15 minutes ago, Bertie Wooster said:

FAQ: "If the ship that General Rieekan is equipped to leaves the play area, a ship or squadron already affected by this ability ( emphasis mine) remains in the play area until the end of the Status Phase. "

Even though Rieekan's card doesn't say so, FFG ruled that Ten Numb remains in the play area. But he's destroyed! Rieekan's destroyed! The rules say "When a squadron is destroyed, remove it from the play area and place it next to the matching squadron card" and "Destroyed ships and squadrons are no longer in play. All ship and upgrade cards belonging to destroyed ships are inactive." So why does Ten Numb remain? Because he's already affected by Rieekan's ability, before Rieekan's ship was destroyed. Likewise, removing Aspiration with Vader doesn't reset Aspiration's shields, because those shields were already affected by Aspiration's ability, before Aspiration was removed.

I bolded the important part of your quote. Now watch this. I am going to quote the Rieekan card here and bold an import part of it:

"Once per round, when a friendly ship or friendly unique squadron is destroyed, it remains in the play area and is treated as if it was not destroyed until the end of the Status Phase ."

FFG didn't rule or state anything that wasn't on the card. The bit about staying till the end of the status phase has always been there. A discarded card, in this case the Fleet Commands are treated as being inactive the same way Rieekan would be after being destroyed. Rieekan, being an upgrade card allows it to overrule the rules reference saying that a destroyed squad is already removed. Ten Numb is able to remain because the Rieekan card says it does until the end of the Status Phase the same way you get the fleet command buffs until the end of the round . Even if the card was made inactive it already stated while it was active that these effect persist to a specific time. So you've added another case agreeing with my precedent , which is, that if FFG wanted an effect to last even after the the card is discarded/become inactive it would print on the card the time frame it lasts too. No where on the Aspiration card does it say that its effect continues to persist. If FFG intended it to they would have printed that this effect lasts until the end of the game on the card itself.

34 minutes ago, whokickmydog said:

I bolded the important part of your quote. Now watch this. I am going to quote the Rieekan card here and bold an import part of it:

"Once per round, when a friendly ship or friendly unique squadron is destroyed, it remains in the play area and is treated as if it was not destroyed until the end of the Status Phase ."

FFG didn't rule or state anything that wasn't on the card. The bit about staying till the end of the status phase has always been there. A discarded card, in this case the Fleet Commands are treated as being inactive the same way Rieekan would be after being destroyed. Rieekan, being an upgrade card allows it to overrule the rules reference saying that a destroyed squad is already removed. Ten Numb is able to remain because the Rieekan card says it does until the end of the Status Phase the same way you get the fleet command buffs until the end of the round . Even if the card was made inactive it already stated while it was active that these effect persist to a specific time. So you've added another case agreeing with my precedent , which is, that if FFG wanted an effect to last even after the the card is discarded/become inactive it would print on the card the time frame it lasts too. No where on the Aspiration card does it say that its effect continues to persist. If FFG intended it to they would have printed that this effect lasts until the end of the game on the card itself.

However once Rieekan has been removed from the table his card is not in play so, by your logic, neither is the until the end of the status phrase. Hence as ships cannot remain on the table after losing all their hull it must be removed immediately.

Does this sound wrong to you? It should because it is.

Aspiration allows alteration of shields. Upon removal of that card there is no, "and reduce shields to max levels" step. The card is simply removed.

Stop and take this in for a second.

How would you rule Endeavor?

I'm going to jump in, because RAW it seems pretty straight forward.

ASPIRATION: 'When you deploy this ship, you may move shields to up to 2 of your hull zones from your other hull zones. If you do, the number of shields in a zone cannot exceed a maximum of "6". You cannot recover shields while any zone is greater than its maximum shield value.'

So there are two effects on this card:

1. When you deploy this ship, you may move shields to up to 2 of your hull zones from your other hull zones. If you do, the number of shields in a zone cannot exceed a maximum of "6".
2. You cannot recover shields while any zone is greater than its maximum shield value.

