3 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

... Sigh.

Don't you worry, I will never let go of that beautiful, beautiful phrase!

Just now, GreenDragoon said:

Don't you worry, I will never let go of that beautiful, beautiful phrase!

But that is my worry. Don't mind me. I just hate being wrong about people.

6 minutes ago, prauxim said:

Remember that Nien's time in the meta came, went, and was over for 6 months before FFG ruled multiple tokens are dealt individually, during which time we had the Illuminati's (wrong) interpretation

Not to belabour the other point too much, but for many of the things that end up needing FFG clarification, none of the rulings are really "wrong", it's just FFG arbitrarily decided something different later and that's fine.

It's a minor point but fear of being "wrong" and the community reading more into these rulings than the effective dice rolls that they are has a chilling effect on things like marshalls and the community groups making necessary rulings in the first place. Like there's still stuff we don't have *any* rulings for because everyone is too scared to be "wrong" later and that's entirely missing the point in these FAQs...

Ultimately it's fine with me if some tournaments rule Padme one way and others differently. It's better if the community agrees on either way in advance. It's the best if FFG eventually clarifies in the rules and/or an FAQ. In none of these cases does it really matter if the ruling at each step is consistent with the previous one.

/soapbox

6 minutes ago, prauxim said:

Is there even an official channel to do that?

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/contact/rules/

worth submitting instead of debating, or at least in addition too.

3 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

But that is my worry. Don't mind me. I just hate being wrong about people.

Aw come on, it's just good natured fun. I didn't realize that you were really bothered by that.

@punkUser I agree.

Building on that, also probably important (or at least very helpful) for TOs to publish their rulings as far in advance as possible, in case someone was planning on taking something that relies on a trick that nobody's sure works or not.

23 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

Performing an attack is not specified when it occurs in the rules reference. It just talks a bit about theme (which doesn't matter for RAW). Therefore, when I roll the die for Porkins' ability, if I verbally go through the steps of declaring the target (myself) etc., it's an attack. Porkins is in his own bullseye, since he is range 0 of himself and things can be in your bullseye at range 0. Furthermore, the bullseye is printed on his cardboard base so he must be inside it. Therefore, if I equip Marksmanship to Porkins, every time I use his ability and roll a hit I may change it to a crit and never suffer damage with him ever.

I'm two standard deviations above average height so you have to accept this from me.

I'm 6'6", well over 301 pounds, and built like a slightly larger truck, and I agree.

6 hours ago, Brunas said:

I uhh... disagree? Quoting these for everyone else, I'm sure you're familiar:

So to make sure I understand your argument, basically because it's not a focus result until after it's modified, it doesn't count as a focus result during the dice modification?

If I have midnight locked, can I use CLT to add a focus result? Pretty clearly no right, even though the dice result isn't there to be modified yet.

Padme is slightly different, because it's not a complete shut down of dice abilities, but the idea that you can add a focus result, which we all agree is a dice modification, then claim to have not modified a focus result seems... incorrect.

is there a reason it matters?

"I have modified this focus result that i just added. Padme doesn't say I can't modify the same result multiple times. I will now spend a force to modify that very same focus result to make it a hit."

1 minute ago, skotothalamos said:

is there a reason it matters?

"I have modified this focus result that i just added. Padme doesn't say I can't modify the same result multiple times. I will now spend a force to modify that very same focus result to make it a hit."

At this point, I think we're all just trying to carry enough wood to crucify a truck on top of a hill.

12 minutes ago, Brunas said:

At this point, I think we're all just trying to carry enough wood to crucify a truck on top of a hill.

I really don't want to know how much wood you are carrying after arguing rules on the ffg forums.

@GreenDragoon, more shots total is my style, and I can't say it's made me win anymore than a cautious player wins. I think you might be feeling some conf-bias.

I can recall a specific game with quad T70's vs some scum Jank (I'm talking Dalan with a couple DMS Z's and something else), and I fired an ENORMOUS number of 3/4 dice unmodified attacks to no avail.

He won that game with both Z's still alive, and granted, some decent green dice, but still.

More shots should theoretically bend your odds, but that hasn't necessarily proven true for me (and I've floated my dice, btw...)

1 hour ago, Jeff Wilder said:

FWIW, I wouldn't hit "Report."

