After an attack targeting Han Solo resolves, can you play the Marksman command card before declaring, or in the process of resolving, his Return Fire ability?

Marksman reads, "Use before declaring a ranged attack. Figures do not block light of sight for this attack."

If you want to play this you must do it before declaring the return fire attack. You can't do it during resolution. This card is previous to step 1.

Immediately before declaring the target for Return Fire to make the target a valid target.

So the proper usage should be?

1) "Thank you for shooting my face. I play Marksman. Now I declare Return Fire on your face."

or

2) "Thank you for shooting my face. I declare Return Fire. I play Marksman, and now declare your face as the target of my attack (nested within Return Fire)."

Must be 2 since it's an out of activation attack. Declaring Return Fire allows you to declare an attack, but the next thing you have to do is declare an attack per Return Fire.

Is there a situation where this timing matters that much?

9 minutes ago, theChony said:

I s there a situation where this timing matters that much?

A piky opponent that won't let you play the card 1 millisecond after the official time frame.

Ah, that guy... ? Although in fairness I did think of a situation but it brings up another question.

Is declaring Return Fire limit once per round, even if it gets aborted via Negation in this case? Or canceled by Jamming signal (sp)?

Return Fire is an ability, it cannot be aborted via Negation. Marksman is cost 1, so it cannot get Negated. If it gets cancelled by Comm Disruption , you still need to declare a valid target if there is one. If there is no valid target, there goes your once per round.

You should know about Signal Jammer and not activate Return Fire needlessly. (Although you may choose to use Marksman to discard Signal Jammer to be able to use other cards during the attack.)

1 hour ago, theChony said:

Is declaring Return Fire limit once per round

Fair point!

17 hours ago, Golan Trevize said:

A piky opponent that won't let you play the card 1 millisecond after the official time frame.

Yeah I'm headed to Nationals and I don't want to mess up the timing and get called out on it. It sounds like Return Fire, Marksman, attack. So there exists the slim chance that Marksman is Comms Disrupted and I spent my Return Fire.

7 hours ago, Smashotron said:

Yeah I'm headed to Nationals and I don't want to mess up the timing and get called out on it. It sounds like Return Fire, Marksman, attack. So there exists the slim chance that Marksman is Comms Disrupted and I spent my Return Fire.

Yep! Although Spy lists aren't that common. If you play wave 11 in that case Thrawn+spies is a decent list that my pop out. Good luck for the tournament!

On 8/29/2018 at 4:31 PM, Smashotron said:

Yeah I'm headed to Nationals and I don't want to mess up the timing and get called out on it. It sounds like Return Fire, Marksman, attack. So there exists the slim chance that Marksman is Comms Disrupted and I spent my Return Fire.

Eh, if you're that worried about it, play it at the earlier option. Then, if -that guy- gets -that way- about it, you can avoid the argument, take Marksman back (since they're insisting it can't be played at that time), and play it at the (apparently) 'correct' split-second moment. ; )

On 8/27/2018 at 6:31 PM, Smashotron said:

After an attack targeting Han Solo resolves, can you play the Marksman command card before declaring, or in the process of resolving, his Return Fire ability?

Marksman reads, "Use before declaring a ranged attack. Figures do not block light of sight for this attack."

On the other hand, if you didn't declare target, you could not have played Marksman.

(Anyway, a corner-case of a corner-case.)

6 minutes ago, a1bert said:

On the other hand, if you didn't declare target, you could not have played Marksman.

Well Marksman is weird since it is played before you intend to do something, which is why I asked FFG. I was about to return with a follow up, but as you said, it would be difficult to even set this scenario up on purpose. I just treated as another case of old cards causing irregularities.

Breaking causality has its issues. (I.e. for abilities with "before X" timing you are saying "I'm doing X, but before it I'm doing Y".)

The time police resolves it the best they can, and at least for this case the ruling is probably the fairest if not the most obvious (to me).