above

You fail to decloak and stay cloaked for the round.

Can you try different directions?

RAI no, but RAW? Someone made the argument some weeks ago, but I forgot what his point was. I only remember that it might be unclear.

14 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Can you try different directions?

RAI no, but RAW? Someone made the argument some weeks ago, but I forgot what his point was. I only remember that it might be unclear.

No.

Doesn't say anything about you getting to try again, so you don't.

57 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Doesn't say anything about you getting to try again, so you don't.

Hence the RAI.

I think the argument was that, because it is no action, the rule for failed actions doesn‘t apply and so there is nothing saying that you can‘t try again.

Maybe the once per opportunity does, but it‘s not that clear.

6 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

Hence the RAI.

I think the argument was that, because it is no action, the rule for failed actions doesn‘t apply and so there is nothing saying that you can‘t try again.

Maybe the once per opportunity does, but it‘s not that clear.

Then it really isn't RAW or RAI if there isn't a rule for something. The rules says it can fail and failing doesn't have to be an action

Quote

FAIL

Some effects can fail, which means the effect did not resolve as intended and

instead is resolved in a default way.

• A ship can fail when it barrel rolls,boosts,coordinates,decloaks,deploys,jams,locks, or SLAMs.

• An effect that fails does not trigger any effects that would occur after a

ship resolves that effect.

• If an action fails, the player does not choose a different action to perform

and cannot choose to resolve the effect in a different way.

• If an action fails, since the action was not completed, that ship cannot

perform a linked action.

• If a red action fails, the ship does not gain a stress token

8 minutes ago, Oberron said:

If an action fails, the player does not choose a different action to perform

and cannot choose to resolve the effect in a different way.

Decloak is listed as something that can fail, but is not an action, so the quoted point doesn‘t apply. But it is the one that would prevent you from trying to decloak again.

Why do they not explicitly include decloak?

There are two options, and I would think the first is clearly intended (=RAI):

1. Because you obviously can‘t try to decloak again

2. Because you obviously can try to decloak again.

But the rules as written (=RAW) do not clarify which one it is.

I kinda get where @GreenDragoon is coming from.

"During the System Phase, each cloaked ship may spend its cloak token to decloak." There isn't anything specifically here to say that spending a cloak token to decloak is a once-per-round effect. However, there is the standard once-per-opportunity rule.

• "Many abilities are restricted to occur “once per opportunity,” which means they can be resolved only one time during the specified timing window. For example, if an ability occurs “At the start of the Engagement Phase,” this ability can only be resolved once at the start of each Engagement Phase."
• "As another example, if a ship has the ability “While you perform an attack, you may reroll 1 attack die,” it may resolve that ability once during each of its attacks. (Card Interpretation; p.2)"

I think applying the rule makes sense here.

For example, consider a generic-language ship or pilot ability "During the [when] phase, you may spend [something] to do [something else]." We'd generally recognise this as a once-per-opportunity effect. I think applying OPO to decloaking is appropriate.

6 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

I think applying OPO to decloaking is appropriate

I agree that it is appropriate, but does it necessarily mean that you can‘t try another side to decloak?

I am still just playing devil‘s advocate, but one possible reading is:

„During the system phase“ starts a while-loop where you can decloak. Attempting to decloak could start the next loop. In that case, failing the decloak only breaks the inner loop but not also the outer loop.

Just now, GreenDragoon said:

I agree that it is appropriate, but does it necessarily mean that you can‘t try another side to decloak?

I am still just playing devil‘s advocate, but one possible reading is:

„During the system phase“ starts a while-loop where you can decloak. Attempting to decloak could start the next loop. In that case, failing the decloak only breaks the inner loop but not also the outer loop.

If once-per-opportunity applies to spending cloak tokens, you can't try again. The rules are really clear what happens when you fail a decloak: you keep your token and remain where you started.

1 minute ago, theBitterFig said:

If once-per-opportunity applies to spending cloak tokens, you can't try again.

I‘d argue that it applies to decloaking, not spending cloak tokens. The small difference is that the opportunity, the timing of decloaking is still happening.

3 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

The rules are really clear what happens when you fail a decloak: you keep your token and remain where you started.

The RAI yes, but the RAW too?

