See also calculating, focused, evading, reinforced, disarmed, etc etc etc.

The only one that this isn't true for currently is Tractored, where you have to have tokens of a number relevant to your base size to be tractored.

There's also no short term for not having force charges currently active, but this isn't currently used for any kind of reference, I suspect if they ever print something based on having no force up, they will invent a word for it.

So, then, if something suffers damage, is it damaged for the rest of game (cannot be repaired and thus returned to a state of non-damaged)?

5 minutes ago, dmcgee1 said:

So, then, if something suffers damage, is it damaged for the rest of game (cannot be repaired and thus returned to a state of non-damaged)?

Not really.

"Suffer Damage" is take any hit or crit to the shields or hull. It's an action, a verb. It's something which happens. That's what will put the kibosh on Stealth Device.

Being "Damaged" is a state, and it refers specifically to having a damage card on your ship. This is the adjective. It describes the current state of your ship. There are ways for damage cards to be discarded, so a ship can go from damaged to not damaged.

The two terms are similar, but it's not hard to read the context of various cards to figure out whether the card is asking about an event happening (Stealth Device), or about a ship being in a particular state (Wullfwarro, Null).

Yeah, that's not exactly/technically correct. Suffer is the verb, and damage is the noun in "suffer damage," but arguing English is not what this is, truly, about. It is about the rule and how is should be applied, and whether the wording is ambiguous enough to warrant an official explanation. I believe that it is.

If a ship has shield(s), then the [implied] suffered damage removes a shield. But ships are not considered damaged until they have damage cards.

I would very much like to see this answered by FFG.

In a pragmatic sense, the terms "suffer damage" and "damaged" are superficially close enough that there are new folks who ask about the topic like every month or so. To that end, if there's ever a 3rd edition, it'd be prudent of FFG to select other terms.

However, the majority of the community does not find these terms *at all* confusing or ambiguous. Not even remotely. That's why like a half-dozen folks have given clear answers to the post, all in the same direction.

23 minutes ago, dmcgee1 said:

but arguing English is not what this is, truly, about.

No, it is. Ultimately, all interpretation of Rules-As-Written are about how we understand the written word, and that is going to come down arguing about language.

In general onhere, if there's a rules interpretation where I think the language can be read two ways, with two different meanings, I'll be honest about that. There's a lot of rules where there are valid interpretations of the language which I think are a bit more strained and less preferable, but this isn't even *close* to one of those.

Stealth Device isn't asking about whether your ship is in a state. Clear as day, it's asking about whether an event happens to it. That event is suffering damage. The default effect of suffering damage is to lose a shield. I'll copy over the card and rule as posted by @meffo last page.

1 hour ago, dmcgee1 said:

Yeah, that's not exactly/technically correct. Suffer is the verb, and damage is the noun in "suffer damage," but arguing English is not what this is, truly, about. It is about the rule and how is should be applied, and whether the wording is ambiguous enough to warrant an official explanation. I believe that it is.

If a ship has shield(s), then the [implied] suffered damage removes a shield. But ships are not considered damaged until they have damage cards.

I would very much like to see this answered by FFG.

They already did. In the rulebook.

1 hour ago, thespaceinvader said:

They already did. In the rulebook.

Can we please avoid the snark? I'm am truly not trying to be obtuse, here. I am trying to explain why I feel that the rule is ambiguous enough to warrant an official ruling.

If all you are going to say is that it is in the rulebook, all I can say is, "Yeah, that's the point I am trying to make, too."

7 minutes ago, dmcgee1 said:

Can we please avoid the snark? I'm am truly not trying to be obtuse, here. I am trying to explain why I feel that the rule is ambiguous enough to warrant an official ruling.

If all you are going to say is that it is in the rulebook, all I can say is, "Yeah, that's the point I am trying to make, too."

It isn't ambiguous though.

lol. quad post.

lol quad post.

3 hours ago, dmcgee1 said:

Yeah, that's not exactly/technically correct. Suffer is the verb, and damage is the noun in "suffer damage," but arguing English is not what this is, truly, about. It is about the rule and how is should be applied, and whether the wording is ambiguous enough to warrant an official explanation. I believe that it is.

