Ok, I don't know if people already talked about this, and this is really a theoretical post about Blinded Pilot.

The rule for Asteroid is written like this:

You cannot perform any attacks

The rule for Weapon disable is written like this:

You cannot perform attack

The rule for cloak is like this:

You cannot perform any attack

All of this can't remove Blinded Pilot because according to FAQ, when you cannot perform attack, you never get an opportunity to attack. But when you look at the Blinded Pilot card it say:

You cannot perform any attack

So if the Blinded Pilot prevent you from having any opportunity to attack, how are you supposed to remove it.

To be logical, all the other effect should also let you have an opportunity to attack, but skip the attack part (A bit like using Feedback Array) or they should reword Blinded Pilot like this:

"The next time you have an opportunity to attack, instead flip this card face down" or something like that.

It does basically say that...

Blinded Pilot

• Pilot
• You cannot perform attacks.
• After your next opportunity to attack (even if there was no target for an attack), flip this card facedown.

Yep, I know what it says... but the wording "You cannot perform attacks" mean you don't get an opportunity to attack, so the second part can never trigger.

Edit:

Right now the card is in fact worded like this:

You don't have opportunity to attack.

After your next opportunity to attack (even if there was no target for an attack), flip this card facedown.

Muribundi, you are absolutely correct that by a super-strict literal reading of the card, it is broken in that way.

However, everyone understands how the card is intended to work. If you brought this up at a tournament and tried to argue that your opponent's Blinded ship stays blinded for the rest of the game because of this logical inconsistency, as a TO, I would tell you to shut up, flip the crit down, and carry on with the game. If you continued to insist about a silly technicality like this, I would kick you out of the tournament for bad sportsmanship.

Nope, nope, nope.

It says you cannot perform attacks. That means the opportunity to attack is there, but you can't take advantage of it.

After that opportunity, flip the card face down. There is no problem here.

Now, whether the other rules make sense... that's a bigger question.

18 minutes ago, EdgeOfDreams said:

Muribundi, you are absolutely correct that by a super-strict literal reading of the card, it is broken in that way.

However, everyone understands how the card is intended to work. If you brought this up at a tournament and tried to argue that your opponent's Blinded ship stays blinded for the rest of the game because of this logical inconsistency, as a TO, I would tell you to shut up, flip the crit down, and carry on with the game. If you continued to insist about a silly technicality like this, I would kick you out of the tournament for bad sportsmanship.

It is funny how I preface it with: "this is really a theoretical post about Blinded Pilot." and people assume that I want to rule law it.

I never said I want it broken, I just point out that right now, this does not make any sense...

I the reason why I brought this up is because at a tounement, I was cloaked, and I was not aware that cloak, obstacle or weapon disabled prevented flipping it. And I was arguing that I should because the wording was the same as the Blinded Pilot.

Idiot wording create useless arguing during play...

Telling someone, it is like this, "just because" is not a logical reason...

Edit: Also, by talking about it in forum, it make them fix stuff, so hopefully this bring it to their attention and they will fix this.

21 hours ago, muribundi said:

It is funny how I preface it with: "this is really a theoretical post about Blinded Pilot." and people assume that I want to rule law it.

I never said I want it broken, I just point out that right now, this does not make any sense...

I the reason why I brought this up is because at a tounement, I was cloaked, and I was not aware that cloak, obstacle or weapon disabled prevented flipping it. And I was arguing that I should because the wording was the same as the Blinded Pilot.

Idiot wording create useless arguing during play...

Telling someone, it is like this, "just because" is not a logical reason...

Edit: Also, by talking about it in forum, it make them fix stuff, so hopefully this bring it to their attention and they will fix this.

There's no reason to fix it, because of what this next quote says ....

22 hours ago, InquisitorM said:

Nope, nope, nope.

It says you cannot perform attacks. That means the opportunity to attack is there, but you can't take advantage of it.

After that opportunity, flip the card face down. There is no problem here.

Now, whether the other rules make sense... that's a bigger question.

Every ship has an opportunity to attack. No matter what, even if nothing is there (hence the part second part of the card). Cards and abilities may prevent that opportunity, however. Same is the case with Blinded Pilot.

Ex. Fenn attacks Poe. Fenn deals Blinded Pilot to Poe. It's then Poe's turn to shoot. Oh, he can't this round due to Blinded Pilot. Round ends. Flip Blinded Pilot face down.

Unfortunately, when something says "you cannot perform attacks", that seems to only mean you don't get the opportunity to attack about 50% of the time. The FAQ basically makes an explicit exception for Blinded Pilot in the clarification on Feedback Array as you can use it with Blinded Pilot (meaning you have the opportunity to attack), but you cannot use it on an asteroid or with a weapons disabled token (meaning you don't have the opportunity to attack). I would expect cloak tokens to work the same way as Weapons Disabled and Asteroids however there is no clarification I could find in the FAQ saying one way or the other.

Someone did post an email response in this thread. Which would make me believe you could actually clear Blinded Pilot while cloaked, if it is to be believed.

Yeah, that's what I was alluding to. Blinded pilot is the one that actually makes sense. It's the asteroid and weapons disabled rules that are inconsistent with the wording.

Given that they just previewed the new Jabba the Hutt card that doesn't actually work (based on how it's written), let's not be hugely surprised.

