Tiny Grimes has said you can do this, but I've seen reddit comments disagreeing. Last night, a judge told me you cannot do it due to the wording on Backup muscle. I read the FAQ and it said damage is dealt when you are placing damage on your character.

SOOO anyone have an OFFICIAL answer, and not what you "think" it is?

The damage is not dealt - it is moved. Moved damage doesn't trigger dealt effects.

Dooku doesn't work for willpower either.

However, I think you can gain a shield from unblockable damage e.g. lightsaber special, but not spend it to avoid any of the damage...

The damage is not dealt - it is moved. Moved damage doesn't trigger dealt effects.

Moved damage isn't TAKEN, I believe it is indeed still DEALT.

MOVE Some effects allow players to move cards or tokens.

• When something moves, it cannot move to its same (current) placement. If there is no valid destination for a move, the move cannot resolve.

• When damage is moved to a new character, it ignores shields and the character is not considered to have taken damage.

TAKING DAMAGE Damage is taken only when one or more damage tokens are placed on the character. If all damage dealt was blocked by shields or some other ability, then no damage was taken.

• Damage not taken is still dealt.

Moved damage isn't TAKEN, I believe it is indeed still DEALT.

MOVE Some effects allow players to move cards or tokens.

• When something moves, it cannot move to its same (current) placement. If there is no valid destination for a move, the move cannot resolve.

• When damage is moved to a new character, it ignores shields and the character is not considered to have taken damage.

TAKING DAMAGE Damage is taken only when one or more damage tokens are placed on the character. If all damage dealt was blocked by shields or some other ability, then no damage was taken.

• Damage not taken is still dealt.

I don't think this is correct. You're laying out the distinction between dealt and taken damage, but dealing damage is a specific effect that isn't occurring here.

There's a normal flow of Deal -> Take damage that's bypassed completely. Moving can still not be taken damage without backing up to calling it dealt.

The damage is not dealt - it is moved. Moved damage doesn't trigger dealt effects.

Moved damage isn't TAKEN, I believe it is indeed still DEALT.

MOVE Some effects allow players to move cards or tokens.

• When something moves, it cannot move to its same (current) placement. If there is no valid destination for a move, the move cannot resolve.

• When damage is moved to a new character, it ignores shields and the character is not considered to have taken damage.

TAKING DAMAGE Damage is taken only when one or more damage tokens are placed on the character. If all damage dealt was blocked by shields or some other ability, then no damage was taken.

• Damage not taken is still dealt.

You should probably also quote the rules on dealing damage. Backup Muscle MOVES damage. We're never told that it DEALS damage. Just because damage is not taken, doesn't mean it was dealt if the source wasn't a dealing of damage.

The damage is not dealt - it is moved. Moved damage doesn't trigger dealt effects.

Moved damage isn't TAKEN, I believe it is indeed still DEALT.

MOVE Some effects allow players to move cards or tokens.

• When something moves, it cannot move to its same (current) placement. If there is no valid destination for a move, the move cannot resolve.

• When damage is moved to a new character, it ignores shields and the character is not considered to have taken damage.

TAKING DAMAGE Damage is taken only when one or more damage tokens are placed on the character. If all damage dealt was blocked by shields or some other ability, then no damage was taken.

• Damage not taken is still dealt.

Nonsense. "Damage not taken is still dealt" is for cards like Cannon fodder.

You need the word "deal" to deal damage. But if you still unsure read this:

Shields block damage. Each shield blocks 1 damage that

would be dealt to the character.

So "this ignores shields" on cards like Backup muscle is just a reminder not a rule.

Bah.

You need the word "deal" to deal damage. "Damage not taken is still dealt" is for cards like Cannon fodder.

Where is that in the rules? How can you pick and choose which cards the rules are intended for?

Moving damage says it's not considered taken damage. And the rules say that even though damage isn't taken it was still dealt.

Unless they update the rules section to say that moving damage isn't dealing damage, in my eyes Backup Muscle and Willpower are dealing damage by moving it. At least that's my interpretation of it.

So it wouldn't trigger anything that triggers on taking damage, but should trigger things based on dealing damage, like Dooku.

