I was playing a match against a maz/eOld Ben deck and the battlefield was cargo hold. During the game I claimed to move second chance from maz to old Ben so I could kill her. Later on, when killing old Ben to remove the Second Chance, he tried to use Old bens ability to play One with the force on old Ben. I said he couldn't do that because second chance is a replacement effect so both of them can't trigger. We went with his way and it greatly affect the game with a 3 focus. I did win due to Kill and Mill, but who was right in our case?

Currently there is nothing in the rules that gives replacement effects priority over other non-replacement effects that trigger at the same time. There is the same problem with grievous killing someone with second chance as well.

I can only hope that FFG amend the rules to say that replacement effects take priority when multiple effects trigger.

TL,DR under the current rules RAW your opponent was correct

They both trigger before Ben dies, and the owner gets to determine the order. So yes, you can trigger Ben and then trigger Second Chance.

And I'm expecting people to abuse the hell out of it.

2 hours ago, Abyss said:

They both trigger before Ben dies, and the owner gets to determine the order. So yes, you can trigger Ben and then trigger Second Chance.

And I'm expecting people to abuse the hell out of it.

Hardly abuse given Bens eye watering cost.

Don't get me wrong, Cargo hold is going to get utterly... ahem... played, by some decks, but anything that gives Master Kenobi some play time is ok by me.

On 4/14/2017 at 2:00 AM, Mace Windu said:

Currently there is nothing in the rules that gives replacement effects priority over other non-replacement effects that trigger at the same time. There is the same problem with grievous killing someone with second chance as well.

I can only hope that FFG amend the rules to say that replacement effects take priority when multiple effects trigger.

TL,DR under the current rules RAW your opponent was correct

This is not accurate, the Grievous second chance thing was officially ruled by Lukas. The post right after yours is short and sweet explanation of how the OP situation works

14 hours ago, krzykoopa said:

This is not accurate, the Grievous second chance thing was officially ruled by Lukas. The post right after yours is short and sweet explanation of how the OP situation works

Where was this ruling? What was the ruling and reasons forecast he rules?

21 minutes ago, Mace Windu said:

Where was this ruling? What was the ruling and reasons forecast he rules?

I am not sure what you mean. Lukas Litzsinger ruled on this in February he posted it via Facebook.

10 minutes ago, krzykoopa said:

I am not sure what you mean. Lukas Litzsinger ruled on this in February he posted it via Facebook.

Sorry typo, stupid phone. What was the actual ruling and what were the reasons for the way he ruled? I'm sure that issue was discussed in length recently with no mention of said ruling

4 minutes ago, Mace Windu said:

Sorry typo, stupid phone. What was the actual ruling and what were the reasons for the way he ruled? I'm sure that issue was discussed in length recently with no mention of said ruling

He said in reference to Grevious ability and second chance "they trigger simultaneously but whoever controls the battlefield chooses the order". He then said in the next RRG update this will be addressed. as for reasons why he didn't expand further. The Facebook groups were going back and forth non stop and then he decided to step in.