Hey,

A couple of scenarios came up when I was using Dengar and Boba Fett in a tournament this weekend. A quick browse of the forums and I found lots of discussion about when Boba steals, but not exactly what he can steal.

Case 1: Critical against a Heavy Scyk. I chose to remove the 'heavy Scyk' title card, would that also remove the manger cannon (since it's only allowed because of the title). Some would apply to a title like Virago, Mist Hunter and Punishing One. I would assume that whatever is attached because of the title would be removed as well. But I'm not sure.

Case 2: Something along the same lines... crit against a K-Wing with extra munitions. Would removing 'Extra Munitions' remove all the 'extra' bomb / torp tokens that are available because of that upgrade.

We sort of ruled that any equipment attached would remain, but any abilities or stats increased would disappear (the +1 hull from the heavy Scyk title would vanish, for instance) But I was curious. Still a very powerful card (ended up taking away a connor net that saved Dengar from from serious pain)

Anyway, I'd like to be clear since there's so many combinations of equipment that are getting more and more reliant. Next goal, steal heavy laser from a YT-2400 outrider

John!

extra munitions itself gets a token from itself on it to take the hit on a discard, so that won't work.

1: Removing a slot doesn't remove things equipped to it, per the FAQ about Integrated Astromech and R2-D^ (and also Boba).

2: Smitty's right, EM just chooses to discard the token it got from itself, from itswelf, so Boba can't do anything to EM.

There is a FAQ entry explaining that using Boba Fett to remove any upgrade cards that also grant extra things to the ship it is equipped to does not remove the extra 'thing'. And, as was pointed out to me in another post, removing the Outrider's HLC does allow its normal primary to work instead.

Quote:

If Boba Fett is used to discard a card that allows an
additional card to be equipped during squad building
(such as Royal Guard TIE, R2-D6, or Mist Hunter), any
additional equipped cards are not discarded.
Boba Fett cannot affect docked ships. If Boba Fett
is used to discard the Ghost title while the Phantom
is docked, the Phantom remains docked and cannot
deploy until the Ghost is destroyed (forcing it to
deploy).
Chewbacca's Upgrade card ability to discard a damage card does not prevent
that card from being dealt, so Boba Fett's ability still triggers.
A ship equipped with Boba Fett can use his ability if the defender was dealt
a faceup Damage card from any source during that ship’s attack. Boba Fett
cannot be used during an attack if the ship with Boba Fett equipped is not the
ship attacking.
If Boba Fett is used to discard an Upgrade card that has an ordnance token on
it (including the Extra Munitions Upgrade card itself), the opposing player can
discard the ordnance token instead.

Case 1: The precedent is set with AI and the EPT granting Astromech where you can dump the mech yet still keep the ETP. Now there are some things you could discard and take a specific ability out with it. More on that in a second.

Case 2: Removing Extra Munitions would NOT remove any munitions tokens on ordnance. It WOULD however remove the rule from the game giving those tokens any meaning thus rendering them useless. Of course EM also has a munitions token on it that can be discarded if the EM would be discarded and only a fool would allow EM to be taken instead of its token.

Apparently he can steal a scene. I mean of all the tiny two-but characters in ESB, he's the one we keep talking about Well him and that guy who wears toilet paper on his head and flies a flying toilet seat.

11 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

Apparently he can steal a scene. I mean of all the tiny two-but characters in ESB, he's the one we keep talking about Well him and that guy who wears toilet paper on his head and flies a flying toilet seat.

Hoooo nice !!!!! Never seen the Jumpmaster like that but now it is sealed, I will never look at it the same way

If you Boba Fett the heavy Scyk title then the extra hull point is lost though correct? Or, Boba Fett a hull upgrade off Carnor with three damage cards and he goes boom.

4 minutes ago, gamblertuba said:

If you Boba Fett the heavy Scyk title then the extra hull point is lost though correct? Or, Boba Fett a hull upgrade off Carnor with three damage cards and he goes boom.

Correct on both counts.

1 hour ago, gamblertuba said:

If you Boba Fett the heavy Scyk title then the extra hull point is lost though correct? Or, Boba Fett a hull upgrade off Carnor with three damage cards and he goes boom.

What extra hull? I don't see anything that changes the rule saying a ship is destroyed when it has damage exceeding its hull value.

Now if you somehow were to strip off a Shield Upgrade with Boba I believe that all you will be doing is lowering the possible shield value although you wouldn't actually get to strip a shield token as well. Send a face-up card to a Regenerator that has Shield Upgrade and a full stack of shield tokens Boba could take the Shield Upgrade which will affect how far up the shields could regenerator but I do not believe it will affect the current number of shields.

4 minutes ago, StevenO said:

What extra hull? I don't see anything that changes the rule saying a ship is destroyed when it has damage exceeding its hull value.

Now if you somehow were to strip off a Shield Upgrade with Boba I believe that all you will be doing is lowering the possible shield value although you wouldn't actually get to strip a shield token as well. Send a face-up card to a Regenerator that has Shield Upgrade and a full stack of shield tokens Boba could take the Shield Upgrade which will affect how far up the shields could regenerator but I do not believe it will affect the current number of shields.

The extra hull from Heavy Scyk title errata. So , say a Scyk takes 2 damage cards including one face-up (not direct hit) and you choose to remove the title. That Scyk now has 2 damage cards and 2 hull so it is destroyed.

