What happens if my opponent claims and then I use Coercion? Does the effect last until opponent's first turn next round? Can they discard the event targeted at the end of the round?

What happens if I have a multi-action turn and play two Coercions with different target Events?

Why did FFG make dumb cards like this?

You have to play the chosen Event if able as your next action.

So if your opponent claims his next action will be in the new turn. If they don't discard the card by then, they are not prevented by the card or the rules in discarding the event you chose during the end phase. However, if they draw their second copy of that event then I think it would be quite reasonable to expect them to play that card in their next turn as they would be able to play that event in their next action.

If you play multiple actions then on your opponents next turn they have to play both, but as they can only play one they would get the choice of the two you selected. There could be some scope to claim that the last event chosen would have to be played as this would supersede the play of the first card chosen. But as neither option seems as good as waiting a turn why wouldn't you? If you pick a card that removes dice, you will still have the other card to play next turn after all. You look at their cards and pick an event, you should be able to control the order of events as it were.

35 minutes ago, Amanal said:

However, if they draw their second copy of that event then I think it would be quite reasonable to expect them to play that card in their next turn as they would be able to play that event in their next action.

Except it's not 'that event', it's a different card. Except you maybe can't actually prove that. I think we should go with ' Why did FFG make dumb cards like this?' Seriously though, I'd say that it's a reasonable to assume they mean 'a copy of that event', but we really shouldn't have to assume.

Honestly, the whole thing is just kind of a mess.

Yea ill also stand with "this exact card" interpretation. Cards in SW:D are instantiated - same as you cannot choose what dice to remove if one of two same upgrades are removed.

1 hour ago, Vitalis said:

same as you cannot choose what dice to remove if one of two same upgrades are removed.

Which is not true.

If a player has two copies of the same upgrade on a character, they do not need to keep track of which die is associated with which card, unless there is a reason to do so (like Con Artist). When both dice are in a dice pool and an ability targets one of their cards, the player resolving the ability chooses which die it affects. - RR.1.4 p.9

4 hours ago, Abyss said:

Except it's not 'that event', it's a different card. Except you maybe can't actually prove that. I think we should go with ' Why did FFG make dumb cards like this?' Seriously though, I'd say that it's a reasonable to assume they mean 'a copy of that event', but we really shouldn't have to assume.

Honestly, the whole thing is just kind of a mess.

Yeah, maybe, so you just get a ruling off the TO and move on.

2 hours ago, NetCop said:

Which is not true.

If a player has two copies of the same upgrade on a character, they do not need to keep track of which die is associated with which card, unless there is a reason to do so (like Con Artist). When both dice are in a dice pool and an ability targets one of their cards, the player resolving the ability chooses which die it affects. - RR.1.4 p.9

Which is true for any other case...you know you can have more than one character in this game right?

1 hour ago, Vitalis said:

Which is true for any other case...you know you can have more than one character in this game right?

There is no other case when you don't have to keep tracking your characters' and upgrades' dice even when you play with 4 the same characters.

If I am using multiples of the same character, do I have to remember which dice came from which character?
••Yes. Make sure that each character’s dice are positioned in such a way that it is obvious which character they came from. If a character is defeated, its specific dice must be removed from the pool, if they are there.

9 hours ago, gokubb said:

What happens if my opponent claims and then I use Coercion? Does the effect last until opponent's first turn next round? Can they discard the event targeted at the end of the round?

What happens if I have a multi-action turn and play two Coercions with different target Events?

Why did FFG make dumb cards like this?

1. No, it does not go over to the next round.

2. They have to play either one of the events you chose as the next action, repeating to the 2nd event their second action.

3. This was probably designed to slow down the complaints people had with Action cheating. You can't throw down Ambush upgrades on Rey, you have to play Noble Sacrifice (as an example).

So, responses have different interpretations and there's logic to them all. No FAQ yet, so how are tourney organizers going to know what to do? Really, FFG, cards like this need to be thought out better. Wording is complete crap. Unforeseen interactions between cards can be easy to forgive. But you've got an unforeseen interaction on this card with a core mechanic. C'mon...do better.

6 hours ago, NetCop said:

There is no other case when you don't have to keep tracking your characters' and upgrades' dice even when you play with 4 the same characters.

If I am using multiples of the same character, do I have to remember which dice came from which character?
••Yes. Make sure that each character’s dice are positioned in such a way that it is obvious which character they came from. If a character is defeated, its specific dice must be removed from the pool, if they are there.

You do realize you just contradicted you own words within one post?

