Can I use his ability even if he hasn't lost a shield just to take one off an enemy or not?
Figuring there are some match ups where you think the chances of it triggering are low enough you'd want to use it when possible even if you're not regening...
I don't think so.
For reference...!
Pretty sure you can do it. The conditions for the effect are that the enemy ship is shielded and in bullseye. The results are that the enemy loses a shield and Dalan recovers a shield. The recover part just fails.
This is an interesting one.
My gut feeling is that you can't, due to this entry in the rrg:
A ship can pay a cost for an effect only if the effect can be resolved.• For example, GNK “Gonk” Droid’s ability says “Action: Spend 1 [Charge] to recover 1 shield.” The ship cannot spend the charge if it has no inactive shields.
But it could be argued that the effect Dalan resolves by spending a charge is just 'choose one shielded ship in your [Bullseye]'. After you've chosen the ship, as much of the rest happens as possible.
I'd still lean towards not being able to do the effect whilst fully shielded though.
3 hours ago, player2072913 said:This is an interesting one.
My gut feeling is that you can't, due to this entry in the rrg:
A ship can pay a cost for an effect only if the effect can be resolved.• For example, GNK “Gonk” Droid’s ability says “Action: Spend 1 [Charge] to recover 1 shield.” The ship cannot spend the charge if it has no inactive shields.
But it could be argued that the effect Dalan resolves by spending a charge is just 'choose one shielded ship in your [Bullseye]'. After you've chosen the ship, as much of the rest happens as possible.
I'd still lean towards not being able to do the effect whilst fully shielded though.
I believe you may be right. The rules may be in need of clarification as there are multiple scenarios where the effect could be partially resolved (use it while you have not lost any shield to lower enemy shields, use it to recover a shield despite the fact that the enemy has no shield).
Until written otherwise, however, this rule reference may imply that the ability must be able to be fully resolved (both aspects)
Looking at the logic of the card, it's worded as
(P & Q) --> (R & S)
Where P is "Choose one shielded ship in bullseye",
Q is "Spend 1 charge"
R is "that ship loses 1 shield"
S is "you recover 1 shield"
And logically that can be broken down to
(P & Q) --> R
So yes, it should work.
1 hour ago, Yearfire said:Looking at the logic of the card, it's worded as
(P & Q) --> (R & S)
Where P is "Choose one shielded ship in bullseye",
Q is "Spend 1 charge"
R is "that ship loses 1 shield"
S is "you recover 1 shield"And logically that can be broken down to
(P & Q) --> R
So yes, it should work.
You can't go by logic in this game. What seems logical and proper may be ruled or 'clarified' completely otherwise. It's happened before in 1e and I can see the same thing happening in 2e.
5 minutes ago, Stoneface said:You can't go by logic in this game. What seems logical and proper may be ruled or 'clarified' completely otherwise. It's happened before in 1e and I can see the same thing happening in 2e.
Do you have any examples of 1e going against logic? The only one I can remember is Palpatine and LWF, and that was a weird case anyway.
40 minutes ago, Yearfire said:Do you have any examples of 1e going against logic? The only one I can remember is Palpatine and LWF, and that was a weird case anyway.
The two that immediately come to mind are "spending zero tokens" to trigger an effect or avoid damage and the wording on the Backup Shield Generator card from Epic.
I believe it was Torani Kulda from 1e who had the ability to strip all green tokens from a defender. The defender had the choice to shed the tokens or take damage. Logically if you have no tokens you take damage. It was ruled that since "zero" was a valid number you could remove zero tokens to avoid damage. There's at least one other example similar to that regarding a rebel pilot.
I think I was the only one that questioned the second example with the Backup Shield Generator. There's a 'Recover Shield Action' in Epic that allows you to spend all your energy to recover one shield. Plain and simple, no problem. The problem I had was with the wording on the Backup Shield Generator card. It says, "At the end of the round, you may spend 1 energy to recover 1 shield up to your shield value". (Italics mine). It was the words in italics that caused me the problem. I maintained, that as written, the card allowed you to recover more than one shield, spending 1 energy for each shield recovered.
If the card stated that you could "spend 1 energy to recover 1 shield" it would've ended there. No discussion or interpretation needed. I was those last 5 words that caused the confusion. Since you can't recover something you didn't lose, it was apparent, at least to me, that I could recover more than 1 shield. That was ruled as incorrect. You could recover only 1 shield using 1 energy, period.
Sometimes the wording is unclear on the cards and sometimes it's the intent. With all the pilot abilities, upgrade cards and different interactions, it's easy for stuff to get muddled up. Someone figured out the number of possible combinations relatively early in 1e and it was mind numbing! It usually gets straightened out. Eventually.
1 hour ago, Yearfire said:Do you have any examples of 1e going against logic? The only one I can remember is Palpatine and LWF, and that was a weird case anyway.
The Inquisitor's range shenanigans (Autothrusters don't work, even though by the language of the card they should)
Genius (pre-nerf) + Trajectory Simulator (one changes your drop to AFTER your move instead of before. the other changes a drop into a launch. Seems legit...!)
"Paying Costs
A ship can pay a cost for an effect only if the effect can be resolved.
• For example, GNK “Gonk” Droid’s ability says “Action: Spend 1 ? to
recover 1 shield.” The ship cannot spend the charge if it has no inactive shields." - page 2 of the rules .
If you can't resolve an effect to its conclusion you can't pay for it and hence cant do it.
I can't see any reason the logic shouldn't be applicable, so long as it's not erratad differently.
This is not a cost, so the "Paying cost"-part is not relevant.
55 minutes ago, Yearfire said:I can't see any reason the logic shouldn't be applicable, so long as it's not erratad differently.
This is not a cost, so the "Paying cost"-part is not relevant.
I would be extremely surprised if FFG see it that way.
2 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:I would be extremely surprised if FFG see it that way.
I hope the do. Or at least change it with an Errata and not a FAQ. If not, the internal logic of this game has rally deteriorated.
It all depends if by resolving effects they mean all the effects. When he has full shields Dalan Oberos can only partially resolve his ability, is that enough to satisfy the rules on resolving effects? I'm not sure we know enough right now to say for sure. For what it's worth I would say no he cannot do it as he is unable to resolve his ability fully.
So half a year later, are we any smarter? Can Dalan use his ability if he is fully shielded? Asking for a friend.
1 minute ago, pappnase99 said:So half a year later, are we any smarter? Can Dalan use his ability if he is fully shielded? Asking for a friend.
No, we are no wiser.
Bit disappointing really, because in the end uncertainty about things like this prevents people from using it in tournaments, instead we see more of same old.
Being bad is what stops people using it.
This came up before...
Official Rulings update on this situation:
I am happy that the rule is being consistently applied.
I am unhappy that Dalan Oberos' ability is nearly useless now, however. It would almost need to be rewritten as "when you engage" instead of " At the start of the Engagement Phase".