So vaders ability forces a ship in your arc at range 0-2 to either lose a green token or suffer damage.

Does that mean it can only be used against a ship that has a green token?

Nope, the only requirement is "in arc, 0-2"

They suffer a damage unless they spend a green token. That is the result of triggering his card. What happens in the effect does not dictate the requirements.

Brilliant,

thanks.

Yup. Vader just targets a ship, and gives it an ultimatum: discard a green token, or suffer a damage. The other ship has to do one or the other... if there are no green tokens around, then it's eating some force pain!

In 1.0 a ship could choose to discard a green token rather than take damage even if it didn't have a green token. Has this changed in 2.0?

1 hour ago, Hold the Edge said:

In 1.0 a ship could choose to discard a green token rather than take damage even if it didn't have a green token. Has this changed in 2.0?

Given that this crew didn't exist in 1e this is a non-question.

Vader specifies that one token must be discarded, so 0 is not an option here.

I tend to think of 2e Vader as a Loan Shark. If you don't pay him, he'll break your legs. He doesn't care if you have the money or not, he'll break your legs either way.

That is, unless Obi-Wan has the high ground.

2 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:

Given that this crew didn't exist in 1e this is a non-question.

Vader specifies that one token must be discarded, so 0 is not an option here.

I was thinking specifically about the M-12 pilot in 1.0 that caused a damage to every ship in his bullseye arc if you didn't discard a green token, and the ruling was that a ship could choose to discard a green token, even if it didn't have a green token, rather than taking a damage. Exact same scenario as the Vader crew card here.

12 minutes ago, Hold the Edge said:

I was thinking specifically about the M-12 pilot in 1.0 that caused a damage to every ship in his bullseye arc if you didn't discard a green token, and the ruling was that a ship could choose to discard a green token, even if it didn't have a green token, rather than taking a damage. Exact same scenario as the Vader crew card here.

Not quite, you are thinking of Torani Kulda who in 1.0 required all ships in the bullseye arc to remove ALL of their focus and evade tokens or take 1 damage. Since all of 0 is 0, a ship did not have to discard any tokens if it had none to discard. Vader, and Torani Kulda in 2.0 for that matter, require the ship to discard 1 green token which a ship cannot do if it doesn't have 1 token to discard.

1 hour ago, joeshmoe554 said:

Not quite, you are thinking of Torani Kulda who in 1.0 required all ships in the bullseye arc to remove ALL of their focus and evade tokens or take 1 damage. Since all of 0 is 0, a ship did not have to discard any tokens if it had none to discard. Vader, and Torani Kulda in 2.0 for that matter, require the ship to discard 1 green token which a ship cannot do if it doesn't have 1 token to discard.

This. Plus, in First Edition , there were several instances of rulings where "zero" was considered a valid solution to the term "all." Against Torani Kulda, you could remove all zero green tokens to avoid damage. Keyan Farlander could remove a stress token to convert all zero focus results into damage results.

In Second Edition , many of those loophole situations where you could previously treat "zero" as "all" have been closed, either by re-wording the ability (as Torani Kulda now works), or through specific rulings (like Ten Numb's).

6 hours ago, Hold the Edge said:

In 1.0 a ship could choose to discard a green token rather than take damage even if it didn't have a green token. Has this changed in 2.0?

Not exactly. The specific example you're thinking of required the ship to "discard all tokens" and 0 was generally an acceptable number for these sort of things in 1.0 (i.e. spend a focus to change 0 eyes, spend a tsrget lock to reroll 0 dice, etc).

So when the ship was instructed to discard "all" it's tokens it could, if it wished, discard "all 0" of its tokens. Had the ability been worded as it is in 2e "Spend 1 token" then they would have needed to have a token to spend. Even in 1e you couldn't "spend 0" of something.

Incidentally though, they did also change the base rules in 2e so doing 0 of something generally isn't allowed. Not explicitly as a blanket rule, but for instance you cannot spend a focus token to change eyeballs unless you have at least 1 eyeball showing on a roll. So it's a bit of a mix in a way in the transition from 1 to 2.