The Destiny FB group got a response from the developers. Basically, once you get hit with Coercion:

1. If you take an action, it must be to play that event
2. You are not required to take an action; you may pass without playing the event
3. The effect expires at the end of the round

1 and 2 are a rather creative read of the cards. 3 is completely unsupported, but that's FFG for you. So basically, when you get hit with Coercion you can either play the event immediately, pass until the event can be better played (common for removal events) or just pass out the entire turn (which is rough, but better than eating your own Noble Sacrifice or Price of Failure on turn one).

Did they get an answer to the "Spot a _________" and not having enough money to play the event? So , can you play an event that says spot a ______ when you don't have a _________? I argued you could, but my opponent always says no.

I assume you are let off the hook if you don't have enough money to play an event, though? (AKA, coercion essentially fails)

11 minutes ago, Traxlenak said:

Did they get an answer to the "Spot a _________" and not having enough money to play the event? So , can you play an event that says spot a ______ when you don't have a _________? I argued you could, but my opponent always says no.

I assume you are let off the hook if you don't have enough money to play an event, though? (AKA, coercion essentially fails)

Spotting is not a play restriction, it is part of the effect. You can play the card even if you cannot spot the character, but it will do nothing.

If you can't afford the card, you can't play it, and "if able" comes into play. Don't pick something your opponent can't afford

What I need to stop my opponents from becoming salty and telling me to "learn the game" is a statement like "the only time you are unable to play an event is when you cannot pay for it".

It's funny, I played the card a bunch because it's one of my new favorites, but I have thought about taking it out of all the decks I play it in just because I don't want to argue with people about how it works.

Ex. First time I played it:
Me - "Coercion. You have to play Pinned Down next."
Opponent - "I can't play that card, because I can't spot a vehicle."
Me - "Well, fine, we will go with that. I guess you will have to play Isolation next, then."
Opponent - "But you don't have any character dice on the battlefield...You don't understand this game do you..."

I then proceeded to tell him that it is pretty straightforward in the rules that you can play an event even if it doesn't do anything.
He never believed me, and I wasn't gonna cheat the card back into my hand to go through that argument again.

Funny thing is, same sort of thing happened in person just the next day. Much less salty because we have played a bunch and we like each other, but he still didn't think that it could be played like it's supposed to be.

I’m actually not sure you can’t play an event even if you can’t pay the cost! From the RRG:

”A player can attempt to play a card even if they do not currently have the resources for it, as the cost printed on the card can be altered by in-game effects.
Once a card’s cost has been paid, the card is resolved based on its type.“

So I think if you play Coersion and pick an event more expensive than all their resources, they just discard the event and lose all their resources (do as much as possible). This is a pretty nasty card!

And yeah, I feel your pain. I have often stopped playing certain stuff just because my opponents made it impossible for me. I had a situation where this really annoying guy beat me with a Luke/Rey deck in a tournament, winning due to mostly luck, and condescendingly explained to me why I lost after the match. He also got mad at me and said I should be disqualified for talking during one of his later games, even though it was a “relaxed” format tournament (says talking is allowed in the RRG). So yeah, a real jerk. Anyway, he made that game really painful for me, because during one of the breaks where he wasn’t making me wait while he laboriously overexplained his chain of seven or eight actions, I played Force Misdirection against his blanks. He argued that blanks aren’t a symbol (even though it says so in the RRG) and then when I pulled it up said that it must have been changed in the latest version... the whole experience was so unpleasant that I haven’t played Force Misdirection since.

I love playing force misdirection on blanks. Also, you need to play it again, because it is one of the best hero blue removal in the game. I will always play it with Kanan now, because of his 6 different sides, and the ability to focus to whatever you want, then play the card, as the same action. (If there is a focus on his character die)

23 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

I’m actually not sure you can’t play an event even if you can’t pay the cost! From the RRG:

”A player can attempt to play a card even if they do not currently have the resources for it, as the cost printed on the card can be altered by in-game effects.
Once a card’s cost has been paid, the card is resolved based on its type.“

So I think if you play Coersion and pick an event more expensive than all their resources, they just discard the event and lose all their resources (do as much as possible). This is a pretty nasty card!

Nope. The line just before the one you quote says: "If they do not have enough resources to pay, then the card is not played."

If you don't have enough resources, you can't play the card. You can attempt to play it, but if you can't pay, you can't play it. And if you don't play the card, you don't pay for it, even partially. The "do as much as you can" applies to resolving effects, not playing a card in the first place.

38 minutes ago, Traxlenak said:

It's funny, I played the card a bunch because it's one of my new favorites, but I have thought about taking it out of all the decks I play it in just because I don't want to argue with people about how it works.

