It clearly isn't certain from the Timing Chart in the FAQ or anywhere else in the rules how this works.

Therefore the only sensible option is to play it how it should work until it becomes certain.

To my mind there is only one possible interpretation of how it should work. 1 damage from the TLT, nothing else, all done.

18 hours ago, Juunon said:

Even if we leave this up to the player with initiative to decide, EmeraldBeacon points out that not knowing who controls the harpooned condition makes a significant difference. In order for one to be acceptable, the other has to be defined. Otherwise the person who has initiative gets to decide nothing.

It is not up to the player with initiative to decide, the player with initiative resolves their ability first. Attacker has TLT trigger to resolve and the defender has Harpooned! to resolve. Whichever player has initiative resolves their respective ability first: both trigger when the attack hits (before the deal damage step and after compare dice results step).

It is extremely clear that the Harpooned! condition is controlled by the ship it is assigned to as the card starts: "When you are hit by an attack, [...]" and in X-Wing "you" means the ship to which the card is assigned.

Unfortunately @MrParsons, how one thinks a rule "should" resolve is not a president by which tournaments and events are to be ruled. Both cards resolve their respective abilities when the attack hits, a step that occurs before dealing damage and after the compare dice results step [Defined by the FAQ flowchart as STEP 6 IV] - this is why initiative matters per what I just said above.

The FAQ does provide a rules reference for how to handle each player having an ability to resolve off of the same trigger/in the same timing window:

Quote

Q: If both players have effect that resolve at the same time (or from the same trigger), which player resolves their abilities first?

A: The player with initiative resolves all abilities he would like to resolve, then the other player resolves all abilities he would like to resolve.

X-Wing FAQ Version 4.40 / Effective 11.06.2017 | Page 23

In the case of TLT, Harpooned!, and others: "abilities he would like to resolve" is not actually a choice as neither card features the option "may." Essentially the game state forces you to "like to resolve" the triggered ability.

13 minutes ago, ZealuxMyr said:

It is not up to the player with initiative to decide, the player with initiative resolves their ability first. Attacker has TLT trigger to resolve and the defender has Harpooned! to resolve. Whichever player has initiative resolves their respective ability first: both trigger when the attack hits (before the deal damage step and after compare dice results step).

That's my point though. As EmeraldBeacon stated earlier, it's not clear who controls the Harpooned! condition. If the defender controls the condition card, then you're absolutely right in that the initiative player resolves their ability first. If the attacker controls the condition card however, then the attacker controls both TLT and Harpooned cards and therefore should be able to choose which to resolve first.

5 minutes ago, Juunon said:

That's my point though. As EmeraldBeacon stated earlier, it's not clear who controls the Harpooned! condition. If the defender controls the condition card, then you're absolutely right in that the initiative player resolves their ability first. If the attacker controls the condition card however, then the attacker controls both TLT and Harpooned cards and therefore should be able to choose which to resolve first.

23 minutes ago, ZealuxMyr said:

It is extremely clear that the Harpooned! condition is controlled by the ship it is assigned to as the card starts: "When you are hit by an attack, [...]" and in X-Wing "you" means the ship to which the card is assigned.

There should be zero debate on who controls the condition card. X-Wing is very clear on what "you" in a card assigned to a ship means...

Edit: Harpoon Missiles read: "If this attack hits, after the attack resolves, assign the "Harpooned!" Condition to the defender." Thus Harpooned! is assigned to the defender and "you" further emphasizes that the defender controls the condition card.

Further edit: If the attacker controlled the condition card only the attacker would be able to access, trigger, and resolve the "Action: Discard this card. Then roll 1 attack die. On a [hit] or [critical hit] result, suffer 1 damage." BUT as the defender controls the condition because it is assigned to the defender they are the only one that can access, trigger, and resolve the action portion of this card.

Just to point out that Xizor can't be used as a reference at all... Xizor say the friendly ship suffer the effect. But with TLT or Ion Canon, there is no more HIT or CRIT to suffer the effect from.

Harpoon do not reference suffering something that must still exist when the time to suffer stuff come. It just check is there still a CRIT when the attack hit, yes then do that.

