Has anybody found ANY reference to being able to spend ANY token for zero effect, other than having caused a failed action? Which, by the way, isn't an attempt to spend a token for zero effect, it's just the result of misjudgment.

As you cannot resolve zero effects, you cannot spend the token to do so. This is explicitly stated as an example for Garven Dries. What makes you think it would be completely opposite for a different pilot?

45 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

This is explicitly stated as an example for Garven Dries  .

What's this?

45 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

As you cannot resolve zero effects, you cannot spend the token to do so.

That's an assertion not backed up by the rules and is one of the two main contentions in this thread.

46 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

This is explicitly stated as an example for Garven Dries. What makes you think it would be completely opposite for a different pilot?

Garvan triggers "after you spend a focus token." and focus tokens specifically can't be used to modify zero <eyeball> results. Ten spends a stress and nowhere does it ever say that stress specifically or tokens, in general, can't modify zero dice when they are instructed to "modify all" dice.

This thread is a good example, lots of people talking for absolutely zero results.

7 minutes ago, xwingMinty said:

This thread is a good example, lots of people talking for absolutely zero results.

And we've all spent a bunch of time. So, see? You CAN spend something for nothing!

</sarcasm>

1 hour ago, xwingMinty said:

This thread is a good example, lots of people talking for absolutely zero results.

I have a result, improving my English ?

Years late to the party, but I thought I'd leave some thoughts.

Throughout the rules reference it is implicitly used that 0 is contained in 'all', such frequent use of 'one or more' when intentionally excluding zero.

Another example is the 'simultaneous fire' rule. It is possible for a ship to be destroyed in initiative 0, by say a buzz droid swarm, in a game with there are no initiative 0 ships. Per 'simultaneous fire' The destroyed ship is to be removed after 'all ships that have the same initiative as the currently engaged ship have engaged'. If 0 is not included in 'all', then 'all' initiative 0 ships cannot possibly have engaged. The ship then cannot be removed, the players sit and stare for the remaining hour or so, and whoever is ahead on points is declared the winner.

And for a brief counter to 'the game state must have strictly changed for something to resolve' and 'you cannot do something to zero dice'. It's been explicitly FAQ'ed that one does indeed roll 0 dice on a zero agiity ship, which then allows for the removal of a strain token.

I don't doubt that it's necessary to leave room to interpret whether something written is what was intended. But strictly speaking, too many things break if 0 isn't in 'all'.

On 4/9/2020 at 10:50 AM, Nahjo Che said:

Years late to the party, but I thought I'd leave some thoughts.

Throughout the rules reference it is implicitly used that 0 is contained in 'all', such frequent use of 'one or more' when intentionally excluding zero.

Another example is the 'simultaneous fire' rule. It is possible for a ship to be destroyed in initiative 0, by say a buzz droid swarm, in a game with there are no initiative 0 ships. Per 'simultaneous fire' The destroyed ship is to be removed after 'all ships that have the same initiative as the currently engaged ship have engaged'. If 0 is not included in 'all', then 'all' initiative 0 ships cannot possibly have engaged. The ship then cannot be removed, the players sit and stare for the remaining hour or so, and whoever is ahead on points is declared the winner.

And for a brief counter to 'the game state must have strictly changed for something to resolve' and 'you cannot do something to zero dice'. It's been explicitly FAQ'ed that one does indeed roll 0 dice on a zero agiity ship, which then allows for the removal of a strain token.

I don't doubt that it's necessary to leave room to interpret whether something written is what was intended. But strictly speaking, too many things break if 0 isn't in 'all'.

not years, but pages. it seems you haven't read the thread.

the use of "one or more" has no correlation to the use of "all" in any context i know about in the rules currently.

that's not another example, just an example. it doesn't have any bearing on the discussion in the thread, though, since initiative 0 is a value, not a number of results, tokens, ships, damage cards, shields lost or anything similar. on a side note, there are abilities that makes ships engage at initiative 0 (torkil mux) and two pilots in the game that have initiative 0 (null and g4r-g0r). all ships having initiative 0 is not the same as no ships having initiative 0 in a game state, though. 🙂

the removal of a strain token is a change of the game state. when attacking or defending, you always roll dice, even when you roll zero dice. that's because rolling dice in this scenario does not actually mean that you have to roll dice, it's just a step during attacking that cannot be skipped unless explicitly stated in an ability. see step 3a of Attacking on page five of the RR.



indeed you need to be mindful not to take the statement "all does not include 0" into account in every possible occasion in the game, but in most cases it's very applicable and necessary to keep the game working. or in other words, there are interactions that would also break if "all includes 0".

you're not trying to argue that dalan oberos (kimogila) or ten numb (b-wing) can use their abilities even if there are 0 shields to remove or gain or 0 results to modify, respectively, are you?

also, thanks for you input and welcome to the party.

