Just now, Tybrid said:

The word "TO"

Thanks, I figured out after reading it again that you meant the word "To" and not an abbreviation. I'm used to capital "TO" to mean something like Tournament Organizer so I thought maybe there was another rule document for tournaments that explained things.

4 minutes ago, Tybrid said:

IF you were correct about that, then the quote I referenced from PG 17 (Special abilities are mandatory if that side of it's die is resolved" comes into effect and you could not resolve the die without the 5 resources.

However, the language again gives choice with the word TO.

Typically choice is given with "May" or "Or" in Destiny from what I've seen in other cards.

5 minutes ago, Buhallin said:

You're coming at this backwards. The question is not "What says you can resolve specials with no effect". The question is "Why can't you?"

You're allowed to resolve specials. When you resolve any ability, you do as much as you're able to. That's simple enough.

The problem is you're inventing a pre-check that says "If you get no effect from this you can't do it." That very much DOESN'T exist in Destiny, and there are a number of examples for it. You cite one of the ones in the FAQ, with Cunning and Holocron. It literally says "resolves to no effect", not that you can't resolve it at all.

Nothing in the rules for resolving a damage die says "May", so it would be required. But at the same time, if for some reason you couldn't deal damage, that wouldn't stop you from resolving the die. Do as much as you're able to.

What's another example other than the specific one called out with Cunning and SH? Note that one doesn't say resolve to no effect, just that the end result is no effect therefore you've done as much of the effect as you can by choosing SH. Nothing in the rules for resolving specials that anyone has quoted yet either says "May" other than when the card itself says "May".

Just now, Tybrid said:

I just copied the google search result in an attempt to be funny, but you were successful in derailing that. Good Job.

I didn't mean for the comments on my end to get heated so I apologize for that if it came off that way at all. I'm genuinely interested in how this works and think I have a generally good grasp of the rules, but fully acknowledge I may be wrong. I've been posting rule pages to back up my thought process and just asking for others to do the same. My TCG background is Pokémon, where I'm very comfortable in pretty much all the rules and strange interactions. I'm relatively new to Destiny so I'm trying to have an approach where I think through what the card says, what the rules say, and match them up.

My thought process was that "to" instead of "and" implies choice. I think it's an explicit implication of choice. Just how I came to the logic of my answer.

3 minutes ago, TheGuardian118 said:

What's another example other than the specific one called out with Cunning and SH? Note that one doesn't say resolve to no effect, just that the end result is no effect therefore you've done as much of the effect as you can by choosing SH. Nothing in the rules for resolving specials that anyone has quoted yet either says "May" other than when the card itself says "May".

The rules and FAQ both specifically address playing cards for no effect, and that it is legal. Exhausting an empty Backup Muscle and playing a Noble Sacrifice with no blue characters are the specific examples.

I suspect the response is "But that doesn't say anything about specials!" Which is true, but why would it matter? Specials are abilities. Abilities resolve the same regardless of what the actual source of the ability is, except as specified.

We know that you can play an ability even if it does nothing. Is there anything about Special Abilities that countermands that, or adds extra restrictions? Nope, so you can do it.

4 minutes ago, Tybrid said:

My thought process was that "to" instead of "and" implies choice. I think it's an explicit implication of choice. Just how I came to the logic of my answer.

The rules are very clear about what makes an ability optional. Having a "to" in there doesn't qualify.

2 minutes ago, Tybrid said:

My thought process was that "to" instead of "and" implies choice. I think it's an explicit implication of choice. Just how I came to the logic of my answer.

I read it more as a condition to be met, not a choice to be made. Maybe they'll clarify it in the next FAQ if enough people have the question.

3 minutes ago, Buhallin said:

The rules and FAQ both specifically address playing cards for no effect, and that it is legal. Exhausting an empty Backup Muscle and playing a Noble Sacrifice with no blue characters are the specific examples.

I suspect the response is "But that doesn't say anything about specials!" Which is true, but why would it matter? Specials are abilities. Abilities resolve the same regardless of what the actual source of the ability is, except as specified.

We know that you can play an ability even if it does nothing. Is there anything about Special Abilities that countermands that, or adds extra restrictions? Nope, so you can do it.

Yes, playing cards and exhausting supports (Backup Muscle) for no practical effect is allowed. We were talking about dice though. You don't play an ability; you play a card.

Dice resolution is a separate thing from playing cards and exhausting characters/supports. All of the symbol descriptions on page 9 are worded to make something happen. The only exception being when part of something can happen, like a 3 discard side only hitting 1 card due to the other player only having 1 card left. Page 17 says that abilities from dice resolution are mandatory. If something is mandatory that usually means it's required, not optional so you couldn't resolve without being able to do the ability.

In order to add clarity, I'll provide a different example. Can you resolve Force Throw on special side if there are no other dice in the pool? Yes, but it doesn't do anything. Same thing here. Failure to meet the conditions of the ability does not prevent the resolution of the die.

18 minutes ago, Buhallin said:

The rules are very clear about what makes an ability optional. Having a "to" in there doesn't qualify.

Right answer, got there the wrong way. Thank you for helping me sort it.

4 minutes ago, Tybrid said:

In order to add clarity, I'll provide a different example. Can you resolve Force Throw on special side if there are no other dice in the pool? Yes, but it doesn't do anything. Same thing here. Failure to meet the conditions of the ability does not prevent the resolution of the die.

The basic idea here is correct, but Force Throw can still throw a die - itself. You don't remove dice from the pool until after they've resolved, so Force Throw can use itself. Handy if someone hits it with Confidence.

