13 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

great, they didn't read the rules ref either

the head TO didn't design the game OR write the rules to it. A TO is a TO, the weight of their rulings is neither sacred nor more significant other than the fact that they're expected to have read the rules (which they clearly have not because, again, it's outlined with explicit clarity on page 8)

****, I remember the Omega Leader thread I started. He seemed complicated, but all the answers could be definitively answered by the rules reference. Then some guy emails somebody at FFG and their answer differs not only from what could be found in the rules ref but also the final, actual FAQ

This is why we have rules to begin with, people

I HATE the TO system. TOs should NEVER have the ability to interpret rules, nor need to. The rules should be well enough worded, there should be protocol for asking online, so that within a week of releases, there are no standing questions.

See Magic.

2 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

I HATE the TO system. TOs should NEVER have the ability to interpret rules, nor need to. The rules should be well enough worded, there should be protocol for asking online, so that within a week of releases, there are no standing questions.

See Magic.

Actually, they kinda do need the ability to interpret rules, even in Magic. The very purpose of a TO/judge/whatever is to interpret the rules for players in their tournament. The difference is Magic has a judge program helping to make sure all of their judges are doing it right, while we get stuck with huge variance in the quality of our event TOs and judges.

And Magic has far more explicitly worded rules and cards. It's usually entirely clear what a card does so long as you understand how they template things.

14 hours ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I've never understood why people have so much difficulty with this one. There is a difference between "affected by," which is passive, and "able to benefit from," which is active. There is room between those two things for a Huge ship not to be able to have focus tokens (because having a focus token assigned is passive, which can't happen), but still be able to benefit from focus tokens if some other effect permits it (like Esege).

It's not that hard to understand the ruling. It's not ideal, no, but it's not hard to justify.

(Making a note of this for re-write in my "re-write Huge/Epic rules project.")

Nah, you know exactly why: Sloppy wording. Lets review:

(Page 4; Huge Ship Rules)---------------------------------------------------------

Focus, Evade, and Stress tokens

Focus, evade, and stress tokens do not affect huge ships. When a huge ship
receives any of these tokens, immediately remove them and return them to
the token supply.

---------------------------------------------------------------------(End)

So right out of the gate, you are dead wrong... Huge Ships can have /or/ be assigned Focus Tokens! It's right there in the rules. Now, when this happens... They are immediately discarded. And since they have no effect (if they were assigned and somehow dodge the auto-discard rule (Esege, anyone), they do not get to modify dice.

20 hours ago, Stay On The Leader said:

I 100% agree that should not be able to use Minefield Mapper and Extra Munitions to drop 2 bombs from one bomb upgrade card in deployment.

However the indications I have are that it's going to ultimately go the other way and just be one of those 'because FFG said so' things that contradicts the rules as written.

And because there are numerous examples where things don't work the way they are written to work is why we need an FAQ, and why just repeatedly pointing to the rules and going 'read this, dumbass' achieves nothing.

I agree.

9 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

I HATE the TO system. TOs should NEVER have the ability to interpret rules, nor need to. The rules should be well enough worded, there should be protocol for asking online, so that within a week of releases, there are no standing questions.

See Magic.

HaHa, LOL, ROTFLOL.

That is funny. Sorry, wrong game.

5 hours ago, lazycomet said:

So right out of the gate, you are dead wrong... Huge Ships can have /or/ be assigned Focus Tokens! It's right there in the rules. Now, when this happens... They are immediately discarded. And since they have no effect (if they were assigned and somehow dodge the auto-discard rule (Esege, anyone), they do not get to modify dice.

I understand the argument.

It's just not difficult to get around, and thus it's not difficult to have a conception of why Esege works.

2 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I understand the argument.

It's just not difficult to get around, and thus it's not difficult to have a conception of why Esege works.

Not difficult no. It's because FFG said so

8 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I understand the argument.

It's just not difficult to get around, and thus it's not difficult to have a conception of why Esege works.

But do you get the argument? I'm not sure by the following statement: "why Esege Works."

1. Esege DOES work. Nearby Huge Ship may now use Esege's Focus token as if it were their own.

2. Huge Ship attempts to use Esege's Focus token NOT as if it were Esege's token, but as if it were their (Huge Ship) own.

3. Huge Ship spends Esege's Focus token, which has no effect on Huge Ships.

4. Nothing happens; token is spent/discarded.

9 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

Not difficult no. It's because FFG said so

Show me in the FAQ/Errata.

This game could use a FAQ, but something with a bit more sophistication and common sense than the one that got "leaked". This game doesn't need ships getting nerfed into the ground, while at the same time all big meta archtypes barely take a dent.

1 hour ago, lazycomet said:

But do you get the argument? I'm not sure by the following statement: "why Esege Works."

1. Esege DOES work. Nearby Huge Ship may now use Esege's Focus token as if it were their own.

2. Huge Ship attempts to use Esege's Focus token NOT as if it were Esege's token, but as if it were their (Huge Ship) own.

3. Huge Ship spends Esege's Focus token, which has no effect on Huge Ships.

4. Nothing happens; token is spent/discarded.

Yes, I understand the argument.

Unlike some, however, I am able to understand that there is a huge amount of wiggle room in your Step 3, such that "spending a focus token to change a die result" may very well not fall into what the rule means when it says "focus and evade tokens don't affect Huge ships." (Thus invalidating your Step 4.)

Maybe that's because of my training as a lawyer, or maybe it's just because I'm just naturally flexible enough to understand more than one conflicting idea at a time, but I do understand the argument.

How about one for Palpatine and Cad Bane?