If a ship has shield(s), then the [implied] suffered damage removes a shield. But ships are not considered damaged until they have damage cards.

I would very much like to see this answered by FFG.

it's not that simple, though. suffer is a verb, damage is a noun. damaged is used in the rules like an adjective. it can also be an adverb or the verb in past tense or past participle. rules discussion often come down to arguing english, so it is in fact what this is truly about. there is not a singular rule here to discuss. none of the rules can be interpreted without the context of the rest of the rules.

if you really believe the use of the aforementioned terms is ambiguous enough to warrant further explanation or clarification from FFG, please go ahead and post your question to them from here: https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/contact/rules/

FFG does not respond to questions in these forums. this is a community driven effort to discuss the rules of the game that we know and love.

if a ship has shields and it suffers damage, that it resolved by loosing a shield. ships are not considered damaged until they have damage cards. some effects can deal damage cards to ships. that is not suffering damage, though. this means a ship can be damaged without having suffered damage as well.

the rules of x-wing 2.0 are far from 100% clear or even easy to interpret. that's why we have this forum. you cannot expect to understand the rules or be able to resolve interactions between different abilities in this game without reading the rules. lots of people try and do just that, but more often than not, they have to ask someone who has actually spent the time to read the rules reference.

even people who have read the rules reference get confused. that's why this forum is needed. we can bounce ideas and try to interpret things as best we can. and we are better at it than you are or i am.

i will agree with most people in this thread, though. your question is relatively simple and has an obvious answer. it does not need clarification from FFG, since it's already spelled out in the rules reference.

2 hours ago, dmcgee1 said:

Yeah, that's not exactly/technically correct. Suffer is the verb, and damage is the noun in "suffer damage," but arguing English is not what this is, truly, about. It is about the rule and how is should be applied, and whether the wording is ambiguous enough to warrant an official explanation. I believe that it is.

If a ship has shield(s), then the [implied] suffered damage removes a shield. But ships are not considered damaged until they have damage cards.

I would very much like to see this answered by FFG.

I think that, as has been covered in the thread already, the confusion comes from conflating the terms "suffer damage," and "damaged," which have different meanings as defined in the Rules Reference. Everyone that's stating "it's defined in the rules" is correct: those explicit terms have been defined by FFG, and as such, any clarification is very unlikely to come from them; the card is actually pretty clearly written (which isn't always the case in this game). That's why we on the forums are trying to clarify the rules, to try and make them clearer, or help players understand the underlying meaning of it.

All of the answers come from the current Rules Reference (1.1.0, Jan 15 2020) , which I highly recommend reviewing outside of this thread. I'm not going to just tell you to "look it up," though, I'm going to try and call out the various definitions in the guide and point to where you can look them up yourself for double verification. Both items I'm going to discuss are under the topic of "Damage," which starts at the bottom of page 8, and continues to the top of page 9.

• SUFFER DAMAGE: @Hiemfire posted the text verbatim from the Rules Reference. Suffering damage is an active occurrence, not a passive state. When a ship "suffers damage," it either removes a shield or is dealt damage cards. A ship can suffer damage from any number of sources - attacks, devices detonating, obstacles are the main culprits - but when the damage is suffered, whether into shields or hull, it activates the trigger on Stealth Device. While you may feel that it should only work on hull damage, that's a thematic argument, not one based on the actual written rules.
• DAMAGED: Continuing at the top of page 9, a "Damaged" ship is one that has at least one damage card assigned to it. "Damaged" is a passive state, not an active occurrence. For Stealth Device to work the way you understand it, it would have to be written differently. Likely, it would not have a charge, and would instead would be written, "While defending, if you are not damaged, roll one additional defense die."

As @meffo stated, the word suffer is a verb, is active in nature, and defines the timing trigger for when Stealth Device would lose its charge. Immediately after a ship suffers damage, regardless of where (hull or shields), the charge on Stealth Device is lost.

(as a contrast, consider some ships and upgrades that have "while you are damaged" effects)

• Wullffwarro rolls extra dice, but only if he has hull damage.
• "Rush" changes his Pilot Initiative when damaged.
• R2-D2 (Rebel Crew) can regenerate your shields, but only when you're also damaged.