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

I‘d argue that it applies to decloaking, not spending cloak tokens. The small difference is that the opportunity, the timing of decloaking is still happening.

That doesn't make sense to me. Every other "in this phase, you can do the thing" is going to be clearly understood at once-per-opportunity. Doing the thing is to spend a cloak token to decloak.

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

The RAI yes, but the RAW too?

Yes RAW. To decloak is to perform a kind of non-action Boost or Barrel Roll, and when those fail, the ship does not move. On top of that, there are specific rules for what happens when a decloak fails in the rules reference (Cloak, p. 8). How is this unclear? "* If a decloak fails, the ship is returned to its prior position before it attempted the decloak and the cloak token is not removed."

Plus it has been considered that any charges or tokens required to be spent before attempting something are still spent even on a fail. So no boost or barrel roll and no cloak token.

6 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

That doesn't make sense to me. Every other "in this phase, you can do the thing" is going to be clearly understood at once-per-opportunity. Doing the thing is to spend a cloak token to decloak.

I disagree, because actions have this very explicit additional rule:

"If an action fails, the player does not choose a different action to perform and cannot choose to resolve the effect in a different way."

This means two things: First, this addition is necessary for every other "in this phase, you can do the thing" to be clearly understood as once-per-opportunity. Otherwise, why add it? Second, this addition does NOT apply to cloak and hence the attempt to decloak is NOT clearly understood as once-per-opportunity.

6 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

How is this unclear? "* If a decloak fails, the ship is returned to its prior position before it attempted the decloak and the cloak token is not removed."

Because - unlike actions - it is unclear whether the follow up is "try again" or "you tried and failed, you cannot choose to resolve the effect in a different way". Actions have the second followup explicitly in the rules. But decloak has not.

Why? Was it overlooked and is it a mistake? Again, I think so. I completely agree with you that the RAI is very clear. But I think the argument that the RAW is not clear is an interesting one. I do not have a horse in this race, I only encountered a similar discussion and thought it to be interesting.

It says you can fail.

Where does it say you can try again if you do?

'Ain't no rule says you can't' is not a valid argument.

1 hour ago, thespaceinvader said:

It says you can fail.

Where does it say you can try again if you do?

'Ain't no rule says you can't' is not a valid argument.

Then this rule is entirely unnecessary, yes?

“If an action fails, the player does not choose a different action to perform and cannot choose to resolve the effect in a different way."

Because it implies that there is an instance where the player can choose to resolve the effect in a different way.

5 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Then this rule is entirely unnecessary, yes?

“If an action fails, the player does not choose a different action to perform and cannot choose to resolve the effect in a different way."

Because it implies that there is an instance where the player can choose to resolve the effect in a different way.

Yes. It is redundant. it's included for clarity, not for necessity, because it's different from 1e. It implies nothing of the sort.

E: and please, do answer the question, rather than deflecting.

7 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Yes. It is redundant. it's included for clarity, not for necessity, because it's different from 1e. It implies nothing of the sort.

E: and please, do answer the question, rather than deflecting.

I know you never believe so, but I‘m arguing in good faith. I‘m interested in learning whether there could be something to the idea or not. I mention this because I was actually answering your question.

Q: Where does it say you can try again if you do?

A: It is implied by the quoted rule, that there is an instance where the player can choose to resolve the effect in a different way.

2 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

I know you never believe so, but I‘m arguing in good faith. I‘m interested in learning whether there could be something to the idea or not. I mention this because I was actually answering your question.

Q: Where does it say you can try again if you do?

A: It is implied by the quoted rule, that there is an instance where the player can choose to resolve the effect in a different way.

It doesn't though. All that ruyle says is that when an action fails you can't choose to do something else.

It doesn't imply anything in either direction about decloaking failing.

Where does it explicitly say, in the rules section about cloaking and decloaking or in any section where cloaking or decloaking is referenced, that you get the chance to redo it if it fails?

Vague inferences are not rules text, and this is a game in which explicit rules text is necessary to do *anything*.

No, there is no mistake in the rules. The mistake is in your interpretation.

