ability says to do.

1) Just the card.

2) You just get the effect. I believe you also re-roll the Cunning die, as that's the die being resolved.

3) No.

4) See 2-3.

On #2, You do not get to re-roll Cunning. You are resolve the Cunning die to get the cunning ability, which is to trigger another cards ability. If you trigger an ability that references itself, none of that happens to cunning. So targeting Thermal Det, make that detonator explode, targeting your own holocron swaps the holocron, and targeting your own BB-8 will re-roll the BB-8 as well. Some of things still happens when you target your opponants stuff, and some of them don't. You can never have an opponants card in your hand or deck, so targeting their holocron does nothing.

Are you sure?

Nothing I've found in the RRG supports either ruling conclusively, and in the absence of an FAQ I think it's fair to say that "This die" refers to the die being resolved, which in this case is the Cunning die. The "Self Referential Effects" heading only covers cards, not dice.

I am only as sure as the space in their rulings allows. Which means 'no'. BUT, my well informed opinion, When you resolve cunnings die, it gives Cunnings effect. To talk specific timing and specific cards:

Lets use cunning and Outpost.

I declare that I am resolving special dice.

I choose Cunning, so I resolve the die to add the ability to the queue.

Cunnings ability asks for my to pick a target, so I choose outpost.

Cunnings Ability in the queue resolves now, and the result is that it adds Outposts Ability to the queue. The Cunning die leaves at this step, because the cunning effect has done it's thing.

Outpost ability in the queue now resolves.

If you apply this BB-8, either it should roll it's own die, OR the ability re-rolls a target, but there is no die there for 'itself' to be. (if it's not in the pool, for example)

The Core separation I think is being made is that Cunnings ability does not make an ability happen from cunning, but from the source of the copied ability. If it was coming, Copy abilities that made cards move somewhere would move cunning, not the target card. The ruling we have in the current version of the Rules makes it clear with the Holocron ruling that targeting an opponents holocron would move their holocron to your hand, and they won't allow that.

While you may be correct, Netace, we're dancing in the region of supposition and RAI at this point.

I also have to take some issue with your example. When you resolve Cunning's die, you aren't resolving Cunning and THEN resolving the target ability. The ability of Cunning's special side is to resolve the special on another card as if it were yours.

It's one resolution of ONE ability, not one followed by the other. They're the same, and in that case, unless "this die" is added to the "Self Referential Effect" heading as the die associated with the card, it would *seem* that "this die" as part of the resolved effect refers to the die being resolved, in this case, Cunning's die.

Now, it is specificed under Special Abilities that the die resolved to use a card's special must be the die associated with that card, but that is the very rule that Cunning specifically breaks, in accordance with the Golden Rule.

I don't even think my interpretation is necessarily what FFG intends. This seems like a solid pick for "Email FFG and wait for the next FAQ"

EDIT: I went ahead and fired off an email. Should be an easy one for the team to answer.

The ability of Cunning's special side is to resolve the special on another card as if it were yours.

The ability of Cunning's special side is to resolve the special on another card as if it were yours.

No, it actually says:

"Resolve a special ability on another card in play as if it were your card ." ( your card )

It does not say:

"Resolve a special ability on another card in play as if it were yours ." ( special of yours )

or

"Resolve a special ability on another card in play as if it were your card's ." ( your card's special )

I think it's a big difference, your interpretation seems to assume different wording on Cunning, with the last part referring to Cunning's special instead of what it actually refers to, i.e. another card.

In other words: you seem to assume it's kind of a replacement effect, while it is not.

My interpretation is in no way altered by changing the wording.

The die being resolved is still Cunning, and the concept of "this die" remains undefined in the RRG. (As far as I've been able to find, please do point it out if I'm mistaken) Without definition, "this die" could just as easily refer to the die being resolved (Cunning) rather than the die associated with the card. This is relevant, because Cunning already explicitly breaks the die association rule as per the Golden Rule in the RRG.

That said, I appreciate that specific wording can significantly alter the landscape when it comes to rulings, but this is not one of those cases.

