I do not read any part of that ability as dependent upon removing tokens. It's not a cost that he can fail to pay; it's simply the first of two effects that follow his acquiring a lock.
For the record, I am not firmly on either side of the "zero is/isn't part of all" debate. I am on the side of "unless FFG clarifies Ten Numb, all the relevant precedents say you can't spend tokens for no effect."
1 hour ago, nexttwelveexits said:I am on the side of "unless FFG clarifies Ten Numb, all the relevant precedents say you can't spend tokens for no effect."
This is actually the correct answer right here. All this does 'All doesn't include Zero, therefore Ten Numb's ability would fail, therefore he cannot spend the stress' is a really roundabout way to get to 'If his ability would not affect the game state he can't do it'
If you think abilities that have to spend to do a thing have to alter something in the game state, which is supported by the rules on focus and on gonk, then everything works fine. All can include zero and everyone is happy. Well except Ten Numb.
Genesis states "After you acquire a lock, you must remove all of your focus and evade tokens. Then, gain the same number of focus and evade tokens that the locked ship has." There are three steps here:
1. Acquire a lock - this has already happened before anything else on the card triggers and those triggers failing should not backtrack to the lock failing.
2. remove all of your green tokens - this can only fail if all does not include zero .
3. Gain the same green tokens as your lock target - this is a "Then" clause that is a separate sentence following the first sentence containing both steps 1 and 2, the "then" is clearly in regards to the previous sentence as there is no other target for it in his ability. So if all does not include zero this part of his ability fails should Genesis not have had any green tokens to remove in step two.
TLDR: Unless all includes zero Genesis Red's ability only does anything if you have a way of having given him a green token before he acquires a lock but does not prevent him from acquiring a lock without a green token.
1 hour ago, AramoroA said:Why would the second part of his ability work if the first part fails though? Surely if the first part of his ability fails then you don't do the Then part.
There's a somewhat relevant quote
So the first effect fails, the second effect that's trigger by the first one resolve does not happen.
Moreover why is he allowed to Acquire a target lock if his ability would fail. It's a mandatory effect that is to apply some drawback to he ship as per the RR, he cannot do the mandatory effect so surely he cannot perform the action.
genesis reds pilot ability is not a may or a can - it's a must. since it's a must, all of it must be followed, even if parts of it are not relevant. of course he can still acquire locks, though. his pilot ability happens after he acquires a lock, not as part of it.
It seems like the Saturation Salvo ruling should give you enough information to resolve this, essentially you do as much as you can to satisfy the effect and just ignore anything outside of that. So if the defender does not have 2 defence dice you can still use Saturation Salvo to make them re-roll 1 dice.
Quote... as it must resolve the effect as completely as possible....
Now the rules do not explicitly cover the step case of what happens if the defender has 0 defence dice but I don't see why I could not pick 0 dice to resolve the effect as completely as possible. So with Ten Numb you spend a stress and resolve the effect as completely as possible, setting 0 dice to the right face.
I still don't think he works but it's got nothing to do with All not including 0 as you always resolve things as much as you can even if that's less than was supposed to be originally.
This sure feels like a lot of effort to make a really simple question difficult.
Can I spend a focus to modify eyes if I didn't roll eyes?
No.
Can I spend a calculate to modify an eye I didn't roll an eye?
No.
Can Ten Numb spend a stress to modify eyes if he didn't roll an eye?
Not explicity stated by FFG.
So, we have to extrapolate from incomplete data. Since Ten's ability is phrased identically to the other two cases just with a stress token instead of the other I see no rational justification for the answer to be different.