I can understand this. The number of people who play this game without understanding the most fundamental rules is staggering. I just don't try and play online at all - we've got a good, knowledgeable local group which will educate people over time. It's not worth my time to play with a bunch of random strangers who can't be bothered to learn the rules.

54 minutes ago, Traxlenak said:

What I need to stop my opponents from becoming salty and telling me to "learn the game" is a statement like "the only time you are unable to play an event is when you cannot pay for it".

Here's the sequence of rules that matter here:

pg 14, Play a Card From Hand: Before a player plays a card, they should first check to see if there are any play restrictions on the card. If there are, and those conditions are not met, then the card cannot be played.

pg 21, Play Restrictions: Play restrictions sometimes appear on a card and are marked by the word “only.” A player cannot play the card unless the play restriction is met.

pg 21: Spotting: Some cards require a player to spot a specific game element in order to use its ability...If a player is not able to spot the required element, then the card does nothing.

So: Play restrictions stop you from playing the card. Play restrictions are identified by "only". Spotting does not include "only", so it's not a play restriction. Spotting is required to use the ability, not play it, and spotting even tells you that if you can't, then the card does nothing - not that you can't play it.

Throw that on your clipboard and amaze your friends

If you read coercion:

"They must play that event as their next action, if able."

Passing make sense since PASS is not an action, it's an option. So you could read this card that way:

"On opponent next turn, if they decide to take an action instead of passing, their action must be "Play a card" and play that specific event"

Then there is the restriction part wich is a little bit unclear:

"Before a player plays a card, they should 1st check to see if there are any play restrictions on the card. If there are, and those conditions are not met, then the card cannot be played. "

I think the only real restriction right bow are (Exemple):

-Upgrades on specific colored characters

-Maybe "spot something" might not be a restriction...

Chak

4 hours ago, Chakan99939 said:

If you read coercion:

"They must play that event as their next action, if able."

Passing make sense since PASS is not an action, it's an option. So you could read this card that way:

"On opponent next turn, if they decide to take an action instead of passing, their action must be "Play a card" and play that specific event"

Then there is the restriction part wich is a little bit unclear:

"Before a player plays a card, they should 1st check to see if there are any play restrictions on the card. If there are, and those conditions are not met, then the card cannot be played. "

I think the only real restriction right bow are (Exemple):

-Upgrades on specific colored characters

-Maybe "spot something" might not be a restriction...

Chak

The text of Coercion doesn't give the ability to pass without eventually needing to play the card as an action. And, even if they did pass, since it isn't an action, it doesn't clear the requirement of Coercion. It's not the opponent's next available action , it's the next action they take.

1 hour ago, gokubb said:

The text of Coercion doesn't give the ability to pass without eventually needing to play the card as an action. And, even if they did pass, since it isn't an action, it doesn't clear the requirement of Coercion. It's not the opponent's next available action , it's the next action they take.

It is confirmed by emails (for now) that you can pass Coertion since: "They must play that event as their next action, if able." Action. If you pass you are not making any action. But you need to pass for the rest of the round since any action you would like to take gonna be affected by Coertion.

As for the "spot something" or Isolation for example - IMO Coertion goes around those - you can play it - it just does not do anything since no action on that event is satisfied.

8 hours ago, Buhallin said:

The Destiny FB group got a response from the developers. Basically, once you get hit with Coercion:

1. If you take an action, it must be to play that event
2. You are not required to take an action; you may pass without playing the event
3. The effect expires at the end of the round

1 and 2 are a rather creative read of the cards. 3 is completely unsupported, but that's FFG for you. So basically, when you get hit with Coercion you can either play the event immediately, pass until the event can be better played (common for removal events) or just pass out the entire turn (which is rough, but better than eating your own Noble Sacrifice or Price of Failure on turn one).

As for 3 it actually makes sense. If effects would linger from round to round you could use "It binds..." for like 3 turns in a row without playing anything and the get -3 resource cost.

1 minute ago, Vitalis said:

As for 3 it actually makes sense. If effects would linger from round to round you could use "It binds..." for like 3 turns in a row without playing anything and the get -3 resource cost.

Not really. It Binds All Things is a before trigger, and specifically reduces the cost of the upgrade which is played to trigger it. If there were some generic thing that said "Exhaust to decrease the cost of the next upgrade you play by 1" then it would be right. But there's no such effect.

There is also no rule that delayed effects expire at the end of the round. There's nothing in either the rules or the card that says it should expire. But that's FFG for you. I have never seen a game company that is less willing to follow their own rules.