15 minutes ago, Crimsonwarlock said:

Why do effects have to happen during a step? The FAQ clarification (emphasis clarification, not rules change/errata) on HARPOONED! even goes so far as to detail that it's effect happens between steps.

Because Harpooned isn't part of the attack . The steps for resolving an attack don't take into account other things happening outside of the attack because until harpooned, there wasn't such a thing, and attacks resolved from beginning to end without "otherthings" happening.

For a MTG analogy, Harpooned is the first "instant" type of effect that gets between established timing. Until Harpooned, that I can think of (and please feel free to correct me), there wasn't anything that occurred outside of the "you do your thing then I do my thing then we move to the next thing" of established game phases. But harpooned has to be resolved during an attack, but separately from it, since it isn't part of it.

Seriously, I'm done. Good luck.

So clearly, we either need two new phases to Step 7, the "deal damage" step, of the timing chart... or a new step in between 6 and 7. My suggestion, based on my understanding of the rulings for Harpooned and TLT (and cards like them):

STEP 6.5 - Post-Compare Results, Pre-Deal Damage Effects

1. Trigger card effects that refer to specific dice results after comparison (Harpooned)
2. Trigger card effects that modify or cancel dice results after comparison (TLT, Ion Cannon, Bossk etc)

Though I think I am correct now, I also thought I was previously correct in saying Harpooned! always triggers not long ago after the FAQ release.

What we need, what we all need, is FFG to put one of these two phrases into the FAQ for this condition card:

• This condition card always resolves if at least 1 critical hit result was left uncancelled in Step 6 iv.
• This condition card only resolves if at least 1 critical hit result was left uncancelled in Step 6 iv and the defender has initiative.

I do sincerely thank all who've participated in this extensive conversation, especially @JasonCole for his solid contributions to contradict my interpretation of this messy condition (pun absolutely intended). Without adversity to our opinions our understanding cannot evolve and we cannot grow.

I really f'ing hate Harpewpewpewned ! . Such over-complicated trash, and because it's from the most power-creeped Missile/Torpedo to date, it's almost the only one that's wise to play.

//

My position is thus: TLT cannot hit in the first place unless there are uncancelled crit results (at least in the cases we're interested in). So there necessarily must have been an uncancelled crit, ergo Harpooned! triggers.

That's partly a position adopted because I think that's what the FAQ was intended to show. I don't think the FAQ was intended to show that it ought to come down to initiative (even though I think there's a pretty sizable weight that this would be the best RAW way to interpret the interaction, and that's how I viewed the rules before the FAQ). I think if they'd intended Initiative to matter in the interaction, they'd have said that it should when commenting on it. As FFG said that TLT *can* trigger Harpooned! but they didn't mention initiative, I think they intend for TLT to always trigger Honpaerod! when there is a relevant crit.

//

Further, in terms of "game fairness" rather than "rules as written" I don't think Initiative should impact the interaction. This isn't a rules argument, but I think there would be a fundamental unfairness if in some games the interaction works, and in some it doesn't. I can't off the top of my head think of interactions which are quite as skewed as that within one list. An example I saw on here lately with Guri vs Old Terroch is a bit different, in my "moral" assessment. With most initiative-based interactions, while one player tends to be favored over another, there are usually trade offs situations where that differs. Move first and you can block. Shoot first and you can maybe land meaningful crits. Even odder interactions (Valen Rudor defending against a Tactician ship) have cases where it'd be good to be on either side of the initiative (Tactician with initiative prevents Valen from his actions when already at Range 2, but doesn't do anything if Valen moves into Range 2 with his action, Valen with Initiative can move out of Range 2, but pays a price if he moves into Range 2).

Harpooned being "you always lose-the-interaction with initiative" and "you always win the interaction if you defer" is irksome to me, and I think unfair. Before the FAQ, I certainly thought that's where the rules stood, but I greatly disliked it and wanted it settled either way or the other, no matter which side. I want, as much as possible, for the game to work the same way with and without initiative, and personally find that the least confusing.

//

This is, I'll admit, a somewhat wishy-washy, somewhat RAI take on this.

//

I'll add: I'd also greatly appreciate FFG spelling out exactly when things like TLT trigger in the flowchart. Is it before Step 7.i? After Step 6.iv?

Personally, I'd choose to view Harpooned! as triggering immediately after 6.iv, and TLT (etc.) triggering immediately before 7.i, but I don't really have evidence for it. I just think it'd make things cleaner. Like Roark Garnet happening at the start of the combat phase, compared to Torkil Mux happening at the end of the activation phase. We know how they interact, since the windows were made explicit and different.