The card states that after you suffer damage you remove your charge.

Does taking a hit on a shield count as a damage or would it have to be damage against your hull?

Any damage counts, regardless of whether it hits shields.

"Deal Damage: If the attack hits, the defender suffers damage for each
uncanceled hit and crit result in the following order:
a. The defender suffers 1 hit damage for each uncanceled hit result.
Then cancel all hit results.
b. The defender suffers 1 crit damage for each uncanceled crit result.
Then cancel all crit results." page 5 of the rules reference

Damage is any uncanceled hits or crits (does not matter if it hits your shields or hull)

Per the Rules Reference under damage "When a ship suffers damage, that damage is suffered one at a time. For each damage a ship suffers, it loses a shield by flipping the shield to its inactive side. If it does not have an active shield remaining, it is dealt a damage card instead." So losing a shield or taking a damage card are results of suffering damage but they do both qualify as suffering it and deactivate a stealth device, this can be rough when you fly like me and lose your stealth device to an asteroid before the initial engagement :p.

Interesting.

So Gideon Hask would get to roll an additional die against a defender that has lost a shield?

No.

A defender is not Damaged until it has been dealt a card.

Suffering damage does not necessarily give you the Damaged condition.

9 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

No.

A defender is not Damaged until it has been dealt a card.

Suffering damage does not necessarily give you the Damaged condition.

Do you have a reference for this? Seems a bit of a contradiction, it counts as damage for one effect but not another.

13 minutes ago, GeneralZod217 said:

Do you have a reference for this? Seems a bit of a contradiction, it counts as damage for one effect but not another.

"A ship is damaged while it has at least one damage card. A ship is
critically damaged while it has at least one faceup damage card." page 8 of the rules reference

so you need a damage card to be damaged.

"There are two types of damage: ? (regular) damage and ? (critical)
damage. When a ship suffers damage, that damage is suffered one at a
time. For each damage a ship suffers, it loses a shield by flipping the shield
to its inactive side. If it does not have an active shield remaining, it is dealt a
damage card instead. For ? damage, the card is dealt facedown; for ?
damage, the card is dealt faceup and its text is resolved. All ? damage is
suffered before ? damage." - page 8 of the rules reference

so dealing damage can hit shields or deal cards.

You can deal damage to shields or hull, you are only damaged if you have a card.

Damage and Damaged are different things.

10 minutes ago, GeneralZod217 said:

Do you have a reference for this? Seems a bit of a contradiction, it counts as damage for one effect but not another.

Because it doesn't.

Suffering Damage is one thing.

The state of being Damaged is another.

Ignore the words, treat them as what they are - keywords. The first one means 'losing a shield or being dealt a card as a result of an uncancelled hit or crit result somewhere'. The second means 'having at least one damage card on your ship.

Rules ref, page 8. Not difficult to find, but very difficult to copypaste.

Thanks.

You could have just said page 8 but I appreciate the effort!

technically everything except depending on how you read it (still waiting on a faq for this one, i dont think it counts) Sayn's "deal a facedown card" removes that charge.

Vader crew can remove it too. Gotta love it when people with SD boost or roll instead of tokening up and instantly get Vader'd out of SD lol.

4 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

technically everything except depending on how you read it (still waiting on a faq for this one, i dont think it counts) Sayn's "deal a facedown card" removes that charge.

Vader crew can remove it too. Gotta love it when people with SD boost or roll instead of tokening up and instantly get Vader'd out of SD lol.

Rules are pretty clear on that first point:


Being dealt a damage card is different from suffering damage. So Seyn is great in that he ignores shields but, as a side effect, he also doesn't pop stealth devices.

You're right about Vader, though. Man, that's nasty.

Ah thank you for pointing to a rule for that one.

I never played he counted as dealing damage because in 1.0 it was always different and i saw nothing in 2.0 saying anything otherwise. But it did spark a lot of arguing locally...which is funny because I WAS THE SEYN USER not the guy arguing lol....

Yah, I'd say Seyn doesn't trigger SD. He's not causing the target to suffer damage.

19 hours ago, jftanner said:

Rules are pretty clear on that first point:


Being dealt a damage card is different from suffering damage. So Seyn is great in that he ignores shields but, as a side effect, he also doesn't pop stealth devices.

You're right about Vader, though. Man, that's nasty.

Sorry but I have to disagree.

The dealing of a damage card is different to suffering damage in the sense that it ignores shields.

How can a ship that has a damage card not be classed as being a damaged ship?

It is Damaged. It has not Suffered Damage. The latter is not a requirement for the former nor the former of the latter.

1 hour ago, thespaceinvader said:

It is Damaged. It has not Suffered Damage. The latter is not a requirement for the former nor the former of the latter.

Man this is a crazy rule. I think I get it but it's a bit complex.

It's a weird edge case that affects currently literally only one ship in the game, and only when it shots an enemy with Stealth Device. It's a little wonky feeling but it's all within the rules as written.

Perhaps Syen would have been better written 'suffers 1 [hit], ignoring shields' for better consistency, but... ffg.

On 10/13/2018 at 8:44 AM, thespaceinvader said:

It is Damaged. It has not Suffered Damage. The latter is not a requirement for the former nor the former of the latter.

Precisely this ^.

Though, the fact that those two terms ( Damaged vs Suffer Damage ) are totally distinct from each other in the rules is a perfect example of FFG being very, very bad at writing clear and precise rules with consistent and unambiguous wording.