Also Xizor is far from using the same wording, Xizor do not care if the attack hit, it is past that point, he care if there is HIT or CRIT to suffer.

And if you look at the chart, Harpoon and TLT happen in between step 6 and step 7 "Did the attack hit". Xizor happen during step 7 if there is something to suffer. They are not related at all.

Xizor is precedent for the timing no more no less.

Quote

Prince Xizor

Prince Xizor’s ability triggers when he is hit by an attack. A ship that suffers damage from Prince Xizor’s ability is not considered hit by an attack.

If Prince Xizor is hit by an attack with an effect that triggers upon being hit and cancels dice results (such Ion Cannon), he cannot use his ability and must suffer the effect of that card.

X-Wing FAQ Version 4.40 / Effective 11.06.2017 | Page 23

I certainly understand why you are confused given how the FAQ entry is worded. But what you're failing to understand is the difference between "triggering" an ability and "resolving" an ability.

Yes, both Harpooned!, Twin Laser Turret, and Prince Xizor all trigger when hit by an attack but they don't all resolve at that time. Harpooned! and Twin Laser Turret resolve immediately, before the deal damage step (Step 7, where hit and critical hit results are suffered) where as Prince Xizor's ability resolves during Step 7 - after the resolution of Harpooned! and Twin Laser Turret [thus Prince Xizor cannot use his ability and must suffer the effect of that card as all dice results have been canceled during his trigger but before his resolution].

When Prince Xizor is hit by an attack his ability triggers and during the applicable step (Deal Damage - Step 7) the ability that was triggered may be resolved. The same as any other ability. Gunner, for example, has the same timing Trigger as Prince Xizor but you don't get to skip Step 8 (resolving abilities that trigger after attacking or defending that do not result in additional attacks) and instantly go to the second attack granted by Gunner.

In conclusion it is very important to remember that not all abilities trigger and resolve in the same timing windows. Prince Xizor, Gunner, Harpooned!, Twin Laser Turret, Ion Cannon, Tractor Beam Cannon, Ion Cannon Turret, Draw Their Fire, Selflessness, and so on all trigger when the attack is determined to (or not to) hit but only some of them resolve immediately (i.e. in that same timing window).

18 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:

Xizor is precedent for the timing no more no less.

Not at all, Xizor don't trigger during the hit window, he trigger during the suffering dmg window.

ZealuxMyr is wrong, they don't use the same trigger at all, Xizor do not trigger on a hit, he trigger later on. In kind of a way, Xizor don't care if the attack hit or not, it care of you suffer dmg from result.

1 hour ago, muribundi said:

Not at all, Xizor don't trigger during the hit window, he trigger during the suffering dmg window.

ZealuxMyr is wrong, they don't use the same trigger at all, Xizor do not trigger on a hit, he trigger later on. In kind of a way, Xizor don't care if the attack hit or not, it care of you suffer dmg from result.

I am 100% correct. Please take the time to read the FAQ entry, emphasis added by me:

Quote

Prince Xizor

Prince Xizor’s ability triggers when he is hit by an attack. A ship that suffers damage from Prince Xizor’s ability is not considered hit by an attack.

If Prince Xizor is hit by an attack with an effect that triggers upon being hit and cancels dice results (such Ion Cannon), he cannot use his ability and must suffer the effect of that card.

X-Wing FAQ Version 4.40 / Effective 11.06.2017 | Page 23

Edit: Prince Xizor triggers when he is hit by an attack and resolves during the deal damage step.

Again, it is very important to pay attention to the difference between triggering and resolving an ability - they are not always synonymous.

On 1/10/2018 at 7:07 AM, ZealuxMyr said:

It is extremely clear that the Harpooned! condition is controlled by the ship it is assigned to as the card starts: "When you are hit by an attack, [...]" and in X-Wing "you" means the ship to which the card is assigned.

While I wouldn't say it's extremely clear (because that ruling about "you" was written before opponent-assigned cards were a thing), I personally agree with this interpretation, and that resolution of all effects based on initiative order is the proper way to handle things.