The first effect has a "when" timing. From the RRG:

• A “when” effect occurs at the moment that the specified event occurs and cannot occur again for that instance of the event

So when the ship is deployed, you may move shields. After the ship has deployed, the timing window is closed. This effect cannot take effect again, as there is no time when you will deploy a ship a second time in a game.

The second effect is always active as long as the card is active.

So... when Vader causes Aspiration to be discarded, the card is no longer active. This means Effect 2 now no longer applies, and Effect 1 can not occur again (which doesn't matter, as it couldn't happen again any way).

As another example, consider Strategic Adviser. It has a "when" effect. After you pass your turn, the timing window closes, and the effect is done. If Vader then discards Strategic Adviser, you do not roll back your passed turn. The card is inactive and you simply cannot use it again. The precedence for this has been set very clearly.

3 hours ago, TheCallum said:

How would you rule Endeavor?

I would rule that nothing happens. It does not lose its contain token because there is no rule preventing a ship from having a specific defense token. There is also no rule stopping the Endeavor from having 2 extra scatter tokens as well. The reason we don't see this is because there is also no legal path allowing it to get these tokens. Under the Set Up section the second bluet point it state "Assign the appropriate defense tokens to each ship." Now we have to find out what the appropriate defense tokens are. Under the Defense Token section it states " Ships and unique squadrons gain the defense tokens indicated on their ship and squadron cards." It has now been assigned the appropriate defense tokens. So in setup before the first round even starts the Endeavor is given 2 braces and a redirect token. I doesn't gain the contain token yet. At the beginning of the first round is when the Ship gains the extra token. No time before that and no time after that. The same "At the start of the first round" wording is found on the Needa card as well. If for some reason there was a way to discard this title before the first round, you would not gain the new token. I have not found any other rules taking about how ships should be equipped with defense tokens.

And very importantly to my whole argument there no rules staying that a ship cannot have a specific defense token. So there is nothing to check against during the game. So when Vader removes this card there is no rule stating that the (Ex) Endeavor cannot continue to have said token. I would even agree that Walex Blissex can bring it back if you discarded it because you discarded it and he brings back discarded things, and bringing back that token even if it is not on the ship card is not disallowed in the rules. The ship is still abiding by all the game rules . I hope that that answers your question.

Now for Aspiration which is this topic is about. There is a rule stating "A hull zone cannot have more shields than its maximum shield value" So when the title is discarded and the ship still has a hull zone with shields above it's max it is no longer abiding by all the game rules . This situation needs to be rectified. And the way I think (because we don't have an official ruling yet) to do this would be to drop the shields on that hull zone to its maximum so it is now abiding by the game rules.

3 hours ago, Ginkapo said:

However once Rieekan has been removed from the table his card is not in play so, by your logic, neither is the until the end of the status phrase. Hence as ships cannot remain on the table after losing all their hull it must be removed immediately.

Does this sound wrong to you? It should because it is.

Aspiration allows alteration of shields. Upon removal of that card there is no, "and reduce shields to max levels" step. The card is simply removed.

Stop and take this in for a second.

That is not my logic. Yes once Rieeken is killed, he is no longer in play. But his effect still is. If his effect wasn't then the Fleet Commands would not work when they are discarded as they use the same wording in that they both say " until the end [a specific phase be it end of round or end of status phase] " I'll be clear here. Rieeken's ability still functions after his removal. The Fleet Command effects still function after being discarded or even if the ship is destroy. My logic is that all of these effects continue to work even after the card has been removed from play because it states so on the card itself. The effect is until the end of the round/status phase. The effect is no longer linked to the card. The effect now has its own timing widow that it follows. FFG backs this up in the FAQ where they state in regards to the fleet upgrades "If the ship with this upgrade equipped is destroyed after resolving this effect, friendly ships are still affected until the end of the round."