10 hours ago, Hold the Edge said:

In 1.0 a ship could choose to discard a green token rather than take damage even if it didn't have a green token. Has this changed in 2.0?

There was no general, game-wide ruling on this.

There was one 1.0 ship with an effect that basically read "choose one: suffer 1 damage or lose all focus and evade tokens". Because of its wording, the ruling was that you could choose "lose all focus and evade tokens" when you had none, and if you did, you would lose all 0 of them.

Vader (crew) 2.0 is worded differently. Vader deals 1 damage unless the target chooses to remove 1 green token. You cannot choose to remove 1 when you have zero.

15 hours ago, Hold the Edge said:

I was thinking specifically about the M-12 pilot in 1.0 that caused a damage to every ship in his bullseye arc if you didn't discard a green token, and the ruling was that a ship could choose to discard a green token, even if it didn't have a green token, rather than taking a damage. Exact same scenario as the Vader crew card here.

As others have said, while the "sense" of 1e Torani Kulda and 2e Vader are similar, the wording is very different.

The reason in 1.0 you could discard 0 tokens to dodge say the top Kimo pilot's ability is because the wording was stupid.

"Either discard all tokens, or suffer 1 damage"

"All" included "0" - which is why Vader crew does not specify that. He words it the other way around,

"...that ship suffers 1 [hit] damage unless it chooses to remove 1 green token " and you have to have a token to satisfy you removed 1 token. Because "all" is not used, which would include 0 tokens. Had they made that mistake again where its "damage, or remove all green tokens" then yes you could once again say "Cool i remove all of my tokens i dont have because 0 is a defined number" to avoid the damage.

You'll notice they also fixed said Kimo pilot's ability in the same fashion. Torani no longer removes all tokens to avoid that issue, so in a sense she got nerfed because its not removing a token stack anymore, but you also WILL take damage now.

On 10/10/2018 at 9:32 PM, emeraldbeacon said:

In Second Edition , many of those loophole situations where you could previously treat "zero" as "all" have been closed, either by re-wording the ability (as Torani Kulda now works), or through specific rulings (like Ten Numb's).

Wait, did I miss a ruling on Ten Numb? I thought we were still waiting for that. If you've got a link, I'd love to see it.

i swear i saw something about Ten Numb needing a focus result but i couldnt find it when that thread about him popped up.

As of right now i believe he does let you spend a stress for nothing. They probably havnt insta-faq'd it because its a bwing.

18 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

i swear i saw something about Ten Numb needing a focus result but i couldnt find it when that thread about him popped up.

As of right now i believe he does let you spend a stress for nothing. They probably havnt insta-faq'd it because its a bwing.

There is a ruling that Garven can't spend a Focus token to trigger his ability if he doesn't have any [eye] results. It's not much of a stretch to apply the same logic to Ten.

2 minutes ago, digitalbusker said:

There is a ruling that Garven can't spend a Focus token to trigger his ability if he doesn't have any [eye] results. It's not much of a stretch to apply the same logic to Ten.

While I agree with you,

Let's not turn this thread into a ten numb thread... that thread is epic enough.

3 minutes ago, digitalbusker said:

There is a ruling that Garven can't spend a Focus token to trigger his ability if he doesn't have any [eye] results. It's not much of a stretch to apply the same logic to Ten.

That's a massive stretch, and there's not a consensus, but this isn't the place to discuss it; there's a existing thread on that here:

4 minutes ago, Icelom said:

While I agree with you,

Let's not turn this thread into a ten numb thread... that thread is epic enough.

3 minutes ago, MockingBird ME said:

That's a massive stretch, and there's not a consensus, but this isn't the place to discuss it; there's a existing thread on that here:

Ah, that's what I get for posting before I'm caught up.

I'm of ten numb after reading threads like that...