1 hour ago, StevenO said:

I do not believe it will affect the current number of shields.

Yes it will, the rule say you can't have more shield then your maximum. But anyway it is really hard to deal a crit dmg card when there is still shield remaining.

But if a Ship with Shield Upgrade and exactly all of its starting shield is hit by and advanced homing missile with also Boba crew, it is a crit dealt directly under shield. Then if the attacker use Boba to remove the Shield Upgrade, the defender will loose the extra shield.

If the same situation happen, but the defender was at starting shield value minus one, he would not loose a shield.

2 hours ago, muribundi said:

3 hours ago, StevenO said:

I do not believe it will affect the current number of shields.

Yes it will, the rule say you can't have more shield then your maximum. But anyway it is really hard to deal a crit dmg card when there is still shield remaining.

It does say that somewhere? I guess I haven't looked that hard for it as it should be a rare occurrence but I also wasn't entirely certain which is why I qualify it as a thought/opinion instead of as certain fact.

28 minutes ago, StevenO said:

It does say that somewhere? I guess I haven't looked that hard for it as it should be a rare occurrence but I also wasn't entirely certain which is why I qualify it as a thought/opinion instead of as certain fact.

Rules Reference p17, "Shields":

A ship cannot have more shield tokens than its shield value. If a ship has a number of shield tokens equal to its shield value, it cannot recover shields.

(emphasis mine)

20 minutes ago, digitalbusker said:

Rules Reference p17, "Shields":

A ship cannot have more shield tokens than its shield value. If a ship has a number of shield tokens equal to its shield value, it cannot recover shields.

(emphasis mine)

Then what is done with any overload? Ships can have tokens they do not, or can not, use yet they remain despite whatever granted them being removed. Before the SU would be removed the ship certainly didn't have more tokens than it did shield value and a token is as much part of a ship as an upgrade card would be when what granted it is removed. Of course that would then make that second sentence funny as having tokens greater than the shield value would appear to allow the recovery of shields when it clearly couldn't happen.

PS. All of this is just playing Advocate for a situation that will rarely, if ever, arise is actual gameplay. I do think it would be strange that a ship could lose tokens without a game rule specifically removing them which I believe every other token has. If a cloaked Scum loses his Stealth Device there is nothing making it lose the Cloak Token (upgrade specific loss excluded) which leaves that token active and in play until it is finally used; a shield token should work the same way.

1 hour ago, StevenO said:

Then what is done with any overload? Ships can have tokens they do not, or can not, use yet they remain despite whatever granted them being removed. Before the SU would be removed the ship certainly didn't have more tokens than it did shield value and a token is as much part of a ship as an upgrade card would be when what granted it is removed. Of course that would then make that second sentence funny as having tokens greater than the shield value would appear to allow the recovery of shields when it clearly couldn't happen.

PS. All of this is just playing Advocate for a situation that will rarely, if ever, arise is actual gameplay. I do think it would be strange that a ship could lose tokens without a game rule specifically removing them which I believe every other token has. If a cloaked Scum loses his Stealth Device there is nothing making it lose the Cloak Token (upgrade specific loss excluded) which leaves that token active and in play until it is finally used; a shield token should work the same way.

Ships can have tokens they can't use, but they can't have tokens they can't have.

I'll grant that the procedure for what you do with shield tokens you have but aren't allowed to have isn't super clearly spelled out, but what option other than returning them to the supply makes any sense?

Sure a ship can have a token it can't have. Otherwise why could a ship be passed of TL token or still be holding onto a Cloak Token as mentioned before. Beside all of that some certainly seem like they are fine with letting things happen that really shouldn't.

1 hour ago, StevenO said:

Then what is done with any overload?

Nothing. If the rules intended for you to discard down to your shield value, they'd say to do that. Do what the FAQ says, don't do what it doesn't say.

I suspect it doesn't say that because no-one's thought to address it, though.

20 minutes ago, StevenO said:

Sure a ship can have a token it can't have. Otherwise why could a ship be passed of TL token or still be holding onto a Cloak Token as mentioned before. Beside all of that some certainly seem like they are fine with letting things happen that really shouldn't.

Those aren't the same thing at all. Passing a blue Target Lock token to a ship without the Target Lock action (or using an ability that lets such a ship acquire a Target Lock) isn't flying in the face of any rules that say "can't". It's just giving something to a ship that can't get it in the normal way. They could have written the rules to say "a ship can maintain zero Target Locks... A ship with the [Target Lock] icon in its Action Bar can maintain one Target Lock." Same with cloak token. There's no reason a ship without access to the Cloak action can't have a Cloak token, there's just currently no other way to get one.

With Shield tokens in excess of your shield value, there's a rule that says you can't have them. "There's a rule that says I can't have this thing" is very different from "there isn't a rule that lays out a way for me to get this thing."

There is no rules that say a Ship can't have Cloak Token or Target Lock Token if it does not have the action first. This is far from the same thing.

But there is a rules that say Epic Ship can't have Evade, Focus or Stress Token.

For the rest, no there is no clear rule to remove to token in excess, but the "can't have" is enough to imply that you must remove them, if not, you are breaking the rules by keeping them, because the rules say you can't have more...

And if you say you can keep them because it is not written, then I will now premeasure my move because it is not written anymore that I can't do it...