I think that this is what the whole discussion is about. Yes, nowhere on the card does it say "and reduce shields to max levels", but nowhere on the card does it say "until the (sometime frame) you can have shields on a hull zone above it's max" While i know that nowhere on the card does it explicitly say that the ship can have shields on a hull zone above its max. I think that we can agree that the card effect is what allows the ship to break the no shields above max rule. Since this effect has no time frame attached to it like my previous examples (FC, Rieeken, D-Caps), it goes away when the card (Aspiration) it is attached to goes away. So now we have a ship with shields above its max (which is against the core rules) without an active card effect saying that it can. Again this is how I interpret this.

The entire game Aspiration can have shields above it's max on that hull zone because those extra shields are checked against the title card which allows them to be there. When the title card is gone, the extra shields are now checked against the Core Rules which don't allow them to be there. So for me, the extra shields would just be removed to the amount the core rules allows.

It's all about the trigger. The difference with Motti is he's a persistent effect that goes away when he is removed. Aspiration (and Endeavor since it was brought up) have specific timing for their trigger with no follow up. Since their effect has already happened, Vader Boarding Party does nothing to them. The same could be said for Needa. You wouldn't swap his evade token back to the original because his effect's timing is already completed. This is an important distinction.

Thanks for all the replies everyone - does FFG ever comment in the forums about these kinds of questions or are we to simply wait until the next FAQ is released?

2 minutes ago, strikenowhere said:

Thanks for all the replies everyone - does FFG ever comment in the forums about these kinds of questions or are we to simply wait until the next FAQ is released?

It’s pinned

Of course, you need to send on the question first.

Thanks - just submitted the question via their form...hopefully we'll get an answer!

Year and a half later we finally get an official ruling

On 3/2/2020 at 12:17 PM, whokickmydog said:

Year and a half later we finally get an official ruling

Hahaha about time!

On 3/2/2020 at 9:17 AM, whokickmydog said:

Year and a half later we finally get an official ruling

On 3/5/2020 at 4:55 PM, The Jabbawookie said:

There was a lot that surprised me in this FAQ. All of Darth Vader boarding teams, Surprise Attack and Fleet Ambush, LTT's weird phrasing, the "don't pick two identical dust fields" (who even asked this question?) thing (meanwhile, I still want to know if "bridging" a dust field is a thing or not)...

2 hours ago, Bertie Wooster said:

There was a lot that surprised me in this FAQ. All of Darth Vader boarding teams, Surprise Attack and Fleet Ambush, LTT's weird phrasing, the "don't pick two dust fields" (who even asked this question?) thing (meanwhile, I still want to know if "bridging" a dust field is a thing or not)...

What really shocked me that someone actually asked and made it to the FAQ was this:

Q: Can a player choose to count as an irregular squadron a single model from a tree-peg squadron placed on a singleextender peg?

12 hours ago, Lemmiwinks86 said:

What really shocked me that someone actually asked and made it to the FAQ was this:

Q: Can a player choose to count as an irregular squadron a single model from a tree-peg squadron placed on a singleextender peg?

Isn’t that kind of like gluing a CR90 to a Starhawk base and calling it a small ship?

8 hours ago, Cpt ObVus said:

Isn’t that kind of like gluing a CR90 to a Starhawk base and calling it a small ship?

Or: Can i place the ship card the other way around, and shoot with my front battery in the rear this way?
And does my front battery count for Salvo this way?

🤦‍♂️

1 hour ago, Tokra said:

And does my front battery count for Salvo this way?

SSD Salvo Meta confirmed. 🤾‍♀️

Oh, the flashbacks...

On 3/9/2020 at 5:54 PM, Bertie Wooster said:

There was a lot that surprised me in this FAQ. All of Darth Vader boarding teams, Surprise Attack and Fleet Ambush, LTT's weird phrasing, the "don't pick two identical dust fields" (who even asked this question?) thing (meanwhile, I still want to know if "bridging" a dust field is a thing or not)...

I asked the dust fields thing. Not because I didn't imagine the answer rather than to clarify. I've being playing a lot of proximity mines and GSR and I tell you if I may pick I'm gonna do cause the slight shape difference means that mine may be stick to your path or not. But above anything else it was just an update to the old question about obstacles set which didn't cover the new obstacles.