So if Grievous places enough damage on a Finn with 2 lightsabers and 2nd chance to "defeat" him, what happens next?

Second Chance is a replacement effect, so Finn is never actually defeated. GG wouldn't get anything.

32 minutes ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

Second Chance is a replacement effect, so Finn is never actually defeated. GG wouldn't get anything.

Thought he could only steal non ability upgrades?

45 minutes ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

Second Chance is a replacement effect, so Finn is never actually defeated. GG wouldn't get anything.

Agreed. Grievous does not get to make a fine addition to his collection.

But what if the guy with Grevious triggers his ability first?

3 minutes ago, ScottieATF said:

But what if the guy with Grevious triggers his ability first?

It's not a before effect, it's a replacement effect.

21 minutes ago, Keigi said:

Thought he could only steal non ability upgrades?

Right, but I think OP was asking what happens to the lightsabers.

Both Second Chance and Grievous' ability are Before effects. Both trigger on a character being defeated so the controller of the battlefield chooses the order that they resolve.

If Second Chance is resolved first then the defeat is replaced and Grievous cannot steal anything.

If Grievous is resolved first then one of the lightsabers is stolen, then second chance resolves and the defeat is effect is replaced.

Furelli

14 minutes ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

It's not a before effect, it's a replacement effect.

There is no such thing as a "before effect". There are before abilities that have effects. In this case it is a before ability that also contains a replacement effect. How can it not be a before ability when the first word is "Before"?

You're right, it's both. I needed to re-read the card. But the "would be" and "instead" still mean that Finn never actually dies.

I think there's been some circular logic conducted on this one before, and Lukas had to step in with a ruling. Could be misremembering. "How can something be not-defeated if it had to be defeated in the first place to trigger that non-defeating?" In either case, the ultimate answer is that it's a replacement effect.

3 minutes ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

You're right, it's both. I needed to re-read the card. But the "would be" and "instead" still mean that Finn never actually dies.

I completely agree with this but I will say after research, the way it could be ruled is the controller of the battlefield decides which is first and if that's grievous...hello light saber. I've read far to many debates on this one to go further but my final 2 cents is...grievous shouldn't be able too. But under current rules or lack there of...can

You still have to be "defeated" to begin with to even start the process of triggering Second Chance, otherwise what is the triggering condition of that ability?

Grevious' ability doesn't care what happens to the character after only that it had been tagged as "defeated". Whether that "defeated" is replaced by something else doesn't matter if Grevious' ability executed before the one with the replacement effect.

4 minutes ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

You're right, it's both. I needed to re-read the card. But the "would be" and "instead" still mean that Finn never actually dies.

I think there's been some circular logic conducted on this one before, and Lukas had to step in with a ruling. Could be misremembering. "How can something be not-defeated if it had to be defeated in the first place to trigger that non-defeating?" In either case, the ultimate answer is that it's a replacement effect.

The problem is that the card clarifications section of the RRG mentions what happens when two Second Chances are on the same character when he is defeated. Both still trigger, but only one can replace anything so the card ends up doing nothing and staying put.

Again, both still trigger. This would imply other before effects triggering on character death would also trigger. In which case GG would steal an upgrade regardless.

5 minutes ago, ScottieATF said:

You still have to be "defeated" to begin with to even start the process of triggering Second Chance, otherwise what is the triggering condition of that ability?

Grevious' ability doesn't care what happens to the character after only that it had been tagged as "defeated". Whether that "defeated" is replaced by something else doesn't matter if Grevious' ability executed before the one with the replacement effect.

Yeah, we're definitely back to square one on this. I'll see if I can find the older thread.

Here's the thread, maybe we can spare ourselves some redundant conversation:

I think it comes down to this: you resolve before abilities before continuing to resolve the effect, as per the rules. In this case the before ability - healing 5 - takes place before the effect - being defeated - finishes resolving.

1 minute ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

Yeah, we're definitely back to square one on this. I'll see if I can find the older thread.

I side with this game badly needing a stack crowd. This before after inbetween replacement bs is getting so old. I am really wondering if Lukas has any idea what he is doing or just going, "it works this way cause I say it does" Logically you can't come back from death with out dying, it's not preventing your death it's fixing it. I completely understand people confused on this, it's the Rey crap all over again and still disagree with that ruling but it is what it is.

3 minutes ago, LordFajubi said:

I side with this game badly needing a stack crowd. This before after inbetween replacement bs is getting so old. I am really wondering if Lukas has any idea what he is doing or just going, "it works this way cause I say it does" Logically you can't come back from death with out dying, it's not preventing your death it's fixing it. I completely understand people confused on this, it's the Rey crap all over again and still disagree with that ruling but it is what it is.

Muddy at best. To be fair for thematics...it's a picture of Finn I believe when he crashes the tie fighter and never actually died. He just narrowly escaped. So with this logic GG wouldn't steal. But the silly rules leave the window open.

1 minute ago, LordFajubi said:

I side with this game badly needing a stack crowd. This before after inbetween replacement bs is getting so old. I am really wondering if Lukas has any idea what he is doing or just going, "it works this way cause I say it does" Logically you can't come back from death with out dying, it's not preventing your death it's fixing it. I completely understand people confused on this, it's the Rey crap all over again and still disagree with that ruling but it is what it is.

Well, I know why they did it. Hear me out: Destiny is a game with no fundamental, inherent way to interact with your opponent's actions. In that context it makes perfect sense for a FIFO order of resolution for triggered effects - whoever was first goes first. The problem is that sometimes you want things to skip straight to the head of the line, and there's no elegant way to do that with a reverse stack. The whole 'before ability' thing is a mechanism that was designed to make the best of a poor situation.

3 minutes ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

Well, I know why they did it. Hear me out: Destiny is a game with no fundamental, inherent way to interact with your opponent's actions. In that context it makes perfect sense for a FIFO order of resolution for triggered effects - whoever was first goes first. The problem is that sometimes you want things to skip straight to the head of the line, and there's no elegant way to do that with a reverse stack. The whole 'before ability' thing is a mechanism that was designed to make the best of a poor situation.

I'd rather see the situation fixed but I get what you are saying ? I don't want to get another 9 page rules discussion going but I am leaning more every day this game is not for me.

I'm patiently awaiting Mep's input. Will it be pie, or cake?

Just now, WonderWAAAGH said:

I'm patiently awaiting Mep's input. Will it be pie, or cake?

ROFL

4 minutes ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

I'm patiently awaiting Mep's input. Will it be pie, or cake?

Maybe crow? Jk mep we love u

To rowdy and Scottie: I see what you guys are saying, and I don't mean to diminish your input. Maybe there needs to be some designer perspective injected here; are they simultaneous before triggers, or does one of them having a replacement effect inherently change their relationship with one another?

2 minutes ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

To rowdy and Scottie: I see what you guys are saying, and I don't mean to diminish your input. Maybe there needs to be some designer perspective injected here; are they simultaneous before triggers, or does one of them having a replacement effect inherently change their relationship with one another?

I agree. To me, they trigger simultaneously and since they triggered, they get to resolve.

The rules do say that once an effect has been replaced, other effects cannot trigger off of it. However, in my mind both things trigger before any replacement happens.

38 minutes ago, DarthBlade said:

Muddy at best. To be fair for thematics...it's a picture of Finn I believe when he crashes the tie fighter and never actually died. He just narrowly escaped. So with this logic GG wouldn't steal. But the silly rules leave the window open.

Well, with this logic Grievous has been dead for what, 45 years? So how could he steal anything at all??