Moving damage says it's not considered taken damage. And the rules say that even though damage isn't taken it was still dealt.

Unless they update the rules section to say that moving damage isn't dealing damage, in my eyes Backup Muscle and Willpower are dealing damage by moving it. At least that's my interpretation of it.

So it wouldn't trigger anything that triggers on taking damage, but should trigger things based on dealing damage, like Dooku.

So the only requirement for damage to be dealt is that it's not taken? Because there's an infinite amount of not-taken damage. I resolve a shield - you haven't taken damage, so I dealt damage. I disrupt - no taken damage, so it's dealt damage.

You have to put that one line in context with the rest of the rule, specifically: "If all damage dealt was blocked by shields or some other ability, then no damage was taken."

Moving damage says it's not considered taken damage. And the rules say that even though damage isn't taken it was still dealt.

Unless they update the rules section to say that moving damage isn't dealing damage, in my eyes Backup Muscle and Willpower are dealing damage by moving it. At least that's my interpretation of it.

So it wouldn't trigger anything that triggers on taking damage, but should trigger things based on dealing damage, like Dooku.

So the only requirement for damage to be dealt is that it's not taken? Because there's an infinite amount of not-taken damage. I resolve a shield - you haven't taken damage, so I dealt damage. I disrupt - no taken damage, so it's dealt damage.

You have to put that one line in context with the rest of the rule, specifically: "If all damage dealt was blocked by shields or some other ability, then no damage was taken."

Where did I say that was the only requirement? We're discussing a specific example and in this specific example, I believe the damage wasn't taken but it was still dealt.

Where did I say that was the only requirement? We're discussing a specific example and in this specific example, I believe the damage wasn't taken but it was still dealt.

But that's the core of your point. It says that moved damage isn't taken, and you're trying to say that any damage that isn't taken is dealt. But that's flawed - damage has to be dealt in the first place in order to "still" be dealt.

And that should be the key - "still dealt" means that an existing condition doesn't vanish. It doesn't create it out of nothing.

Where did I say that was the only requirement? We're discussing a specific example and in this specific example, I believe the damage wasn't taken but it was still dealt.

But that's the core of your point. It says that moved damage isn't taken, and you're trying to say that any damage that isn't taken is dealt. But that's flawed - damage has to be dealt in the first place in order to "still" be dealt.

And that should be the key - "still dealt" means that an existing condition doesn't vanish. It doesn't create it out of nothing.

That is the core of my point because that's what the rules say. Even though the character wasn't considered to have taken damage, doesn't mean the card that moved the damage didn't deal damage.

Per the rulebook:

Damage is taken only when one or more damage tokens are placed on the character.

Moving damage places damage token(s) on a character, however because of the rules for moving, they aren't considered to have taken that damage.

The rules for taking damage also say that even though damage wasn't taken it was still dealt.

Not sure how that's any less flawed than the assertion that it isn't dealing damage.

How can you pick and choose which cards the rules are intended for?

Just think about this for a minute and you will see all makes sense:

If you play Cannon fodder you need to be successful to use "then" part. So if your trooper has two shields and the die has 2 value, then you successfully dealt 2 damage. Damage was not taken but still dealt.

Note that this:

Damage is taken only when one or more damage tokens are

placed on the character. If all damage dealt was blocked by

shields or some other ability, then no damage was taken.

describes the "breaking through shields" concept. Don't use it out of context.

This:

When damage is moved to a new character, it ignores

shields and the character is not considered to have

taken damage.

is needed to describe the different concept - you don't deal damage to your team partner by using Draw attention. (You don't breaking through his shields.)

And BTW this

I read the FAQ and it said damage is dealt when you are placing damage on your character.

is not true.

^^^^

ummm.... The FAQ LITERALLY SAYS: Damage is taken only when one or more damage tokens are placed on the character.

After reading this entire thread, I don't think the answer is clear. The moving damage description says "NEW CHARACTER" which implies it is talking about cards specifically targeting 2 characters (not support to character).

This is my opinion, and I now want FFG to comment.

How can you pick and choose which cards the rules are intended for?

