Synced Turret requires a target lock on the defender to fire.

Deadeye says you MAY treat Attack: (Target Lock) as Attack: (Focus).

Biggs Darklighter says other friendly ships at range 1 cannot be targeted by attacks if the attacker could target [Biggs] instead.

If a player with Synced Turret has both a target lock and a focus on a ship at range 1 of Biggs and they choose NOT to use Deadeye to treat the target lock requirement as a focus requirement, does that mean they no longer forced to attack Biggs? Or does the fact that they CAN shoot Biggs override their choice in whether or not to use Deadeye?

Deciding how you satisfy the attack header for a secondary weapon is part of choosing that weapon, which we've established comes early enough to avoid Biggs, so yes, you could choose not to use Deadeye and attack someone other than Biggs.

Declare Target

i. measure range (1-2 for Synched Turret)

ii. choose weapon (this is where you decide whether or not to use Deadeye, then select Synched Turret)

iii. declare target (this is where Biggs must be targeted if possible. If you executed step ii as described, then Biggs is only a valid target if you have a target lock on him.)

iv. pay cost (not applicable)

v. target becomes the defender. (Biggs player cries because you kicked Rebel's crutches)

This is very dicey and has been the cause of many debates locally... since the FAQ stated.. "Biggs Darklighter's ability does not trigger if the attacker chose a weapon that cannot target Biggs Darklighter." Normally, without Deadeye... this isn't an issue as a secondary weapon with a TL requirement on another ship cannot shoot Biggs, but with Deadeye, they CAN target Biggs.

The question that FFG needs to answers is this... how does one resolve the issue of the words "Can/Could" vs "May" in these scenarios? IE, which word supersedes the other? Because a ship with Synced Turret and Deadeye CAN and COULD target Biggs in this scenario, but since Deadeye says MAY , what takes precedent?

I can honestly see a valid argument for both sides.

7 minutes ago, shaunmerritt said:

This is very dicey and has been the cause of many debates locally... since the FAQ stated.. "Biggs Darklighter's ability does not trigger if the attacker chose a weapon that cannot target Biggs Darklighter." Normally, without Deadeye... this isn't an issue as a secondary weapon with a TL requirement on another ship cannot shoot Biggs, but with Deadeye, they CAN target Biggs.

The question that FFG needs to answers is this... how does one resolve the issue of the words "Can/Could" vs "May" in these scenarios? IE, which word supersedes the other? Because a ship with Synced Turret and Deadeye CAN and COULD target Biggs in this scenario, but since Deadeye says MAY , what takes precedent?

I can honestly see a valid argument for both sides.

But synced turret cannot target Biggs unless the player with Deadeye chooses to use it. The game does not know that Biggs is a legal target until the player chooses to use Deadeye. Don't skip steps or shortcut when applying rules.

If you choose not to used Deadeye then Deadeye should be completely removed from the equation. Of course that also means you couldn't later use it and target something else because then Biggs would again become a valid target.

Of course there are really two different kinds of "may" in the game. One is the "may" that is basically saying some rule doesn't apply and this "may" really is NOT optional as it is actually changing the state of the game in some small way. Then you get the "may" that is indicating you could use something or you could choose not to use that thing. In some ways Deadeye is both of those things as having it allows your Focus token to be basically be treated as a TL when it comes to targeting and paying the token cost when using that weapon; where it becomes tricky is that while spending the Focus instead of the TL is clearly optional assuming you have both on the same target you want to shoot at just having the Focus token with Deadeye opens up the targeting options regardless of the TL.

6 hours ago, shaunmerritt said:

This is very dicey and has been the cause of many debates locally... since the FAQ stated.. "Biggs Darklighter's ability does not trigger if the attacker chose a weapon that cannot target Biggs Darklighter." Normally, without Deadeye... this isn't an issue as a secondary weapon with a TL requirement on another ship cannot shoot Biggs, but with Deadeye, they CAN target Biggs.

The question that FFG needs to answers is this... how does one resolve the issue of the words "Can/Could" vs "May" in these scenarios? IE, which word supersedes the other? Because a ship with Synced Turret and Deadeye CAN and COULD target Biggs in this scenario, but since Deadeye says MAY , what takes precedent?

