Easier, yes.

But not as useful, and would invalidate the “cannot be modified again” clause.

Which, really - is a big nail in the intention.

”Cannot be modified again” is mostly irrelevant if your effect is timed at defense tokens - who and how would you be modifying it again?

So it’s at least seemingly intended to be Modify Dice

47 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Easier, yes.

But not as useful, and would invalidate the “cannot be modified again” clause.

I was talking about the second part of his effect. Spending a defense token for the rerolls. And only about the defender, not the attacker.

The first effect is clear and not a problem. Lando is attacker, attacker can modify the dice in step 3. Like all other effects that do the same (TRC, Vader, ...).

I am more surprissed that the rules are not this clear in this point (ok, i am not this surprissed 😉 ).
It should be attacker modify in step 3, defender modify in step 4. Problem solved.
As i said, i cannot remember of any effect for he defender that is being resolved in step 3 (correct me if i missed one).

5 minutes ago, Tokra said:

I was talking about the second part of his effect. Spending a defense token for the rerolls. And only about the defender, not the attacker.

The first effect is clear and not a problem. Lando is attacker, attacker can modify the dice in step 3. Like all other effects that do the same (TRC, Vader, ...).

I am more surprissed that the rules are not this clear in this point (ok, i am not this surprissed 😉 ).
It should be attacker modify in step 3, defender modify in step 4. Problem solved.
 As i said, i cannot remember of any effect for he defender that is being resolved in step 3 (correct me if i missed one). 

I also cannot remember any defender effect in step 3, but the rules do not specifically forbid it. But it would be very strange if defender could, because then it would be player order who decides who goes first and not.

(X-wing is a bit different. In the equivalent modify step, after attack dice are rolled, the defender may mod them, then the attacker has the final chance to mod attack dice. Then in the "defense token" step (which is rolling defense dice) the attacker may mod, then defender has finally say. Not sure how relevant that is, as in X-wing a single dice can also be rerolled only once.)

16 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Don’t need to modify it.

Golden Rules applies.

IE, Lando, as a component, doesn’t need the rules permission to have his timing fit it - it just does, as that’s the timing.

Quite true, but if we're trying to decide what the timing actually is (Modify Dice or Spend Defense Tokens) the rules are what guide us. Like I said, its probably true that it falls under the "Modify Dice" step, and Lando's text can certainly overrule the wording of the rules there, but there are some timing consequences for that as well, as Tokra has mentioned.

Wait, that's not related to the OP post, but ... there is no dot next to "Millenium Falcon". Which means we could field both Han in Millenium Falcon AND Lando in Millenium Falcon .

Not that it is powerful, but you can have two millenium falcons. Just saying...

27 minutes ago, Coranhann said:

Wait, that's not related to the OP post, but ... there is no dot next to "Millenium Falcon". Which means we could field both Han in Millenium Falcon AND Lando in Millenium Falcon .

Not that it is powerful, but you can have two millenium falcons. Just saying...

Currently yes. You can fly Han Solo in Millenium Falcon and Lando in Millenium Falcon.

Just as long as one realises, that the rules are actually clear and surprisingly delineated .

Is a Timing specified?

No.

Is it a Modify Dice Effect?

Yes.

Are You Sure?

Yes. Spend, Reroll, Cancel, they're all Modify Dice effects.

Then a Modify Dice Effect must be used in the "Resolve Attack Effects" step.

And when both players have effects that share a timing, 1st Player resolves ALL of that timing's effects first, followed by 2nd Player .

Indeed. And due to the nature of Spend, this means he wants to be first player so he can reroll before there's any Spending done.

Another timing has to be specified in order to take us to that timing, and not assume the default... And frankly, with such a High Profile card, is the assumption that the designers just........ forgot ?

I'd personally find that fairly insulting, rather than its assuming "as intended". By all means, they have the right to update, change or admit it was a mistake in the future - but as it stands right now , the Rule is clear , if it is little used .

9 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Indeed. And due to the nature of Spend, this means he wants to be first player so he can reroll before there's any Spending done.

The really interesting part of the Ten Numb case?