Genesis is irrelevant to this question because the instruction to remove all green tokens is a mandatory effect that happens in response to a trigger not as a trigger. The trigger for his ability is "After you acquire a lock". That's it. The inability to perform the responses to that trigger is irrelevant, that wouldn't stop him from doing the trigger. Once the trigger has happened (acquire a lock) then both the effects happen as they are mandatory. The instruction says "Do X, then do Y". Nothing in the clause specifies that you must do X in order to do Y, just that X and Y both happen in sequence in response to the trigger. If you don't have any green tokens when you acquire a lock then you either "remove all 0 tokens" OR "you're unable to do it because you can't remove 0 tokens in 2.0" but which one you pick is irrelevant to gameplay because even if it "fails" that step doesn't affect the next one.
7 hours ago, MockingBird ME said:Genesis states "After you acquire a lock, you must remove all of your focus and evade tokens. Then, gain the same number of focus and evade tokens that the locked ship has." There are three steps here:
1. Acquire a lock - this has already happened before anything else on the card triggers and those triggers failing should not backtrack to the lock failing.
2. remove all of your green tokens - this can only fail if all does not include zero .
3. Gain the same green tokens as your lock target - this is a "Then" clause that is a separate sentence following the first sentence containing both steps 1 and 2, the "then" is clearly in regards to the previous sentence as there is no other target for it in his ability. So if all does not include zero this part of his ability fails should Genesis not have had any green tokens to remove in step two.
TLDR: Unless all includes zero Genesis Red's ability only does anything if you have a way of having given him a green token before he acquires a lock but does not prevent him from acquiring a lock without a green token.
except all of his ability is a must. it doesn't take any failures to resolve effects into account. you do not have a choice. everything in his pilot ability is mandatory.
"then" means what it usually means, simply "after that", "next" or what have you...
58 minutes ago, sharrrp said:This sure feels like a lot of effort to make a really simple question difficult.
Can I spend a focus to modify eyes if I didn't roll eyes?
No.
Can I spend a calculate to modify an eye I didn't roll an eye?
No.
Going further with your examples...
Can I spend a target lock to reroll zero dice? No.
Can I spend an evade token to modify a die if I didn't roll any defense dice (thanks to tractor tokens, etc)? No.
I still don't get this obsession over trying to prove all does not include zero when the far simpler 'things must effect the game stat' is right there.
That's my preference.
The core rule they're going for, put in very loose language, is 'you can't spend a token to do nothing, just in order to have spent the token'. It affects Garven, Ten, and Sunny on the positive side (they want to be able to spend tokens to do zero things to get their abilities to work), and things like Hotshot Gunner on the negative side (it wants to force people to spend focus tokens, but they can't if they didn't roll eyeballs, which makes it a lot weaker than its ancestor).
That would be a useful general rule.
The whole 'all zero things' question would then be mostly (or possibly entirely) moot. I think it's only Ten who currently would have any meaningful desire to spend a token that could modify dice as a result, for no other effect, that isn't already covered.
And it's that fact that makes me strongly believe that it's not intended to be possible to use Ten's ability on zero eyeballs.
1 hour ago, emeraldbeacon said:Can I spend an evade token to modify a die if I didn't roll any defense dice (thanks to tractor tokens, etc)?
1
Just that an evade token is not described to be "unspendable" while all of the results are already an evade. This one precedence kinda drives me up the wall and makes me question the true "universality" of the whole "you have to make a difference" idea. Why is it so? Either it's been omitted by a sloppy dev OR the specific explanation for focus and calculate is where it is for a reason.
2 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:things like Hotshot Gunner on the negative side (it wants to force people to spend focus tokens, but they can't if they didn't roll eyeballs, which makes it a lot weaker than its ancestor).
Actually Hotshot Gunner isnt hurt by this. They changed the phrasing. Now it says after the modify defense dice step the defender removes one focus or calculate. So still works on 0 eye ball rolls.
It does only proc on turret attacks now so like the Firespray for instance can't use it.
5 hours ago, sharrrp said:Can I spend a focus to modify eyes if I didn't roll eyes?
No.
Because there is an additional rule that specifically says focus cant be used with no <eyeball> results.
5 hours ago, sharrrp said:Can I spend a calculate to modify an eye I didn't roll an eye?
