5 minutes ago, muribundi said:

Edit: I'm fed up of people saying 0 is never a valid choice in real life. YES it is a valid choice, the fact that it may no be good for you does not make it something that is "impossible". This is a mathematically and logically valid choice...

The problem is people confuse Zero with a Null. While zero is a valid number and a choice in real life so is a null. Using a variation on your example, I give you a choice of either an apple or an orange in my basket but the basket contains only apples. You have your choice of two fruits but you wanted an orange. Your options were reduced to either an apple or nothing. Not zero but Null.

Kilda' s card forces a choice with the word "must". Either damage or tokens. If you have no tokens then you can only choose damage. FFG started this "zero is a valid number" BS probably without realising that a null is not the equivalent of zero. Now they're stuck with it.

Honestly, I think the language is fine. They could have easily worded Torani as such "...the defender may discard all focus and evade tokens. If the defender did not discard at least one token, it suffers 1 damage."

On 1/22/2018 at 5:57 PM, choassassin said:

WHAT IS THE POINT OF THE CARD THEN?!

Have you heard of a guy named Poe Dameron? Kylo Ren? Omega Leader? The Moldy Crow title?

double post!

(0) ZERO is a valid option, no denying that.

If you have a token and choose to remove (0) ZERO of them, then you take a damage.

If you do not have a token, you can still choose to remove (0) ZERO of them ( according to the errata )

So if at both times you have chosen to remove (0) ZERO of them, then why in one instance you take damage and in the other you do not.

Now is it a tad OP, there is a argument there no doubt, especially combined with the title and the effect of Bulls eye, that being said, you have to line up that shot just right. A lot of people bought this ship because of the wording on that card and after this I can understand the resentment.

My major concern is, they are going to pull this same crap on Legion after I drop $500 on the game next month because they don't pay attention to the wording on the cards close enough.

I don't even have a pony in this race, I don't play scum.

18 minutes ago, Anatak12 said:

(0) ZERO is a valid option, no denying that.

If you have a token and choose to remove (0) ZERO of them, then you take a damage.

If you do not have a token, you can still choose to remove (0) ZERO of them ( according to the errata )

So if at both times you have chosen to remove (0) ZERO of them, then why in one instance you take damage and in the other you do not.

Because in one instance you discarded all of your tokens, and in the other one you didn't.

3 hours ago, Stoneface said:

The problem is people confuse Zero with a Null. While zero is a valid number and a choice in real life so is a null. Using a variation on your example, I give you a choice of either an apple or an orange in my basket but the basket contains only apples. You have your choice of two fruits but you wanted an orange. Your options were reduced to either an apple or nothing. Not zero but Null.

Except nothing force me to not take the orange, I can still choose and get away with nothing. You force me to choose, I made a valid choice. To bad for me I ate nothing.

Edit: And by the way, you just used my exact example. I ask you to choose between two fruit type but there is only one type on the table...

19 minutes ago, Anatak12 said:

If you do not have a token, you can still choose to remove (0) ZERO of them ( according to the errata )

There is no errata. The card does exactly what it says on it.

5 hours ago, Stoneface said:

You're missing Anatak12' s point. Logically, if you have no tokens, that option doesn't exist. It's not "Zero" but a "Null".

You're trying to add absent logic to the text. Don't do whats not written on the card.

7 minutes ago, Kalandros said:

You're trying to add absent logic to the text. Don't do whats not written on the card.

The logic isn't absent. It's there but the answer is corrupted by FFG' s "zero is a valid number" ruling.

1 hour ago, muribundi said:

Except nothing force me to not take the orange, I can still choose and get away with nothing. You force me to choose, I made a valid choice. To bad for me I ate nothing.

Edit: And by the way, you just used my exact example. I ask you to choose between two fruit type but there is only one type on the table...

But choosing the orange is a null. If there are no oranges it's removed from the either or statement.

If FFG hadn't ruled that zero was a valid number, how would you approach answering to Kulda' s ability? There have been many threads over years complaining about and explaining what's written on cards. This is just another example.

10 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

But choosing the orange is a null. If there are no oranges it's removed from the either or statement.

No it does not, you want that because it would fit your opinion paradigm... There is no physical law or other life law that say I can't choose the orange. There is absolutely nothing that would prevent me choosing orange if I want too. Except you stating before the choice that choosing nothing would not be accetable.

You give me a choice: "Apple or Orange" the fact that there is no orange DOES NOT PREVENT ME choosing orange. It may be a totaly insanely idiot choice but I still have all the right to do it

7 hours ago, joeshmoe554 said:

Because in one instance you discarded all of your tokens, and in the other one you didn't.

what part of you have no token to discard is so hard to understand?

Let's try this.

Bob owes the IRS $1000.

Bob has two bank accounts.

One account has $0 in it.

One account has $1000 in it.

Bob decides to pay the IRS with the account that has $0 in it.

Question: What happens to Bob?

28 minutes ago, Anatak12 said:

Let's try this.

Bob owes the IRS $1000.

Bob has two bank accounts.

One account has $0 in it.

One account has $1000 in it.

Bob decides to pay the IRS with the account that has $0 in it.