I can honestly see a valid argument for both sides.

they already answered that.

Biggs used to force you to use a weapon that could hit him if you had one. Say you had Dorsal Turret (dont ask why) and he was right beside you, but out of arc while still being in R1 of the guy youre about to attack with your main gun. Except Biggs interrupts and forces you to use the dorsal turret on him.
They changed it so that now you pick a weapon and choose a target and if Biggs is a valid target for that specific weapon then you must shoot him. Deadeye is an option, if you opt to not use it, then the synch turret does not have the Focus header and Biggs is not a valid target.
Unless they for some reason faq him again to include deadeye, he doesnt force you to change the way you are using your cards. He would have gotten away with it before since you HAD to change your weapon if you could hit him at all, but thats not the case anymore.

On 7/18/2017 at 4:32 PM, Vineheart01 said:

Unless they for some reason faq him again to include deadeye, he doesnt force you to change the way you are using your cards.

I think Deadeye needs the FAQ, not Biggs. They need to nail down when this happens and who gets to choose. If Deadeye goes into effect in part ii of the Declare Target step, then I'm happy, but if Biggs can force me to use it, I want it in writing. I could imagine a similar scenario happening when Deadeye meets Hotshot Co-Pilot, even if the end result of such a scenario wouldn't change much.

If Biggs could force you to use Deadeye, that would need to be FAQ'd. In the meantime, looks like he can't.

5 hours ago, cdalman said:

I could imagine a similar scenario happening when Deadeye meets Hotshot Co-Pilot,

Deadeye and Hotshot Co-Pilot don't interract. The relevant text from Hotshot Co-Pilot: " When defending , the attacker must spend 1 focus token if able." Follow the Timing Chart.

Scenario: Ship A equipped with Deadeye and Proton Torpedo, attacks Ship B equipped with Hotshot Co-Pilot

Declare Target

i. measure range (range 2-3 for Proton Torp)

ii. choose weapon (Ship A opt to use Deadeye, and select Proton Torpedo)

iii. declare target (Ship A chooses Ship B)

iv. pay cost (Ship spend focus instead of Target Lock, in accordance with Deadeye)

v. target becomes the defender (Ship B is now defending, which is when the relevant text of Hotshot Co-Pilot may trigger. No interraction between Deadeye and Hotshot Co-Pilot.)

Further Explanation: pay cost happened before ship B was defending. The focus token spent to fire the torpedo does not satisify Hotshot Co-Pilot because Hotshot Co-Pilot had not yet triggered. If ship A has another focus token, it must spend the token at some point after ship B becomes the defender.

1 hour ago, digitalbusker said:

If Biggs could force you to use Deadeye, that would need to be FAQ'd. In the meantime, looks like he can't.

I think it still should still be addressed. The FAQ on Biggs says he dooesnt trigger if the weapon cannot target Biggs. With Deadeye, the "may" indicates you have the ability to target Biggs, and Biggs ability says you cannot target the friendly ship if Biggs can be targeted. So Biggs card is an absolute, where Deadeye is an option. I think it would be valid to argue that Biggs forces you to use Deadeye if you have a focus token.

5 minutes ago, USCGrad90 said:

I think it would be valid to argue that Biggs forces you to use Deadeye if you have a focus token.

That argument is only valid in the absence of the established sequence for Declare Target, the sequence explicitly described in both the Timing Chart and the Rules Reference. Everything in X-wing is done in sequence. The attacker's option to use Deadeye is in substep ii of Declare Target. Biggs is not applicable until substep iii of Declare Target. Biggs does not retroactively affect substep ii, nor does he change the order of substeps.

6 minutes ago, jmswood said:

That argument is only valid in the absence of the established sequence for Declare Target, the sequence explicitly described in both the Timing Chart and the Rules Reference. Everything in X-wing is done in sequence. The attacker's option to use Deadeye is in substep ii of Declare Target. Biggs is not applicable until substep iii of Declare Target. Biggs does not retroactively affect substep ii, nor does he change the order of substeps.

Wouldn't Deadeye kick in in substep iii?