No.
Because the rule for calculate specify at least one: "spend one or more calculate tokens to change that many of its <eyeball> results to hit/evade result"
4 hours ago, emeraldbeacon said:Can I spend a target lock to reroll zero dice? No.
Because the rule for lock specifies at least one: "spend a lock token that it has on the defender to reroll one or more of its attack dice"
4 hours ago, emeraldbeacon said:Can I spend an evade token to modify a die if I didn't roll any defense dice (thanks to tractor tokens, etc)? No.
Because, you guessed it, the rule specifies at least one: "spend one or more evade tokens to change that many of its blank or <eyeball> results to <evade> results"
5 hours ago, sharrrp said:Can Ten Numb spend a stress to modify eyes if he didn't roll an eye?
Not explicity stated by FFG.
You're right it's not explicitly stated but the idea that just because other abilities have explicit wording that prevents them from working this way somehow means a card effect works the same way is nuts. No other card that has its own unique rule is somehow subject to rules from other things that are kinda similar but not the same why would Ten be an exception? It's possible that FFG intends that "all does not include zero" or that "no change to the game state means the effect can't be triggered" but none of that is stated anywhere in the rules.
4 hours ago, MockingBird ME said:the idea that just because other abilities have explicit wording that prevents them from working this way somehow means a card effect works the same way is nuts
Nuts? Really? I've just about decided that you're just trolling Bird. Is your contention that Ten definitely works without an eyeball showing? What is your basis for that assertion?
Google the word "precedent". The focus and calculate rules aren't just kind of similar, they are IDENTICAL situations. There are no examples of similar rules that work the other way. What we have is a very clear precedent. FFG can't possibly come in and rule on every case where someone decides to be contrarian. If they don't we have to go with the rules and the precedents we have, and based on what we have this really isn't even questionable: Ten needs to roll an eye to ditch his stress.
You're free to not like that but unless there is explicit rules to the contrary what would be nuts is to assume an identical situation suddenly works in the opposite way.
1 hour ago, sharrrp said:There are no examples of similar rules that work the other way .
Nowhere in the rules Evade token is prohibited to turn a green to evade if there's no blanks/focus results available.
If you'll pong it back to me with the "just because it's not said you cannot doesn't mean you can, so you cannot" I'll remind you that if this assumption is correct is the very clouer of this discussion.
All in all the discussion appears to be completely academic, as none of us here is competent to make the conclusive call on whether or not certain backbone rules are or are not meant to be applied. But I believe "Assult Gunboat treatment" serves this thread and should push FFG to step in.
Edited by ryfterek2 hours ago, ryfterek said:Nowhere in the rules Evade token is prohibited to turn a green to evade if there's no blanks/focus results available.
Please, read the rules:
QuoteWhile an evading ship defends, during the
Modify Defense Dice step, it can spend one or more evade tokens to change
that many of its blank or (Focus) results to (Evade) results.
So: 1 for 1, 2 for 2, 3 for 3, etc.
There is not prohibited, but also is not permitted. You have a rule that specifies what you spend and what you change.
You can do what the rules sais you can do. You cannot do what the rules don't say you can do.
If Ten Numb would can remove stress with 0 results, his ability may be writed: While attacking remove 1 stress token . Is what occurs when you remove 0 results, you always can remove a token, if the devs intention is to remove stress always, there are more clear ways to write the rule. But is not the situation.
Apliyng logic when read the rules:
- You want to spend a token to modify 0 die.
- Cost: 1 token (stress, focus, evade,...). You have a rulefor Paying Costs: A ship can pay a cost for an effect only if the effect can be resolved.
- Effects:
Add - Place an unused die next to the rolled dice. Can you place 0 die? No, because place 0 is place nothing. Effect no resolved.
Change - Rotate the die to a face. Can you rotate a die you don't have? No. Effect no resolved.
Reroll - Pick up the die and roll it again. Can you pick and roll a die you don't have? No. Effect no resolved.