Edit: Grammar and spelling.

Probably should've structured my thing better, please treat the below as an aside.

21 hours ago, meffo said:

the removal of a strain token is a change of the game state. when attacking or defending, you always roll dice, even when you roll zero dice. that's because rolling dice in this scenario does not actually mean that you have to roll dice, it's just a step during attacking that cannot be skipped unless explicitly stated in an ability. see step 3a of Attacking on page five of the RR.

Which is the point! This is inherently triggering some change in the game state, through something which doesn't.

The effect of roll one fewer defense dice is applied, allowing for the removal of a strain, followed by a rolling of zero dice. It's nothing you in particular had said, but there were some who were too focused (sorry) on Ten Numb's player encountering physical difficulties picking up and re-rolling zero dice, rather that focusing (sorry again :p) on why the ability doesn't work that way. Things can and do happen as a result of triggers that don't manifest in physical or visible table changes.

End of aside, back to my main point.

21 hours ago, meffo said:

initiative 0 is a value, not a number of results, tokens, ships, damage cards, shields lost or anything similar

Initiative 0 is not a number granted, but the number of initiative 0 ships is. Its entirely plausible that a game may have no ships that can engage at initiative 0. In such a game, when a ship is destroyed at initiative 0, by say a buzz droid swarm, we must still be able to talk about "all initiative 0 ships", and be able to ensure that all zero of them have engaged to resolve simultaneous fire.

Another another example 😛 , is the End Phase. Easy enough to force a round where there are no circular tokens on any ships across the board. To continue with the game, we must be able to remove all circular tokens from all ships.

21 hours ago, meffo said:

you're not trying to argue that dalan oberos (kimogila) or ten numb (b-wing) can use their abilities even if there are 0 shields to remove or gain or 0 results to modify, respectively, are you?

That's would be correct, I'm not. I'd simply avoided pilot abilities because they'd seen a lot of attention already.

For Dalan, a shielded ship by definition has 1 shield to remove, and you cannot recover 1 shield without at least one inactive shield. And for Ten Numb, well, the ability is (to me) obviously intended to work as a focus does. This is a case of me personally choosing perceived intent over the written rule. I understand that this could be avoided if I chose to treat "0 not in all", but that would mean me playing with a different mindset to one necessary to me day to day. I would rather apply "well this is probably what they intended" to a few pilot abilities if and when they come up, than to core game phases and mechanics.

21 hours ago, meffo said:

also, thanks for you input and welcome to the party.

Thank you for your welcome!

5 hours ago, Nahjo Che said:

Edit: Grammar and spelling.

Probably should've structured my thing better, please treat the below as an aside.

Which is the point! This is inherently triggering some change in the game state, through something which doesn't.

The effect of roll one fewer defense dice is applied, allowing for the removal of a strain, followed by a rolling of zero dice. It's nothing you in particular had said, but there were some who were too focused (sorry) on Ten Numb's player encountering physical difficulties picking up and re-rolling zero dice, rather that focusing (sorry again :p) on why the ability doesn't work that way. Things can and do happen as a result of triggers that don't manifest in physical or visible table changes.

End of aside, back to my main point.

Initiative 0 is not a number granted, but the number of initiative 0 ships is. Its entirely plausible that a game may have no ships that can engage at initiative 0. In such a game, when a ship is destroyed at initiative 0, by say a buzz droid swarm, we must still be able to talk about "all initiative 0 ships", and be able to ensure that all zero of them have engaged to resolve simultaneous fire.

Another another example 😛 , is the End Phase. Easy enough to force a round where there are no circular tokens on any ships across the board. To continue with the game, we must be able to remove all circular tokens from all ships.

That's would be correct, I'm not. I'd simply avoided pilot abilities because they'd seen a lot of attention already.

For Dalan, a shielded ship by definition has 1 shield to remove, and you cannot recover 1 shield without at least one inactive shield. And for Ten Numb, well, the ability is (to me) obviously intended to work as a focus does. This is a case of me personally choosing perceived intent over the written rule. I understand that this could be avoided if I chose to treat "0 not in all", but that would mean me playing with a different mindset to one necessary to me day to day. I would rather apply "well this is probably what they intended" to a few pilot abilities if and when they come up, than to core game phases and mechanics.

Thank you for your welcome!

i agree. but if you read the OP of the thread again, i'm only dealing with pilot abilities - and you're only dealing with the rules in general in your examples. i certainly could have added "abilities:" before ""does "all" include 0?"" in the topic of the thread to make this clearer. so i just did that. staying on topic is very important. 😉