Just now, emeraldbeacon said:

While I wouldn't say it's extremely clear (because that ruling about "you" was written before opponent-assigned cards were a thing), I personally agree with this interpretation, and that resolution of all effects based on initiative order is the proper way to handle things.

I understand where you're coming from, the player with Harpoon Missiles physically owns the condition card. But, in terms of the game state, when a ship is assigned a card it becomes that ship's card and the extensive use of "you" further indicates Harpooned! can only be resolved by the ship with the condition assigned to it.

It wouldn't hurt anything for FFG to clarify it in the FAQ, I just wouldn't expect to see it happen as assigned items (tokens, damage and upgrade cards, etc.) is very well defined by the FAQ and Rules Reference as well as the use of the keyword "you."

38 minutes ago, ZealuxMyr said:

I understand where you're coming from, the player with Harpoon Missiles physically owns the condition card. But, in terms of the game state, when a ship is assigned a card it becomes that ship's card and the extensive use of "you" further indicates Harpooned! can only be resolved by the ship with the condition assigned to it.

It wouldn't hurt anything for FFG to clarify it in the FAQ, I just wouldn't expect to see it happen as assigned items (tokens, damage and upgrade cards, etc.) is very well defined by the FAQ and Rules Reference as well as the use of the keyword "you."

100% agreed.

I think a lot of people are coming from the understanding of control/possession of cards, like it's used in Magic: The Gathering. Ownership and Control of cards in that game, though, is very clearly delineated in the rules and on the cards... most Magic cards are really good about explicit and consistent wording. X-Wing... not so much.

To be fair, there's a lot more room for text on Magic cards than X-Wing upgrade cards...

FFG could take a page from the Wizards of the Coast design team's book when it comes to sticking to a set block of keywords and clearly explaining new keywords on the cards their printed on when first introduced...so you don't need other reference material to understand what the card does/how it interacts with the gamestate.

On 10/01/2018 at 3:07 PM, ZealuxMyr said:

Unfortunately @MrParsons, how one thinks a rule "should" resolve is not a president by which tournaments and events are to be ruled. Both cards resolve their respective abilities when the attack hits, a step that occurs before dealing damage and after the compare dice results step [Defined by the FAQ flowchart as STEP 6 IV] - this is why initiative matters per what I just said above.

You are quite right.

My suggestion to use a should approach was because I didn't consider it clear in the rules how it does work. This was my error. I now understand that it is in fact crystal clear how it works as the rules are currently written.

I stand corrected.

I agree with ZealuxMyr about trigger and resolve timing: they are not necessarily the same, they can be different from each other.

Most of our analysis about this case is based on interpretations about Harpooned been resolved on step 6, 7 or between, making this the first card, that I can remeber, that could be able to interrupt an attack effect and resolving it's own effect before it, creating another type of interaction in the game, I don't like this approach but it's a possibility, and only a FAQ will be able to solve this without a doubt.

What really makes me unconfortable, is that a lot of people that I know is using this way of thinking to do an Harpooned TLT exploit, just because they can, and ignoring a lot of others signs on rules and other card behaviors clarified or changed on the FAQ. It feels like: "Ok, I can see a lot of arguments and other mechanics on the game that indicates a conclusion where TLT effect must be resolved before another effect of other card, but because FFG made this miscalculation on the wording I can use it the other way around, who cares about how the game designers was thinking when they created this card, let's explore it like we can, while we can". Obviously not all players defending TLT + Harpooned as a valid sinergy think like this, but there are a lot of examples, that will not be taken on consideration by a lot of people because the wording is not exactly the same, showing that probably that's not how we should interpret TLT attacks and effect, the steps and the term "uncanceled"(hit symbol) and "uncanceled"(critical symbol), but people around my gaming circle just discard any argument because:"the wording is different, unconclusive but different", like it's never happened before with other cards.