Assume Biggs is not on the board. If I choose to attack a ship other than the one that is locked, doesn't that happen with Deadeye in step iii? If you select that secondary weapon and have Deadeye, TL, and a focus in step ii, at that point does it just validate the weapon is able to be used? When you decide what target to attack in step iii, isn't that where Deadeye allows you to use the weapon based on TL or focus?

I guess I'm not clear on whether Deadeye triggers when you select the weapon or when you select the target, especially when you have both a focus and TL.

I'm not really debating this, Ive just never thought about a situation like this. In my normal use, I usually have Deadeye with only a focus. So I always considered that Deadeye made the weapon a valid selection in step ii, and then opened up the available targets in step iii.

Let me know whether my line of thinking makes sense.

Deadeye triggers when you select the weapon. "You may treat the ' Attack [Target Lock]: ' header as Attack [Focus]: '.'" During substep ii, you can only choose a weapon if you meet the conditons required by the attack header. The first sentence on Deadeye deals directly with those conditions; it is inherently substep ii. The second sentence of Deadeye is independent of the first sentence and inherently applies to substep iv. There is nothing in Deadeye to resolve in substep iii. Try this example on for size:

Ship A is equipped with Deadeye and Proton Torpedo, Ship B is at range 1 of Biggs. Both Biggs and Ship B are at range 2 of Ship A. Ship A has a target lock on Ship B.

Declare Target

i. measure range (2-3 for Proton Torp)

ii. choose weapon (Ship A chooses Proton Torpedo. It has the ' Attack [Target Lock] ' header. Ship A may treat it as 'Attack [Focus]', but chooses to not employ the first sentence of Deadeye.

iii. declare target. Biggs applies if the chosen weapon can target him. Ship A declared not using Deadeye during the previous substep and chose Proton Torpedo. There is only 1 valid target: Ship B.)

iv. pay cost. Proton Torpedo instructs Ship A to spend Target Lock. The second sentence of Deadeye applies. Ship A chooses to spend the focus token, setting up 4 dice attack that can reroll with a target lock and change 1 focus result to a crit.

v. target becomse the defender (Ship B, because Deadeye applies during substeps ii and iv. Biggs applies during substep iii.)

7 minutes ago, jmswood said:

Deadeye triggers when you select the weapon. "You may treat the ' Attack [Target Lock]: ' header as Attack [Focus]: '.'" During substep ii, you can only choose a weapon if you meet the conditons required by the attack header. The first sentence on Deadeye deals directly with those conditions; it is inherently substep ii. The second sentence of Deadeye is independent of the first sentence and inherently applies to substep iv. There is nothing in Deadeye to resolve in substep iii. Try this example on for size:

Ship A is equipped with Deadeye and Proton Torpedo, Ship B is at range 1 of Biggs. Both Biggs and Ship B are at range 2 of Ship A. Ship A has a target lock on Ship B.

Declare Target

i. measure range (2-3 for Proton Torp)

ii. choose weapon (Ship A chooses Proton Torpedo. It has the ' Attack [Target Lock] ' header. Ship A may treat it as 'Attack [Focus]', but chooses to not employ the first sentence of Deadeye.

iii. declare target. Biggs applies if the chosen weapon can target him. Ship A declared not using Deadeye during the previous substep and chose Proton Torpedo. There is only 1 valid target: Ship B.)

iv. pay cost. Proton Torpedo instructs Ship A to spend Target Lock. The second sentence of Deadeye applies. Ship A chooses to spend the focus token, setting up 4 dice attack that can reroll with a target lock and change 1 focus result to a crit.

v. target becomse the defender (Ship B, because Deadeye applies during substeps ii and iv. Biggs applies during substep iii.)

Here I'd disagree with you. If you're going to say Deadeye can be ignored to get around the open targetting then it should not be permitted to become active later in the attack. You either use Deadeye for your ENTIRE attack or you don't use it at all.

It's easy enough to argue that the "may" in Deadeye implies a constant change to the rule that means if the ship with Deadeye has a Focus it can (MUST if you will) target any ship with any weapon even if that weapon is normally restricted by the TL requirement. Deadeye removes that REQUIREMENT. When it comes time to pay the cost then Deadeye's "may" gives you the choice on which token to spend.