16 minutes ago, InquisitorM said:

Yeah, that's what I was alluding to. Blinded pilot is the one that actually makes sense. It's the asteroid and weapons disabled rules that are inconsistent with the wording.

Given that they just previewed the new Jabba the Hutt card that doesn't actually work (based on how it's written), let's not be hugely surprised.

Why won't Jabba work as is? Seems pretty straightforward.

3 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

Why won't Jabba work as is? Seems pretty straightforward.

You is only the ship with Jabba. So "When something instructs you to discard" doesn't actually trigger on all the other ships in your squad that have tokens on their illicits.

1 minute ago, Tobl said:

You is only the ship with Jabba. So "When something instructs you to discard" doesn't actually trigger on all the other ships in your squad that have tokens on their illicits.

Gotcha!

That was kind of the reason of my post... no, Blinded Pilot RAW does not work for now... and I have an even better example that don't ask huge knowledge of rules.

I told my kid:

"You can't enter the Kitchen
If you are ever in the Kitchen, eat the candy"

This is exactly Blinded Pilot

My kid looked at me: "Dad, your an idiot, I will never be able to eat candy with your rules"

7 minutes ago, muribundi said:

That was kind of the reason of my post... no, Blinded Pilot RAW does not work for now... and I have an even better example that don't ask huge knowledge of rules.

I told my kid:

"You can't enter the Kitchen
If you are ever in the Kitchen, eat the candy"

This is exactly Blinded Pilot

My kid looked at me: "Dad, your an idiot, I will never be able to eat candy with your rules"

False equivalence. Blinded Pilot works just fine. Think of it as a parallel to stress and actions:

When you are stressed, you cannot perform actions. However, you still get an opportunity to perform actions because you get a Perform Action step – you just can't take advantage of that step when you're stressed. You're talking about it as if you skip your perform action step when you are stressed, which you do not.

During your turn, you get an opportunity to attack. If you have an effect that says 'you cannot perform attacks', then you cannot take full advantage of that opportunity, but you can trade it in for things that happen in that opportunity that aren't attacks, like Feedback Array.

So Blinded Pilot works fine, but we have only the FAQ to tell us that landing on a rock and having a weapons disabled token are akin to losing your opportunity to attack rather than preventing you from attacking in that opportunity. There is nothing in the rules to support this interpretation and thus is is entirely arbitrary. That is the problem.

18 minutes ago, muribundi said:

That was kind of the reason of my post... no, Blinded Pilot RAW does not work for now... and I have an even better example that don't ask huge knowledge of rules.

I told my kid:

"You can't enter the Kitchen
If you are ever in the Kitchen, eat the candy"

This is exactly Blinded Pilot

My kid looked at me: "Dad, your an idiot, I will never be able to eat candy with your rules"

THis isn't analogous.

A better phrasing would be handing him a card that says 'you can't enter the kitchen. Next time you have an opportunity to enter the kitchen, burn this card'.

But that assumes he would obey the card only when he could see its instructions.

7 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

A better phrasing would be handing him a card that says 'you can't enter the kitchen. Next time you have an opportunity to enter the kitchen, burn this card'.

I don't think so. I'd say it's more like, "You cannot make a sandwich. Next time you leave the kitchen, discard this card."

Muribundi's point rests on being denied the opportunity to attack, and Blinded Pilot doesn't do that.

Then if the wording "You cannot perform attack" does not remove opportunity to attack, then they need to fix it so you can flip Blinded Pilot with a Cloak Token or Weapon Disable Token or on a Rock.

And this was already state in the original post...

There is an illogism and they need to fix it either way. Changing Blinded Pilot wording or changing the rule of what "You cannot perform attack" really mean

Not being able to attack and not having the opportunity to attack are not the same thing. Blinded Pilot tells us that.

No, they don't need to fix it. In the end, it's FFG's game and they rule it how you want. What you think they should or shouldn't do is ultimately irrelevant. We all knew that the rulings were inconsistent to start with.

5 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Not being able to attack and not having the opportunity to attack are not the same thing. Blinded Pilot tells us that.

And when you read in a rule. "You cannot perform an attack" how are you supposed to know which one apply

7 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Not being able to attack and not having the opportunity to attack are not the same thing. Blinded Pilot tells us that.

The only problem is that in the case of Asteroids and Weapons Disabled which both say you "cannot perform attacks" it denies the opportunity to attack. In the case of Blinded Pilot which says, "you cannot perform attacks" it does not deny the opportunity to attack. And in the case of a cloak token, who knows since there is no clarification in the FAQ and it uses the same language as the two prior conflicting examples.

Just now, muribundi said:

And when you read in a rule. "You cannot perform an attack" how are you supposed to know which one apply

Read the FAQ. If it's not in there, then really, you don't.

5 minutes ago, muribundi said:

And when you read in a rule. "You cannot perform an attack" how are you supposed to know which one apply

Sadly, from the FAQ.

I wish they were consistent about it

Then I prefer to do what I have done, create a thread that they will read, because they read the forum about rule, and ask them to fix the inconsistency and be future proof.

It will not be the first time we ask such a thing and they fix it next FAQ

It's been inconsistent for months if not years.

Good luck with that.

Also, it's far more effective to send in rules questions via the contact form.