Question: What happens to Bob?

In your question here, nothing good.

In the case of this ability, its not like this. Here is how it would be:

1. Court case (FFG) establishes that $0 is a valid payment

2. IRS demands a payment of all $ (Discarding all tokens) or an audit will occur (1 damage)

3. Bob, who has $0, uses the precedent set by the case to pay the IRS all his $, which is 0, rather than be audited.

Yes its dumb, but the ruling is there.

Man you guys are just not letting go huh? Too **** salty about how the card actually reads and plays properly without any errata - the FAQ there only to shut you guys up but you still won't let go... Keep it up Xwing community. Imperial Assault is way more fun.

8 hours ago, muribundi said:

No it does not, you want that because it would fit your opinion paradigm... There is no physical law or other life law that say I can't choose the orange. There is absolutely nothing that would prevent me choosing orange if I want too. Except you stating before the choice that choosing nothing would not be accetable.

You give me a choice: "Apple or Orange" the fact that there is no orange DOES NOT PREVENT ME choosing orange. It may be a totaly insanely idiot choice but I still have all the right to do it

You never answered my question. If FFG hadn't ruled zero was a valid number, how would you explain Kilda' s ability?

1 hour ago, Kalandros said:

Man you guys are just not letting go huh? Too **** salty about how the card actually reads and plays properly without any errata - the FAQ there only to shut you guys up but you still won't let go... Keep it up Xwing community. Imperial Assault is way more fun.

There's no argument over how the ability works. It works that way because FFG says it does. There was no errata, just a clarification. A clarification desperately needed by the wording on the card and the fact that, by fiat, FFG declared zero is a valid number. The example of spending a focus token, to turn zero dice with a focus showing, to activate an ability is in the FAQ.

Let me give you an example of bad wording on a card and have you "process" the action.

"...you may spend on energy token to recover one shield" vs "...you may spend one energy token to recover one shield up to your shield value".

You have 3 energy tokens. How many shields could you recover in each example? I'm very curious to see your answers.

Wasn’t this what Lando tried to pull off in his and Han’s game of Sabacc in EU? He bet all the ships in his hangars, but forgot that they weren’t empty.

4 hours ago, Anatak12 said:

Let's try this.

Bob owes the IRS $1000.

Bob has two bank accounts.

One account has $0 in it.

One account has $1000 in it.

Bob decides to pay the IRS with the account that has $0 in it.

Question: What happens to Bob?

Bob has made a terrible analogy that doesn't fit the situation.

Let's try this in a way that does fit the situation.

Bob has one bank account which has $0 in it. The IRS demands that he choose either:

give him all the money in his bank account

or

go to prison.

Bob chooses the first option, because the IRS are stupid enough to not specify, apparently, that his bank account has to contain money in the first place to choose the first option.

But even that is a terrible analogy because a: the IRS wouldn't demand an unspecific figure like ;everything in your bank account', and b: the IRS has ways to deal with people that don't pay.

This is a game. Real-world situations don't apply to it. Games can do stuff the real world doesn't.

What the card says is (boiled down, for clarity, and boy I wish they would phrase it like this on the card) 'choose one:

- give up all your tokens

- take a damage'

It doesn't specify anything about how many tokens you have to have to choose a particular option, and 0 is a number that fits the definition of 'all' if that's the number you have.

DO what the card says. Don't do what the card doesn't say. Unless the FAQ says different, and in this case, it doesn't.

2 hours ago, Stoneface said:

There's no argument over how the ability works. It works that way because FFG says it does. There was no errata, just a clarification. A clarification desperately needed by the wording on the card and the fact that, by fiat, FFG declared zero is a valid number. The example of spending a focus token, to turn zero dice with a focus showing, to activate an ability is in the FAQ.

Let me give you an example of bad wording on a card and have you "process" the action.

"...you may spend on energy token to recover one shield" vs "...you may spend one energy token to recover one shield up to your shield value".

You have 3 energy tokens. How many shields could you recover in each example? I'm very curious to see your answers.

Please don't bring other badly-worded cards into this it only muddies the waters.

(Because I can't not answer a question though, the answer is one. Because it doesn't say you can spend more than one token to gain more than one shield, and/or because the rules of the game specify that a card can be triggered only once per opportunity, if you used it more than once in the timing assigned to it, yoou would be breaking that rule)

I think this might be the first time the FAQ clarified something, no one disputes what the clarification says, and it resulted in MORE argument.

Ok new question same card.

Say the ship in question has tokens and chooses to take the damage so they are taking one damage.

what form of damage is it? this happens after firing, is it attack damage? would it remove stealth device?

Yea so i went out and bought a few scum ship just so I can play this and see how ( this ship ) works on the mat.

It's just autodamage. It's not damage from an attack, it doesn't kill Stealth Device.

10 minutes ago, Anatak12 said:

Ok new question same card.

Say the ship in question has tokens and chooses to take the damage so they are taking one damage.

what form of damage is it? this happens after firing, is it attack damage? would it remove stealth device?

Yea so i went out and bought a few scum ship just so I can play this and see how ( this ship ) works on the mat.

Its just damage, and damage isn’t what pops stealth device.