2 hours ago, emeraldbeacon said:

Absent an official ruling, the judge was not WRONG. He interpreted the rules a certain way, that is not entirely unreasonable (saying that the FAQ invalidated Hera entirely would be, IMHO, unreasonable). The fact that the debate still continues means that the answer is not clear-cut and obvious, regardless of how one person sees it. I've heard sound, reasonable arguments on both sides of the debate.

I do really hope that @OfficialRules chimes in on this discussion soon!

Pssh... who needs @OfficialRules when you have Chris 'Chico' Brown, Iain Hamp, and Brent Wong saying it works?

2 hours ago, emeraldbeacon said:

Absent an official ruling, the judge was not WRONG. He interpreted the rules a certain way, that is not entirely unreasonable (saying that the FAQ invalidated Hera entirely would be, IMHO, unreasonable). The fact that the debate still continues means that the answer is not clear-cut and obvious, regardless of how one person sees it. I've heard sound, reasonable arguments on both sides of the debate.

I do really hope that @OfficialRules chimes in on this discussion soon!

I'll co-sign this. Most of the time, I try to phrase things as "I disagree" or "I find X argument to be convincing" more than "so and so is wrong." There are some clear-cut things (Kylo can't be given the Optimized Prototype condition, for example) where there isn't really debate. Not everything is so clear. Frequently, rules in X-Wing are decided by community consensus, where more people have been more convinced by one argument over another.

I find the "Hera lets you flip" argument to be a lot more convincing, but clearly, there's not nothing to the opposing side here.

14 hours ago, emeraldbeacon said:

Absent an official ruling, the judge was not WRONG. He interpreted the rules a certain way, that is not entirely unreasonable (saying that the FAQ invalidated Hera entirely would be, IMHO, unreasonable). The fact that the debate still continues means that the answer is not clear-cut and obvious, regardless of how one person sees it. I've heard sound, reasonable arguments on both sides of the debate.

I do really hope that @OfficialRules chimes in on this discussion soon!

He couldn't invalidate Hera but wanted to invalidate the one-eighty while stressed. Trying to have it both ways is unreasonable.

4 hours ago, Frimmel said:

He couldn't invalidate Hera but wanted to invalidate the one-eighty while stressed. Trying to have it both ways is unreasonable.

I don't think it's fair to speak to the judge's personal thoughts and intentions. I doubt he had any personal investment in the outcome of the ruling, or "wanted" anything invalidated. He just looked at the situation and addressed it as he saw best. Was it reasonable? Some think yes, some think no. I don't feel anyone can say that one or another interpretation is outright WRONG in this context - I have yet to see any evidence that outright invalidates any of the arguments here, yet.

And as always, absent an @OfficialRules ruling, there is still no clear-cut answer. We're still operating in shades of gray. Until there is an absolute ruling from FFG...

THREAD NECROMANCY!

I just got an e-mail from Mr. Brooks, answering this (1.5 month old) question for Second Edition... when requesting clarification for First Edition, he promptly replied:

Quote

Hera’s ability allows the ship to reveal and execute red maneuvers even while stressed. Normally, card effects other than changing the difficulty of a maneuver cannot be resolved at that timing, but since the red maneuver is going to resolve normally (due to Hera’s ability), you can still resolve Pivot Wing.

Hope that helps,

Frank Brooks

Creative Content Developer

Fantasy Flight Games

Not the answer that I thought was right, but if that's the rules, that's the rules. At least it's something to go off of!

**** yeah! I love being right! ...and humble

This feels right to me. It seems cleaner for Hera to obviate the entire rule on executing red maneuvers while stressed, rather than only part of that rule.

I'll say again, per @emeraldbeacon the other side was making a not-unreasonable interpretation in preventing Hera from doing a flip. I disagreed with it, felt the flip-side was more convincing, but it wasn't a silly interpretation.

13 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

This feels right to me. It seems cleaner for Hera to obviate the entire rule on executing red maneuvers while stressed, rather than only part of that rule.

I'll say again, per @emeraldbeacon the other side was making a not-unreasonable interpretation in preventing Hera from doing a flip. I disagreed with it, felt the flip-side was more convincing, but it wasn't a silly interpretation.

For what it's worth, I felt that this result is far more consistent with an RAI interpretation, as opposed to what I thought RAW said. I'm 100% ok with the Flippy Hera U-Wing... and glad that we get at least one little piece of confirmation on it.

For once, necromancy is helpful!