If he rolls a Crit, and you use Lando, and he rerolls it to a Crit with Lando ........ He can't SPEND IT. Because that's a Modify Dice effect. Totally a Gamblers Bluff, pays off Big, or not at All.

Why can't he spend it?

7 minutes ago, Bertie Wooster said:

Why can't he spend it?

I'm trying to understand that, too. I don't think there's a restriction on modifying dice multiple times, other than Lando's attack ability. But we're talking about his defense ability here, right?

What you want is for a 1st-player Lando to modify that blue crit to a non-crit so that Ten Numb has nothing to spend. But if Lando is 2nd player, Ten Numb will have already spent his crit before Lando gets a chance to modify it.

And to add...Lando on Lando action would be funny! 1st-player attacking Lando modifies a die that 2nd-player Lando can't make 1st-player Lando re-roll!

2 minutes ago, RobertK said:

And to add...Lando on Lando action would be funny! 1st-player attacking Lando modifies a die that 2nd-player Lando can't make 1st-player Lando re-roll!

@Bertie Wooster No no, you’re right. I was misreading.

Had a horrible night and I was transposing the can’t modify again restriction To both effects, which is totally incorrect.

i have deleted that paragraph, so that it cannot be modified again

😁 😁

On 4/10/2019 at 10:39 AM, Green Knight said:

I also cannot remember any defender effect in step 3, but the rules do not specifically forbid it. But it would be very strange if defender could, because then it would be player order who decides who goes first and not.

Rules Reference Guide page 3: " Resolve Attack Effects : The attacker (!) can resolve attack effects as described below: ..." and " Spend Defense Tokens : The defender can spend one or more of its defense tokens ."

I don't know how this could be interpret that: " While defending you may spend 1 of your defense tokens to force the attacker to reroll 1 or more dice of your choice." would take place during "Resolve Attack Effects"?

To force a reroll is a normal effect of spending evade defense tokens and has always been in Attack Step 4.

8 minutes ago, Triangular said:

Rules Reference Guide page 3: " Resolve Attack Effects : The attacker (!) can resolve attack effects as described below: ..." and " Spend Defense Tokens : The defender can spend one or more of its defense tokens ."

I don't know how this could be interpret that: " While defending you may spend 1 of your defense tokens to force the attacker to reroll 1 or more dice of your choice." would take place during "Resolve Attack Effects"?

To force a reroll is a normal effect of spending evade defense tokens and has always been in Attack Step 4.

Hmm, I figure I’m misreading again 😁

It’s just that “while defending” is a much more open timing than “during the spend defense tokens step”...

The rule of timing to modify dice applies, because another timing (during the spend defense tokens step) hasn’t been specified.

59 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

It’s just that “while defending” is a much more open timing than “during the spend defense tokens step”...

The rule of timing to modify dice applies, because another timing (during the spend defense tokens step) hasn’t been specified.

That's true, but it seems a bit redundant to me to specify that you have to spend a defense token during spend defense token step. I would think that FFG thought they don't have to specify the obvious? They should have specified if you spend a defense token during "Resolve Attack Effects" step.

16 minutes ago, Triangular said:

That's true, but it seems a bit redundant to me to specify that you have to spend a defense token during spend defense token step. I would think that FFG thought they don't have to specify the obvious? They should have specified if you spend a defense token during "Resolve Attack Effects" step.

Only one of those is the default though - and you can only ever assume the default.

Abd the default is - modify dice effects are in the resolve attack effects. You’ll note that, THAT part of the rule, doesn’t give a snot about Attacker or Not - just says resolve it there.

So technically, by specifying “in resolve attack effects” you’re being redundant, and (generally speaking) redundant is omitted.

But hey, you never know how things change, evolve andbe clarified - I’m pretty sure, if they knew Lando or Lando like things were going to be like this back at Wave 0, the rulebook would have been written differently - but hindsight is always 20/20 🙂

10 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

But hey, you never know how things change, evolve andbe clarified - I’m pretty sure, if they knew Lando or Lando like things were going to be like this back at Wave 0, the rulebook would have been written differently - but hindsight is always 20/20 🙂

True again! And my intuition was always different from clarification up to now. We'll wait and see.

Waiting is the key in Armada, as we all know...