Just think about this for a minute and you will see all makes sense:

If you play Cannon fodder you need to be successful to use "then" part. So if your trooper has two shields and the die has 2 value, then you successfully dealt 2 damage. Damage was not taken but still dealt.

Note that this:

Damage is taken only when one or more damage tokens are

placed on the character. If all damage dealt was blocked by

shields or some other ability, then no damage was taken.

describes the "breaking through shields" concept. Don't use it out of context.

This:

When damage is moved to a new character, it ignores

shields and the character is not considered to have

taken damage.

is needed to describe the different concept - you don't deal damage to your team partner by using Draw attention. (You don't breaking through his shields.)

And BTW this

I read the FAQ and it said damage is dealt when you are placing damage on your character.

is not true.

I don't believe I am using it out of context. Where is section that defines DEALING DAMAGE or DEALT DAMAGE? All we have is TAKING DAMAGE and from those rules we have to infer whether damage is dealt or not and I believe that based on those rules, moving damage is dealing damage, even in the case of Draw Attention. You believe otherwise, that's fine. Maybe FFG will update Rules Reference to include some verbage to explicitly say that moving damage doesn't deal damage or vice versa so we don't have to infer anything.

There are plenty of cases which talks about dealing damage, but I think this puts the nail in it:

Supply

This is where the various game tokens are placed. All tokens are taken from the supply when gained (resources), dealt (damage), or given (shields).

"Dealt" damage is damage which comes from the supply. If you're not taking it from the supply (such as when you move it) then it's not dealt.

There are plenty of cases which talks about dealing damage, but I think this puts the nail in it:

Supply

This is where the various game tokens are placed. All tokens are taken from the supply when gained (resources), dealt (damage), or given (shields).

"Dealt" damage is damage which comes from the supply. If you're not taking it from the supply (such as when you move it) then it's not dealt.

Now that's a rule that might have some weight to it.

It's mostly just telling you where to get tokens from when you need them, not necessarily defining dealt damage, resources gained or shields given as being able to come from the supply. But I'll concede the point. Good find.

It's mostly just telling you where to get tokens from when you need them, not necessarily defining dealt damage, resources gained or shields given as being able to come from the supply. But I'll concede the point. Good find.

I'm not sure why, but there are several places where the rules take this sort of backwards approach to definition. Discarding is another good example - there's no actual definition for discarding in the rules, which became important when people wanted Second Chance's "discard from play" to be "remove from game". The closest definition we get is under Discard Pile, which basically says "This is where cards land when they're discarded".

Seems to me this thread, as with so many, is petty rules lawyers trying to weasel their way around a fairly straightforward idea.

Lets hope FFG give us a solid answer on this quickly, so we can move on to the next round of 'well they don't TECHNICALLY define word "x" in the rules so it totally doesn't count for this one scenario.'

Off topic, but I would actually really like the next starter to be a big box deal with two playable decks and bigger rulebook. Maybe in the $40 range.

Lets hope FFG give us a solid answer on this quickly

When a character is dealt damage, place that much damage

on the character. "Damage", page 15.

Lets hope FFG give us a solid answer on this quickly

Here you are:When a character is dealt damage, place that much damageon the character. "Damage", page 15.

Oh no no no.

You don't understand. If the FAQ doesn't address this very specific scenario then that obvious, straightforward, clear as day interpretation of the rules just doesn't COUNT.

I demand they include the Oxford english dictionary as part of the rules, with all word definitions put into a destiny context. Also the FAQ should address every single interaction thar will ever happen, however else can we possibly answer questions like:

"If my dooku takes damage, does he count as taking damage?"

(I want to point out this jibe is not at the OP, Who i feel has asked a reasonable question, but to those rules lawyers who have tried to take a fairly simple answer and turn it into a web of 'well define "dealt"' etc.)

What is clear for you doesn't necessary to be clear for all mankind.

If FFG wants this game played in a competitive way must answer to this kind of questions also if they think that this is "stupid".

That's why some other games rules are hundred of pages and that's why there are judges.

"If my dooku takes damage, does he count as taking damage?"

Of course, Dooku is always a Count.