Ok, the wording of Harpooned is different and give us a margin of interpretation and error, I get it. Hear me out, there's an effect that clearly is triggered and resolved on step 6, even before the attack hits, that take in consideration that canceled critical result dealt by ion canon (and any other kind of weapon that cancel it's own results) is not considered valid. I am talking about Imperial Kath Scarlet, and is one argument and example that shows us how these kind of weapons work, they don't generate damage or critical damage like other weapons, but people refuse to talk about it because harpooned is not Kath, that's a rule only for Kath, the timing is different, the exactly choice of words is different... etc, etc, etc... Well, if it's something inconclusive, why not rely on the examples of the past, even if they are slightly different? No, that's wrong, let's use the exploit. The exploit is good. The exploit is a better solution, let's try to figure it out a cranky ruling about initiative and who "owns" the card, and even XX-23 S-Thread Tracers, a card that dispense FAQ because any other precedent examples of other weapons, will be able to activate Harpooned, a missile with 4 squad points that don't spend TL to be used. That's how I am feeling right now, no more #flycasual, because the people around you will behave like if they are in a competitive cenario of a mainstream card game competiton. Again, not everyone that defends this sinergy think like this, but there are trolls everywhere that will not use arguments and logic.

I beg your pardon for venting this out. I am sorry by my outburst. In short, like ZealuxMyr explained before, and it's something really important, triggering and resolving an effect can occur on different timing. Why Harpooned can't be triggered when hit but resolved on step 7, this is unthinkable? Why necessarily Harpooned condition need to be resolved imediatly when triggered? Why we are interrupting the effect of the TLT attack, to solve another new effect that triggered on the same time that an effect of the attack in motion? Why we are ignoring other possibilities with more background just to exploit TLT + Harpooned?

ps.: This right here is only my personal speculation: I think that we are looking wrongly to the wording "canceled/uncanceled", it feels like "Schrodinger damage" until step 7 when we can finnaly open the box.

In line with @encail's position, I would very much like to see the resolution of Harpooned! moved into step 7. However, as it currently stands (RAW), you're not suffering or resolving damage from the uncancelled critical hit directly. Just triggering the Harpooned! condition. Therefore it is triggered and resolves when the attack is determined to hit - the same trigger and resolution for the effect of canceling all dice results on TLT, Ion Cannon, etc.

I would like to see this exploit go away, and I think calling it an exploit is a good descriptor. But, as the rules are currently defined I'm left with only one explanation for how these effects interact.

Simple solution is, when given the choice, give your opponent initiative if they're trying to use this exploit. Then they must cancel all dice results when the attack hits before you check to see if there is an uncancelled critical hit result with which to trigger and resolve the Harpooned! condition.

Given the intent of "do x. Then cancel all dice result" weapons (i.e. "do x" and only x) I will be surprised if the next FAQ (2020?) does not move Harpooned! to after resolving the "cancel all dice results" step when dealing with these weapons.

1 hour ago, encail said:

I am talking about Imperial Kath Scarlet, and is one argument and example that shows us how these kind of weapons work

Sorry, but you are wrong, if Kath attack with an ion cannon and the defender cancel a CRIT result he will receive a stress, what the FAQ says is that if Kath cancel one of its own CRIT with the Ion effect of cancel all result, the defender do not receive a Stress. And this is **** well logical the defender did not cancel a CRIT result. But way before canceling all dice, you have to determine if the attack hit and to do so the defender will have to cancel HIT or CRIT result and may well receive a Stress Token.

This is funny, because you kind of proven that the Harpooned effect trigger with TLT...

18 minutes ago, muribundi said:

Sorry, but you are wrong,

@muribundi is probably right and I played myself with this example/argument

Kath Scarlet: "When attacking, the defender receives 1 stress token if he cancels at least 1 critical result."

Quote

Kath Scarlet

If Kath Scarlet attacks with an Ion Cannon, [critical hit] results that are canceled by the Ion Cannon’s game effect do not cause the defender to receive 1 stress token.