I would call it in a heartbeat. And I would ruthlessly shame and mock anybody who did it at any event I attended or judged.

Wait, are people saying that adding an 👁 from CLT with Padmé involved counts as modifying an 👁 for the purposes of her ability?

1 minute ago, Chumbalaya said:

Wait, are people saying that adding an 👁 from CLT with Padmé involved counts as modifying an 👁 for the purposes of her ability?

Disturbingly they are.

2 hours ago, skotothalamos said:

is there a reason it matters?

"I have modified this focus result that i just added. Padme doesn't say I can't modify the same result multiple times. I will now spend a force to modify that very same focus result to make it a hit."

This is seems pretty relevant. Even if adding the CLT [eye] is modifying an eye result, they should still be able to modify that same result again.

If a ship with Lone Wolf rerolled an [eye] in to an [eye] couldn’t it then spend an evade token and modify that same dice again? It’s only modifying one dice.

I like whichever ruling makes jedi more sad

9 minutes ago, svelok said:

I like whichever ruling makes jedi more sad

Her ability doesn't work on Jedi.

But Jedi do take a stress since she is so annoying and because she moved for a Vote of No Confidence in Chancellor Velorum's leadership.

Unless it's Anakin.

Then her ability turns all his focus results into blanks.

And makes him fly off the board.

28 minutes ago, Phelan Boots said:

This is seems pretty relevant. Even if adding the CLT [eye] is modifying an eye result, they should still be able to modify that same result again.

If a ship with Lone Wolf rerolled an [eye] in to an [eye] couldn’t it then spend an evade token and modify that same dice again? It’s only modifying one dice.

We're now into so many layers of irony I don't know what's a real question or not, so just in case lmao

No, remember padme cares about the number of results modified, not the number of dice

I have to admit, I don’t see adding a focus to the results as being the modified focus. Maybe I’m having trouble focusing, but... modding that added focus would be modifying a focus. Changing a hit to a focus, is not modifying a focus. So changing a nothing into a focus is different here? Sorry, the picture I’m painting might be a bit fuzzy and out of focus, but I think it makes sense to me that adding a focus result isn’t modifying a focus.

edit: and yeah, rolling a focus result into another focus result means you can not modify that focus result again because in case you haven’t been focusing, you’ve done modified that focus result already

just add your confused reacts here...

1 hour ago, Chumbalaya said:

Wait, are people saying that adding an 👁 from CLT with Padmé involved counts as modifying an 👁 for the purposes of her ability?

Wait...its possible to use the 👁️‍🗨️ emoji instead of having to type out every letter of the word "focus".
How is this the first time this has happened in 1055 Pages?

So much time & effort wasted. Sad.

11 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

Wait...its possible to use the 👁️‍🗨️ emoji instead of having to type out every letter of the word "focus".
How is this the first time this has happened in 1055 Pages?

So much time & effort wasted. Sad.

one small comment for a poster, one giant leap for posterkind

Wait so if Luminara changes a hit to a focus does that use up that ship’s lone focus mod? Is that what I’m hearing? 😂

7 hours ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Are we doing rules shenanigans?

What exactly is a "Game Effect"?

There are multiple cards that reference "game effect(s)" but the term is never defined explicitly.

Is 'being on a rock' a "game effect"? Is spending a target lock a "game effect"? Is having a primary weapon value of 3 a "game effect"?

Before we answer this, what is a “game”?

6 hours ago, Kieransi said:

Performing an attack is not specified when it occurs in the rules reference. It just talks a bit about theme (which doesn't matter for RAW). Therefore, when I roll the die for Porkins' ability, if I verbally go through the steps of declaring the target (myself) etc., it's an attack. Porkins is in his own bullseye, since he is range 0 of himself and things can be in your bullseye at range 0. Furthermore, the bullseye is printed on his cardboard base so he must be inside it. Therefore, if I equip Marksmanship to Porkins, every time I use his ability and roll a hit I may change it to a crit and never suffer damage with him ever.

I'm two standard deviations above average height so you have to accept this from me.

Just the right height for a pecan check.

1 hour ago, SpiderMana said:

Wait so if Luminara changes a hit to a focus does that use up that ship’s lone focus mod? Is that what I’m hearing? 😂

I believe so lol