8 minutes ago, TheGuardian118 said:

I read it more as a condition to be met, not a choice to be made. Maybe they'll clarify it in the next FAQ if enough people have the question.

Yes, playing cards and exhausting supports (Backup Muscle) for no practical effect is allowed. We were talking about dice though. You don't play an ability; you play a card.

Dice resolution is a separate thing from playing cards and exhausting characters/supports. All of the symbol descriptions on page 9 are worded to make something happen. The only exception being when part of something can happen, like a 3 discard side only hitting 1 card due to the other player only having 1 card left. Page 17 says that abilities from dice resolution are mandatory. If something is mandatory that usually means it's required, not optional so you couldn't resolve without being able to do the ability.

Special abilities are still abilities, so they're still governed by the same rules for resolution. When you resolve a special, something DOES happen - you resolve the ability of the special. What the actual effect of that is (if any) doesn't matter, you've still resolved the die.

And mandatory does mean it's required, but what's required is that you do as much as you're able. There's nothing in the rules that says an ability has to do anything in order to be successfully resolved. This applies to any other die as well - you can resolve a disrupt even if your opponent has no resources.

Again, the key rule here says "Players must resolve as much of an ability as they are able to." That's it. When an ability resolves, you do as much of it as you are able. If you resolve a disrupt, you remove as many resources as you can - that can be zero. For any ability, whether it comes from an event, a card, or a special, you do as much as you can. That may be nothing, and there's no rule that specifies any sort of "You have to do at least this much before you can even initiate the action".

1 hour ago, Tybrid said:

I just copied the google search result in an attempt to be funny, but you were successful in derailing that. Good Job.

I agree with Buhallin that it actually didn't come across as being that funny in the first place, it came across as arrogant and sententious, which I don't think you meant it to, especially since the confusion arose from you using ALL CAPS rather than italics or underlines.

I'm not sure I understand the level of hostility you came into this thread with, honestly. It's a legitimate rules question, I checked before posting and it's not in the Rules Reference, and I think a valid point could be made for either side of the argument. Not that it really needed to be an "argument" in the first place.

Got a message from Lukas. The die gets resolved and goes back to card with no effect which I believe you all pretty much came to. Makes confidence really strong IMO

3 minutes ago, zmanfarlee said:

Got a message from Lukas. The die gets resolved and goes back to card with no effect which I believe you all pretty much came to. Makes confidence really strong IMO

Well that is a significant ruling. With confidence it means you can hit a dice with disrupt when you have no resources just so they can't reroll it. That also means that with FN-2199, when you roll in a weapon, unless you get a blank or a modifier you can resolve it immediately, even to no effect, just to return it to your card. So many possibilities.

4 hours ago, PeoplesChampion said:

Well that is a significant ruling. With confidence it means you can hit a dice with disrupt when you have no resources just so they can't reroll it. That also means that with FN-2199, when you roll in a weapon, unless you get a blank or a modifier you can resolve it immediately, even to no effect, just to return it to your card. So many possibilities.

No, this isn't correct.

Confidence forces you to resolve the die, if able. That means that it must be a die you can resolve, or nothing happens. So you can't use Confidence on a blank, or a modified side, or a side with a resource cost they cannot pay.

The important point with Crime Lord is that you CAN resolve it, but the actual effect does nothing because of the "Do as much as you're able" rule. Same would apply to a DT-29 special if your opponent didn't have any dice showing resource sides.

There's a difference between "Cannot resolve" and "Can resolve but it does nothing" which is key to Confidence.

2 hours ago, Buhallin said:

No, this isn't correct.

Confidence forces you to resolve the die, if able. That means that it must be a die you can resolve, or nothing happens. So you can't use Confidence on a blank, or a modified side, or a side with a resource cost they cannot pay.

The important point with Crime Lord is that you CAN resolve it, but the actual effect does nothing because of the "Do as much as you're able" rule. Same would apply to a DT-29 special if your opponent didn't have any dice showing resource sides.

There's a difference between "Cannot resolve" and "Can resolve but it does nothing" which is key to Confidence.

Right, that's what I was thinking. There are some rolls you simply cannot resolve, and others that cannot be resolved independently. I'm just saying that (either with confidence or FN) a roll such as a disrupt or discard can be resolved even if the opponent has no resources or cards respectively. It also makes a huge difference for a good number of specials other than those you mentioned. Cunning with no other specials on the board. Command Shuttle when your character with a special has died. I was just thinking in terms of dice resolution with FN, if I play my IQA on him and roll a disrupt, I can resolve the dice even if my opponent has no resources.

Well, it looks like this has been officially answered, but if anyone is still interested, these entries in the Rules Reference clarify the ruling:

Resolve Dice (pg. 14)

• To resolve a die, a player must pay any costs and carry out the effect represented by the symbol on that die.

Effects (pg. 19)

• An effect is anything that results from an ability.

Choose - Target (pg. 20)

• A target is a card or die to which an effect will happen. The term “choose” indicates that a target must be chosen in order for the ability to resolve.

And Crime Lord's text is:

• - Spend 5 resources to choose a character. That character is defeated after this round ends.

So a Crime Lord die can be resolved by playing Confidence (Choose an opponent's die and force them to resolve it, if able.) because there is no restriction to resolving Crime Lord's special (such as a resource cost that cannot be paid). However, even though the die itself is resolved, the ability of the card will not resolve and Crime Lord will thus have no effect.