The answer will ultimately come down to defining "This die" which I believe will be added to the "Self Referential Effects" as a bullet in the near future. I strongly suspect that "this die" will come to mean "The die associated with the card" but again, as of now, that doesn't seem to be the explicitly true.

That said, I appreciate that specific wording can significantly alter the landscape when it comes to rulings, but this is not one of those cases.

So where do you get the Cunning's replacement effect from? You resolve two special abilities, Cunning's and another card's.

That said, I appreciate that specific wording can significantly alter the landscape when it comes to rulings, but this is not one of those cases.

So where do you get the Cunning's replacement effect from? You resolve two abilities, Cunning's and another card's.

Resolving another card's ability IS the resolution of Cunning. They are one and the same, not separate resolutions. You could argue that the secondary ability being resolved takes place DURING the resolution of Cunning, or I could see the argument that you resolve Cunning THEN resolve another ability, but the lack of clear keywords makes it difficult to say that this is 100% the correct answer.

This distinction may, in fact, separate the die being resolved from the ability.

I encourage you to read everything I've written. The entire point is that it IS NOT CLEAR, which is why I've put it to the FFG rules team.

I fully expect their reply to indicate that you cannot re-roll Cunning, but I've been through his rodeo and had these arguments enough to know that trying to guess what FFG will rule is a fool's game. Just wait for official word.

EDIT: For the record and in the interest of clarity, because I'm really tired of having this conversation on this forum, I am NOT disagreeing with you, saying you're wrong, calling you stupid, or any variation thereof. I'm saying that if there's room for argument, there is zero reason to speculate. We have a fantastically accessible, responsive design team that can give us a definitive answer one way or the other, and they are to be consulted over forum arguments 100% of the time.

While you may be correct, Netace, we're dancing in the region of supposition and RAI at this point.

I also have to take some issue with your example. When you resolve Cunning's die, you aren't resolving Cunning and THEN resolving the target ability. The ability of Cunning's special side is to resolve the special on another card as if it were yours.

It's one resolution of ONE ability, not one followed by the other. They're the same, and in that case, unless "this die" is added to the "Self Referential Effect" heading as the die associated with the card, it would *seem* that "this die" as part of the resolved effect refers to the die being resolved, in this case, Cunning's die.

Now, it is specificed under Special Abilities that the die resolved to use a card's special must be the die associated with that card, but that is the very rule that Cunning specifically breaks, in accordance with the Golden Rule.

I don't even think my interpretation is necessarily what FFG intends. This seems like a solid pick for "Email FFG and wait for the next FAQ"

EDIT: I went ahead and fired off an email. Should be an easy one for the team to answer.

Good call on the e-mail. and you are right, the team should be able to answer pretty strait-forwardly.

That being said. I feel pretty comfortable with idea that Cunning's ability add another card's ability.

"resolve the special ability on another card as if it were your own."

This doesn't imprint the copied ability onto cunning. You are forcing another card to add it's ability to the queue.

For now, It's gonna be awhile before the next FAQ comes out. Best of luck to all the local TOs figuring out how they want to handle these situations in the mean time.

I'd say the BB-8 die and another die of your choosing would get rolled. Interested to see what the FFG says.

The more I read it, the more I think Netace has the right of this one.

I'll post the email when it comes in.

I think we can use Poe's entry as an answer:

If I resolve Poe Dameron’s (r29) special to use the special on

Black One (r32), can I roll Black One’s die into the pool even

though it says “reroll”?

No. The Black One die is not actually in your pool, so you

cannot reroll it.

So "this die" is a corresponding card die.

I think we can use Poe's entry as an answer:If I resolve Poe Dameron’s (r29) special to use the special onBlack One (r32), can I roll Black One’s die into the pool eventhough it says “reroll”?No. The Black One die is not actually in your pool, so youcannot reroll it.So "this die" is a corresponding card die.

It's a narrow distinction, but I feel a valid one.

If Cunning let you "turn a die to a special side and then resolve it as if it were your card" then it'd be a solid precedent.

It doesn't answer the question but I agree it is probably indicative of the correct answer.