Spend - Remove the die from pool. Can you remove a die you don't have? No. Effect no resolved.
- Results: No effect resolved. No cost payed. No token spended.
There is no rule than grants permission to roll or reroll 0 die.
There is no rule that permits you to spend a token to do nothing.
1 hour ago, Arachneo said:There is no rule than grants permission to roll or reroll 0 die.
There is. The Golden rule that cards take effect over the RR. The card says "chance all" and while you've nicely defined those terms to mean one or more in your above post the RR never does. "All" can, but doesn't always, allow for the inclusion of zero; as FFG has not stated what they mean by all we, as a community, are left discussing it.
1 hour ago, Arachneo said:There is no rule than grants permission to roll or reroll 0 die.
There is no rule that permits you to spend a token to do nothing.
Because cards are allowed to make their own rules and break the RR's rules we don't need a rule that does the same thing or something similar, if we had one the card would reference that not be forced to make its own. Cards being able to do these is what makes them so cool and interesting, and also what prevents some 50% of them from not working.
6 hours ago, sharrrp said:I've just about decided that you're just trolling Bird. Is your contention that Ten definitely works without an eyeball showing? What is your basis for that assertion?
Not trolling, I just think your wrong. I am contending that Ten can spend his stress to change zero <eyeball> results because the card says "change all" and not "change one or more" or "if you have at least one <eyeball> change all" or "you may spend your stress as if it were a focus during the modify attack dice or modify defense dice steps." There are a lot of ways they could have worded it that would limit it to being used only if at least one <eyeball> was rolled but that's not what they did, they said "change all."
10 minutes ago, MockingBird ME said:There is. The Golden rule that cards take effect over the RR. The card says "chance all" and while you've nicely defined those terms to mean one or more in your above post the RR never does. "All" can, but doesn't always, allow for the inclusion of zero; as FFG has not stated what they mean by all we, as a community, are left discussing it.
Because cards are allowed to make their own rules and break the RR's rules we don't need a rule that does the same thing or something similar, if we had one the card would reference that not be forced to make its own. Cards being able to do these is what makes them so cool and interesting, and also what prevents some 50% of them from not working.
I'm not talking about the precedence of rules. It is cleat that cards take precedence. But card also apply general rules. In case of Dice Modification (like Ten) you have to follow the rules for Dice Modification and Paying Costs . These rules states that you only can pay a cost for an effect if the effect can be resolved. Remember that an ability "consist of a timing and an effect". In the Dice Modification (page 9 RR) last revision FFG added:
Quote• If a die cannot be changed to a given result, nothing happens.
◊ For example, an attack die cannot be changed to an ? result because
that result does not appear on that die.
If you have no die, you cannot change to the given result. So "nothing happens" means the effect is not resolved.
The argument: " nothing happens does not mean effect is not resolved" is invalid, because if effect is resolved something happens.
As I explain :
2 hours ago, Arachneo said:Apliyng logic when read the rules:
- You want to spend a token to modify 0 die.
- Cost: 1 token (stress, focus, evade,...). You have a rule for Paying Costs: A ship can pay a cost for an effect only if the effect can be resolved.
- Effects:
Add - Place an unused die next to the rolled dice. Can you place 0 die? No, because place 0 is place nothing. Effect no resolved.
Change - Rotate the die to a face. Can you rotate a die you don't have? No. Effect no resolved.
Reroll - Pick up the die and roll it again. Can you pick and roll a die you don't have? No. Effect no resolved.
Spend - Remove the die from pool. Can you remove a die you don't have? No. Effect no resolved.
- Results: No effect resolved. No cost payed. No token spended.
All does not include 0.
For Genesis Red, is a different matter, because removing a token is an effect, not a cost. So that effect does not resolve, but you must resolve all the text of the card. Apply the Then clause and gain the tokens from the ship locked.