6 minutes ago, emeraldbeacon said:

SUFFER DAMAGE: @Hiemfire posted the text verbatim from the Rules Reference. Suffering damage is an active occurrence, not a passive state. When a ship "suffers damage," it either removes a shield or is dealt damage cards. A ship can suffer damage from any number of sources - attacks, devices detonating, obstacles are the main culprits - but when the damage is suffered, whether into shields or hull, it activates the trigger on Stealth Device. While you may feel that it should only work on hull damage, that's a thematic argument, not one based on the actual written rules.

Originally posted by @meffo on page 1, reposted first by @theBitterFig . I reposted it again to try and drive home the reference after @thespaceinvader 's simple and accurate statement that what was being asked already is covered in the rules was basically ignored.

1 hour ago, dmcgee1 said:

Can we please avoid the snark? I'm am truly not trying to be obtuse, here. I am trying to explain why I feel that the rule is ambiguous enough to warrant an official ruling.

If all you are going to say is that it is in the rulebook, all I can say is, "Yeah, that's the point I am trying to make, too."

I'm not being sarcastic. FFG will not answer this question, becaue the answer is unambiguously printed in the rulebook already.

Suffering Damage is an activity that occurs when you take an uncancelled [hit] or [crit] from any source. Its result is either flipping a shield to its inactive state if you have any active shields, or being dealt a damage card, face down if it was a [hit] or face up if it was a [crit], if you have no active shields. It is this, and only this, that causes Stealth Device to break.

Damaged is a state, that of having damage cards currently assigned.

Critically Damaged is a state, that of having face up damage cards currently assigned.

Shielded is a state, that of having active shield tokens.

All of these have opposites, Undamaged, Unshielded, and Not Critically Damaged respectively.

The act of Suffering Damage can affect any or all of these states, but is not directly, or always even causally, connected to any or all of them - you can become Damaged by having a card dealt directly (e.g. by Seyn Marana's ability or by Explosion with Wings), you can become Critically Damaged by having a card flipped (e.g. by R2-D2 crew or Concussion Missiles) and you can become Unshielded by spending or being forced to lose shield tokens (e.g. by Miranda Doni's ship ability, or Plasma Torpedoes). And in all cases, there are ways to reverse those conditions, too, e.g. R5 Astromech repairing your only damage card (assumign that card is facedown), R2 Astromech recovering a shield, any Crit card action repairing your only face up crit.

These game terms are all unambiguously defined, and FFG tends not to FAQ things which are unambiguous, and never answers threads like these directly either way.

I wouldn't deny that Suffering Damage could have been better named, to avoid this kind of misunderstanding, probably by defining 'one or more [hit] or [crit] symbols' with a symbol of its own and using that symbol instead of the word 'Damage' in that instance, which would have been a useful drafting tool in general given how often it comes up, but there's no ambiguity at all as to what any of these terms mean or how they interrelate.

8 hours ago, dmcgee1 said:

I am trying to explain why I feel that the rule is ambiguous enough to warrant an official ruling.

I really think we're using the word "ambiguous" differently.

Clearly, the similarity between the terms "while you are damaged" and "after you suffer damage" has lead a lot of folks to ask questions. I'd call that potentially confusing, but that isn't necessarily the same as ambiguous.

For rules questions, I think I'd reserve the word ambiguous for when there are multiple well-evidenced and grammatically sound interpretations of the language in rules, but here there's not really any question on how the rules work. If we're being precise and looking at the wording of Stealth Device, and the wording on the rules about suffering damage and being damaged. All the cards line up cleanly and consistently there is overwhelming community consensus on how all these things work.

I did as advised and contact FFG directly, and was provided with an answer.

The general consensus of this forum is correct, and if a ship "suffers damage" (after neutralize step), then the stealth device charge is disabled. I now have a better understanding of why (and I admit I may have missed it earlier if someone mentioned it) it is, due to the timing (not whether it is a verb, noun, adjective, or preposition :D).

I also learned that FFG will not answer in these forums (not sure why I did not know that beforehand, but am happy that there is a direct line to them).

Thanks, all, and thanks for your patience and willingness to deal with my hard-headedness.