So...

The Compartment Fire crit says that you cannot ready your defense tokens. If I have the Hand of Justice title card on a Arquitens ship, can it override the crit and ready a token on the ship with the crit?

As per the RRG, if a card effect uses the word "cannot", it is absolute.

Thus, no, Hand of Justice does not override it.

In FFG Parlance (and previous rulings involving different games), their intent is, in this case, that Hand of Justice is doing the Readying.

Just as an Interdictor is doing the Speed Changing, which stops the Thruster Fissure from doing damage to you when it forces a speed change...

So it would work to Ready that Token.

But I have no "rules proof" to offer at this point in time, other than what I have above... Hand of Justice is doing the Readying, not the Ship with the Critical Card, and the critical card states that You, as in, the ship with teh Crit, cannot be the one as to do the readying...

Now, if HAND OF JUSTICE had the Critical Card... It would still work, as long as it was not trying to ready its own, which it can't do, as Hand of Justice is "Another"

I will admit Dras' is a possible interpretation. I considered it before replying, but ultimately rejected it. Upon re-reading, I'm coming around to that view.

It's certainly not bulletproof either way, though, and I can see heated arguments taking place in the absence of a clarification.

9 minutes ago, DiabloAzul said:

I will admit Dras' is a possible interpretation. I considered it before replying, but ultimately rejected it. Upon re-reading, I'm coming around to that view.

It's certainly not bulletproof either way, though, and I can see heated arguments taking place in the absence of a clarification.

I don't want to be the source of a "heated argument"...LOL. It was just something that crossed my mind while list building today...

Oh, DA and I are more just acknowledging that they will happen. Not that we are going to be a party to it

But yes, there is no specific ruling either way, other than the samples I gave, which, I willingly admit are fleeting as precedences go.

I don't think Dras and I have ever been on opposite sides of a heated debate. Though orange vs purple was close.

I don't see why not. You (the ISD or whatever) cannot ready your defense tokens. It doesn't say anything about someone else readying your defense tokens.

Also, if Hand of Justice has this crit, it can still ready other ships defense tokens since the crit says you must target your own. So just go with what Dras said.

Rawr! Its clearly the mauve option! Team magenta shall be burned at the state as witches! Rawr!

I mean, I'll reiterate, that it is only because of very specific wording:

It tells You (Hand of Justice) to Exhaust this Card, Choose a Ship at distance and ready one of its defense tokens.

If it said for you to Exhaust your Card, Choose a Ship at Distance and then to ready a defense token, well that'd be different. A lot more Murkier, for sure. Because you would have to ask who is readying the token.

The final no-no would be any wording that says for "it" to ready a defense token, referring to the other ship. That'd be stopped, too.

But in this case, You, Hand of Justice, Ready one of Its, the other Ships, Tokens...

That gets past the Critical, as far as I am concerned.

I tend to agree. I will remark, though, that the grammatical implications (the "you" is explicit for exhausting, but only implicit for the remaining verbs) may not be immediately obvious for those of us for whom English is only a second language.

In "Alice may <exhaust this card> to <ready a defense token>", Alice is the subject of both actions.

However, in "Alice may <exhaust this card> for <the round to end>", Alice is only the subject of the first action.

This is second nature for most of you - but not for everybody.

I'd expect it to read differently in another - more specific - language, such as French.

But I'm one of those in the "English and Bad English" Crowd.

Bad English being American. Urgh. ::shudder::

1 minute ago, DiabloAzul said:

I tend to agree. I will remark, though, that the grammatical implications (the "you" is explicit for exhausting, but only implicit for the remaining verbs) may not be immediately obvious for those of us for whom English is only a second language.

In "Alice may <exhaust this card> to <ready a defense token>", Alice is the subject of both actions.

However, in "Alice may <exhaust this card> for <the round to end>", Alice is only the subject of the first action.

This is second nature for most of you - but not for everybody.

I guess I just never realized that I needed to be an English major in order to play Armada and interpret it's rulings...**sigh**...public school education rearing it's ugly head once again...

1 minute ago, itzSteve said:

I guess I just never realized that I needed to be an English major in order to play Armada and interpret it's rulings...**sigh**...public school education rearing it's ugly head once again...

You'd actually need to be studying law- modern English studies in American universities focus more on deconstructionism (Foucault, Derrida, etc.) and you'd be hard pressed to have anyone bold enough to ascribe meaning to a text in an English department!

4 minutes ago, DiabloAzul said:

I tend to agree. I will remark, though, that the grammatical implications (the "you" is explicit for exhausting, but only implicit for the remaining verbs) may not be immediately obvious for those of us for whom English is only a second language.

In "Alice may <exhaust this card> to <ready a defense token>", Alice is the subject of both actions.

However, in "Alice may <exhaust this card> for <the round to end>", Alice is only the subject of the first action.

This is second nature for most of you - but not for everybody.

I agree and considered this interpretation as well, but Occum's Razor. So Hand of Justice is readying the defense tokens is the simpler answer because I can say "Ok, Hand of Justice activates, and I'll refresh this token on the ISD." If my opponent says otherwise, I can say "The card says you, and you refers to the ship, Hand of Justice."

Having to explain to someone the implicit and explicit interpretations of "you" on the card seems much more difficult, especially if the person is not native to english. Where as they can just point in the RRG and find out what "you" really means.

Sure! I'm just saying that the card doesn't explicitly say you ready the other ship's tokens.

It says you exhaust the card, and as a result someone [implicit from grammar: you] chooses and readies a token.

It's definitely Hand of Justice doing it, my only point is that this is not immediately obvious to a non-English speaker.

14 hours ago, DiabloAzul said:

Sure! I'm just saying that the card doesn't explicitly say you ready the other ship's tokens.

It says you exhaust the card, and as a result someone [implicit from grammar: you] chooses and readies a token.

It's definitely Hand of Justice doing it, my only point is that this is not immediately obvious to a non-English speaker.

I had this situation also the other day and interpreted as you did, so I didn't ready the Brace of my ISD as I thought I couldn't with Hand of Justice and it ended up losing the Brace and in pieces that same turn (I also speak english just as my second language).

But reading the explanation form Dras I think he is right and Hand of Justice CAN ready another ship's defense token in that case

15 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

I'd expect it to read differently in another - more specific - language, such as French.

But I'm one of those in the "English and Bad English" Crowd.

Bad English being American. Urgh. ::shudder::

You do better when you paint with a smaller brush Dras.

3 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:

You do better when you paint with a smaller brush Dras.

I'll remember that next time I colour some armour. .

Touche