@MockingBird ME The problem with your interpretation is that it purposefully ignores an identical game mechanic, as well as several other related rules, to arrive at an conclusion that is unsupported by any rules. I think you'd have a much better case if you could point to any other scenario in which a token can be spent for zero effect.
You are also treating the focus and calculate rules differently: in your interpretation, the focus rule is a critical exception to a greater unwritten rule, but that same rule being applied to calculate tokens is redundant and superfluous.
As for how Ten Numb could have been worded, that discussion is meaningless. He could have been made more clear in either direction. You can write versions of his ability that specifically forbid him from spending for zero effect, and I can write versions that specifically allow him to spend for zero effect. He's ambiguous and that's not changing until FFG says something about it.
QuoteSo "nothing happens" means the effect is not resolved.
This is the the bone of contention at the heart of this whole thing. Can you prove it? Like show a line from the Rules Reference which says this. We know you don't have to resolve all of an effect to resolve an effect, just do as much as you can.
Spoiler Alert, you can't, which is why we need FFG to clarify this exact issue.
Edited by AramoroA25 minutes ago, Arachneo said:The argument: " nothing happens does not mean effect is not resolved" is invalid, because if effect is resolved something happens.
Nothing it's a beautifull word that means "not anything". Effect resolved is "anything" in any case I can imagine.
I don't have a dog in this fight, and frankly it is going around in circles, but I do have some an example.
4 minutes ago, nexttwelveexits said:I think you'd have a much better case if you could point to any other scenario in which a token can be spent for zero effect.
Afterburners, currently (although I hope they change the rule) you can spend a charge to take a boost action, but if you fail that action it still resolves and you lose the charge, therefore you technically spend a token for zero effect.
You can of course argue that the boost technically resolves (just not the way you want), so therefore that is an effect, but then you could say the the stress used by Numb could be the same... you spend it to turn all focus' into hits, that fails but still resolves (just not how you would like), so just like afterburners you spend the token.
But to be honest who knows (oh yeah FFG do), so maybe it's best to wait.
Just now, xwingMinty said:I don't have a dog in this fight, and frankly it is going around in circles, but I do have some an example.
Afterburners, currently (although I hope they change the rule) you can spend a charge to take a boost action, but if you fail that action it still resolves and you lose the charge, therefore you technically spend a token for zero effect.
You can of course argue that the boost technically resolves (just not the way you want), so therefore that is an effect, but then you could say the the stress used by Numb could be the same... you spend it to turn all focus' into hits, that fails but still resolves (just not how you would like), so just like afterburners you spend the token.
But to be honest who knows (oh yeah FFG do), so maybe it's best to wait.
As you note, when you fail a boost there is still an effect that is resolved, just not in the way you want. Failing is a game mechanic and the rules specify how a failed effect is resolved. Spending a token to modify dice is not an effect that can fail.
28 minutes ago, Arachneo said:Nothing it's a beautifull word that means "not anything". Effect resolved is "anything" in any case I can imagine.
That's your spin on it. Nothing in the rules says anything has to happen for an effect to be resolved. All we know is that you do 'as much as you can' when resolving effects, if you have to reroll 2 dice but you only have 1? You reroll 1, and nothing in the rules suggests that doesn't extend to doing nothing.
Edited by AramoroA38 minutes ago, nexttwelveexits said:You are also treating the focus and calculate rules differently: in your interpretation, the focus rule is a critical exception to a greater unwritten rule, but that same rule being applied to calculate tokens is redundant and superfluous.
I don't know why calculate keeps getting brought up, it doesn't mimic in any way the text in question here. Focus does however as it changes all results; it then as an additional rule tells you that you cannot spend a focus if there are no <eyeball> results to modify. I understand that you're claiming this is somehow setting a general rule that zero results don't qualify as a target for all results but as general rules are not set inside specific rules I continue to assert this is FFG clearly recognizing that zero results would normally be a valid target for something that modified all results (because that's how the language works) and made focus an exception to this.