• 1. Spending a cloak token to decloak, like most triggers in this game, is properly understood as once-per-opportunity, like "when attacking, you may reroll 1 die".
  • 1.a. There is nothing to indicate that spending a cloak token to decloak isn't a OPO effect.
• 2. A Decloak is a kind of barrel roll or boost (not barrel roll or boost action, but the raw move itself), and the rules on how these kinds of moves fail is clear.
  • 2.a. There is nothing to indicate that this behaves differently than any differently than a normal boost or barrel roll.
  • 2.b. You reference a lot the Fail entry, but check also the boost and barrel roll entries--not the actions, but the raw movement methods themselves.
    • 2.b.i. "While attempting to place a ship to complete a boost, the action can fail if any of the following occurs:
      • "The ship’s final positions would cause the ship to overlap another ship.
      • "The ship would overlap or move through an obstacle.
      • "The ship’s final position would cause it to be outside the play area (and therefore would cause that ship to flee).
      • "If a boost fails, the ship is returned to its prior position before it attempted the boost." (Boost, p.6-7)
    • 2.b.ii. "While attempting to place a ship to complete a barrel roll, the action can fail if any of the following occurs:
      • "All three positions would cause the ship to overlap another ship.
      • "All three positions would cause the ship to overlap or move through an obstacle.
      • "All three positions would cause the ship to be outside the play area (and therefore would cause that ship to flee).
      • "If a barrel roll fails, the ship is returned to its prior position before it attempted the barrel roll." (Barrel Roll, p.5-6)
• 3. Moreover, there is a specific entry in the Cloak section for what happens when a decloak fails.
  • There's nothing to indicate here that you wouldn't follow the normal rules for failing a boost, failing a barrel roll.

At this point, it's not "devil's advocacy" since you're not even participating in the discussion. We've been pointing out clear rules text "It says this," and all you can reply is "Well, does it say that?" All we can do is say "Yes. Right here. It says that exactly."

Sigh.

I gotta go make a loaf of bread.

It's good bread, a crusty boule, made with an 80% biga pre-ferment, and baked in a cast-iron pot.

4 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

Because it implies that there is an instance where the player can choose to resolve the effect in a different way.

Sometimes "No" just means "No", not "Well, sometimes".
Most often it means "I know SOMEONE of you guys will try to argue you can do this, so no, you can't." Examples:

• "During an attack, a ship cannot choose to roll fewer dice than it is supposed to roll." does not mean "This might happen!", it just means "SOMEONE is gonna exploit SOMETHING by ruling too few dice, so no, you have to roll all the dice."
• "The player cannot choose to fail a boost if the final position would not cause the action to fail." does not mean "Sometimes you can choose to fail a boost!", it means "You don't get to retract your barrel roll. When you roll, you roll. Tough choice."
• Following the above: "If an action fails, the player does not choose a different action to perform and cannot choose to resolve the effect in a different way." does not mean "There are circumstances where you can choose something else!", it just means "This is what happens because otherwise one of you is gonna say 'Well, it's not saying I can't do that, so I can do that!'" And if you wonder why someone would say such a thing, just look at this thread. "But it states nowhere I can't do that, so surely I can do that?"

1 hour ago, theBitterFig said:

At this point, it's not "devil's advocacy" since you're not even participating in the discussion. We've been pointing out clear rules text "It says this," and all you can reply is "Well, does it say that?" All we can do is say "Yes. Right here. It says that exactly."

I‘m sorry that you feel this way. I tried to make it abundantly clear that I am only interested in the discussion, not in the result. But clearly you aren‘t, so it‘s better to stop.

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

I‘m sorry that you feel this way. I tried to make it abundantly clear that I am only interested in the discussion, not in the result. But clearly you aren‘t, so it‘s better to stop.

If you were interested in a discussion, you'd have actually participated.

I came into this with sympathy for your point of view. That's all gone, because you don't appear care one jot or tittle for what anyone else has discussed here.

3 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

I‘m sorry that you feel this way. I tried to make it abundantly clear that I am only interested in the discussion, not in the result. But clearly you aren‘t, so it‘s better to stop.

@GreenDragoon maybe the rules section is not the best place for a random argument?

People come to this section to try and learn the game and understand things, you randomly arguing something for fun really has no place in the rules section, it just messes people up and causes more confusion. There are lots of places for random discussion and argument, please don't use the rules section for this.

Anyhow.

Bread.