7 minutes ago, StevenO said:

Here I'd disagree with you. If you're going to say Deadeye can be ignored to get around the open targetting then it should not be permitted to become active later in the attack. You either use Deadeye for your ENTIRE attack or you don't use it at all.

It's easy enough to argue that the "may" in Deadeye implies a constant change to the rule that means if the ship with Deadeye has a Focus it can (MUST if you will) target any ship with any weapon even if that weapon is normally restricted by the TL requirement. Deadeye removes that REQUIREMENT. When it comes time to pay the cost then Deadeye's "may" gives you the choice on which token to spend.

Can you support this position with any card text or rules? I'm certain you can't.

The two parts of Deadeye are separate statements with nothing connecting them except being printed on the same card. As written, they function indelendent of each other.

If the second sentence said, "If that attack instructs you..." then triggerinng the second sentence would be dependent on whether or not you triggered the first sentence. The second sentence simply states you may do x instead of y, with no reference to the first sentence and no wording to create a dependent clause. Nothing in the rules or the card says you can only do part two if you did part 1. It is two completely separate and functionally independent abilities on one card, and they are both optional.

16 hours ago, jmswood said:

ii. choose weapon (Ship A chooses Proton Torpedo. It has the ' Attack [Target Lock] ' header. Ship A may treat it as 'Attack [Focus]', but chooses to not employ the first sentence of Deadeye.

But is Deadeye really a choice by the player at this point? The decision to treat it one way or the other is based on who you want to target. Because you have a locked ship and a focus token, doesn't the choice on whether the weapon uses a TL or focus come during selection of a target?

I think there is enough doubt for me that I'd like to see FFG adress it. Your argument is good, so they may agree with it.

Substep ii is when the game rules become aware of the Attack header, so that's when you have to decide to change it with Deadeye if you're going to.

Hi guys.
First hello to everyone, you are an encouraging crowd. Love to see the community being that active and constructive as FFG gives a lot to discuss

I'd like to throw in a detail which hasn't mentioned yet in all these debates to my notice.

There's a difference in " Attack [Target Lock]" and " Attack [Focus]" in terms of target selection. Former has the restriction to only give viable targets with corresponding red target lock tokens while the other does not have this restriction .

A ship using a weapon with Attack (focus) can select any target in arc and range. The timing chart is as this:

Declare Target

i. measure range

ii. choose weapon (Ship chooses Unguided Rockets. It has the ' Attack [Focus] ' header. Say it has a focus so condition is met)

iii. declare target (any ship in arc and range qualifies as viable ship)

iv. pay cost. (Unguided Rockets don't instruct to spend a focus.)

v. target becomes the defender

In this scenario you have to choose Biggs as a target when he is in range to the declared target in step iii.

Now from the reading of the first part of deadeye:

"you may treat the "Attack [Target Lock]" header as "Attack [Focus]"

It lets you use the "Attack [Focus]" game effect instead which is described above.

The condition is checked in step ii. before Biggs comes into play (step iii.)
So when you use deadeye in step ii. you have to select Biggs in step iii. if he is in range and arc.

You still have the option to not use deadeye in step ii. and instead use a secondary with a target lock on another ship in case you have one. Then Biggs cannot interfere in step iii. a s FFG made clear that Biggs cannot force a specific weapon selection.

In step iv. (pay costs) the second part from Deadeye (which is independent) allows now to spend a focus instead of spending a target lock.

So this way the attacking ship can surpass Biggs ability and attack another ship.

From my reading this should be a viable rule interpretation although I admittedly don't like it. In my oppinion it would give deadeye too much power.
Any thoughts?

I still don't get how you can measure range for a specific weapon in the first part of the attack when you don't choose your weapon until the second part.

Would it be more correct to say we are measuring range to all suspected valid targets?

sorry if this is a digretion, I haven't agreed with the turn sequence and especially the attack sequence since it was printed in the FAQ.

You can measure range and arc to all enemy ships before you choose your weapon anyway.

In Support of TL/DE/Focus to not attack Biggs:

IMHO, Why would Pay Cost require a separate step if not to simply support this premise? Otherwise pay cost would have been incorporated in the select weapon step.