Step 6 of the attack timing Flow Chart from the FAQ v4.4.0 effective 11-06-2017:

Quote

6. “Compare Results” step

i. Resolve abilities that occur “at the start of the ‘Compare Results’ step”

ii. Cancel pairs of [hit] and [evade] results

iii. Cancel pairs of [critical hit] and [evade] results

iv. Determine whether the defender is hit by the attack or the attack misses

If Kath Scarlet attacks with an Ion Cannon and rolls 1 hit and 2 crit results and then the defender rolls only 2 evade results you enter the "Compare Results" step. Here you cancel one hit and one evade result in step 6 ii. Then you go to step 6 iii to cancel one critical hit and one evade result. This does trigger Kath Scarlet's ability as the defender cancelled one critical hit result when defending. What the FAQ entry for Kath Scarlet is referring to is when Kath Scarlet rolls 2 hits and 1 critical hit and the defender has only 2 evade results. The defender's defense dice do not cancel any critical hit results. The only critical hit result here that is cancelled is from the Ion Cannon's "cancel all dice results" clause.

2 hours ago, muribundi said:

This is funny, because you kind of proven that the Harpooned effect trigger with TLT...

Well, I definitely played myself. I fell on a trap thinking that, no matter how, the ion canon would not trigger Kath ability, my bad. Using Kath as an argument, I was wrong and that was a poor choice, that in fact show a possibility for this sinergy (TLT + Harpoon) as intended by the game designers, as pointed by @muribundi, but not necessarily proves that harpooned should be triggered by TLT, after all, Kath is about cancelled results, and as soon as they happen, cancelled results will not change no matter the step/moment, and the condition will be met. "Uncanceled" damage is the problem around Harpooned case, because it's a state that can change during the attack, but I took a hard punch in the face, from myself, and I am in no shape to argue anymore (auto KO). I will just work to always loss the initiative against squads based on Harpoon Missiles and TLT.

If the game designers intended in this way, so be it, I just wanted a FAQ or official response to settle this once and for all as soon as possible, but they are probably studying the players interactions to finally make a "choice". (I am feeling like a guinea pig... hahaha)

In fact they could rule to block the TLT - Harpoon thing, they would just have to add a "step" kind of like they did for the After Attack trigger. And rules that the "cancel all" trigger always happen first like the "get an extra attack" trigger always happen second.

They note that they sometime side with the extreme "not logical" side sometime, like with the double attack of Bossk Gunner IG88 Crew. Yes it is rule picking at its best, and many people don't like it, but it still work...

@encail

Sorry by the way, I sounded a bit harsh, my goal was more to point out your argument was kind of proving that there is in fact game mechanics that use result before the cancel all and I found it ironic

3 hours ago, muribundi said:

Sorry by the way, I sounded a bit harsh, my goal was more to point out your argument was kind of proving that there is in fact game mechanics that use result before the cancel all and I found it ironic

Don't worry @muribundi, no offense taken, and it was kinda funny, with all my long speech, I was sabotaging myself... lol

On the one hand, how can there be an uncancelled crit if TLT cancels all dice results? There can't. To say "they were uncancelled before they were cancelled" is true of every single die which eventually is cancelled. They should not detonate.

On the other hand, how can a TLT attack even hit if there wasn't at least one uncancelled hit or crit? That's the very definition of a hit. They should detonate.

I think it's probably technically right that initiative should determine whether TLT's cancellation effect or Harpooned! is triggered first.

However, I think that's completely awful in every sense except a RAW one. Lose the initiative bid or coin toss in a mirror match, and then your opponent can explode your ships with TLTs, but you can't explode theirs. That's utter BS. Mechanics like this shouldn't work so dramatically differently for both players in a match. That seems the height of unfairness, and the broader purpose of rules is to provide a fair negotiation of differences in the context of the game. There are asymmetries from initiative beyond just the information differences (two RAC-Kylos placing Blinded Pilot on each other), but this seems too far.

Personally, I'd prefer a TO just declare "TLTs detonate Harpooned!" or "TLTs will not detonate Harpooned!" and have the same rule for everyone across all games. Not a rules-as-written argument, but that's just like, my opinion man.

In fact the rule of trigger should be changed to the Active Ship resolve his trigger first, it should have always been like that. Or even better, like I said in a previous post, they should change the after attack hit trigger to make it so full cancel attack happen first then everything else.