I have been operating under the belief that Torani’s ability does NOT trigger Jostero’s ability.

Playing with a friend on Vassal and he said it DOES now! Reference, please?

Side Note: does Dead To Rights stop reinforce from functioning like normal?

2 hours ago, JBFancourt said:

I have been operating under the belief that Torani’s ability does NOT trigger Jostero’s ability.

Playing with a friend on Vassal and he said it DOES now! Reference, please?

Per the stated intended way that the B-Wing S-foils function (being able to spend the Lock to perform the bonus attack despite having used FCS to reroll a single die) and clarification in a later FFG Live episode by Max (we're waiting on it to show up in writing since before Covid hit he was planning on doing an updated FAQ) effects that happen during the aftermath step are not part of the attack that triggered them. It's been months since the 2 episodes were released so I don't have links for you, sorry.

2 hours ago, JBFancourt said:

Side Note: does Dead To Rights stop reinforce from functioning like normal?

I'd say yes since the Reinforce Token is being used for its function of mitigating damage but there is an extant counter argument that the token itself isn't being used but only the effect indicated by the token's presence which would not qualify for D2R.

@Hiemfire

The reinforce question really confounds me after reading RR. I totally get you saying the extant counter argument.

1) The reinforce token merely puts the ship in the stated called “reinforced” the token is never “used” for anything other than this, and indicating which end of the ship is reinforced.

2) When attacking a reinforced ship, it’s effect does not occur during the dice modification step. Altho add is a mod...

I honestly don’t know how I’d rule in a TO situation if two players asked me !

It’s a strange niche question of where that little evade comes from... the state of being reinforced, or the reinforce token.

🤔 😬

Also.... by the time we’re in neutralize results step am I even doing anything with DICE or am I just adding a RESULT?

I guess that sounds dumb...I guess you’re technically taking a green die and setting it on the table.

My interpretations...

Regarding the Jostero interaction... As @Hiemfire stated, there have been some clarifications about the whole Combat process. Essentially, once you reach the Aftermath step, nobody is actively attacking or defending anymore. Since Torani Kulda happens during the aftermath step, Jostero's ability works just fine.

Regarding Dead To Rights... Reinforce works by adding an evade result to the overall dice pool, which is explicitly defined as a dice modification (even if it happens outside of the normal timing window for modifying dice). Since it is a direct effect of having the token, the Kimogila ship ability does indeed shut down the Reinforce ability. It's the same principle as Fire Control System... you can reroll 1 die if you have (but do not spend) the lock. You're still "using the lock" to gain that reroll.

4 hours ago, JBFancourt said:

Also.... by the time we’re in neutralize results step am I even doing anything with DICE or am I just adding a RESULT?

Reinforce portion pertaining to the added result. (underlined portion may be what you're looking for)

"During the Neutralize Results step, if the attack would hit and there is more
than one / result remaining, one result is added to cancel one result ."

Step 4 of Attack

"4. Neutralize Results: During this step, pairs of attack and defense
dice neutralize each other. Dice are neutralized in the following order:
a. Pairs of and results are canceled.
b. Pairs of and results are canceled.
The attack hits if at least one or result remains uncanceled;
otherwise, the attack misses."

So the dice are compared to each other. First pairing up Evades with Hits, canceling them, and then Evades with Crits, canceling them. After that part is done if any hit or crit results remain the attack is considered to have hit, if there is more than 1 hit or crit result then Reinforce adds an Evade result, a dice modification, canceling 1 hit or 1 crit with hits being cancel first.

As for if it counts since it is outside of the "modify defense dice" sub step:

(RR v110, page 10, Dice Modification, first bullet): "Dice modification occurs during the respective Modify Attack Dice or
Modify Defense Dice step, unless otherwise stated ."

Reinforce states its timing as "During the Neutralize Results step" which is an "otherwise stated". So it is a Dice Modification. 😄

Interestingly while reading that section over this caught my eye (bolded and underlined):

"A ship is reinforced while it has a reinforce token assigned to
it. Reinforce tokens are circular, green tokens. While a
reinforced ship defends, if the attacker is inside the full arc
specified by the reinforce token and not in the other full arc, the
token provides an effect. The attacker needs to be in the
defender’s arc for the fore reinforce token or be in the defender’s arc
for the aft reinforce token."

The Reinforce token is adding the Evade result, which is a modification of the defense dice. D2R should apply because of this.

Just in case: Reinforce cannot reduce the number of attack die results carried over to step 5 to less than 1 since each Token's effect is processed 1 at a time in the case of multiple Reinforce tokens affecting the same arc (as Morna Ki can have).

Nice 👍

On 5/23/2020 at 5:41 PM, emeraldbeacon said:

My interpretations...

Regarding the Jostero interaction... Essentially, once you reach the Aftermath step, nobody is actively attacking or defending anymore.

That actually isn't correct. What was clarified was, during the aftermath step, you are no longer in the timing of "While you perform an attack". There is still an attacker and a defender. Otherwise the B-wing foils wouldn't work..

Quote

"After you perform an attack, you may spend your lock on the defender..."

If nobody is defending in the aftermath step, then the S-foils would not know who the defender is to target for its ability.

So Jostero still cannot trigger his ability on Torani's target. But he CAN on any other ship caught in his bullseye.

Regarding Dead To Rights.. , I dont see the token itself being "used" to add the evade result, but rather, showing the ship in the game state of being "Reinforced". I also think that "using a token" specifically means "spend".

Quote

A ship is reinforced while it has a reinforce token assigned to it. While a reinforced ship defends...

A ship does not spend the reinforce token when resolving its effect.

In the same respect, a ship can be blocked form 'using' (spending) an evade or focus token, but STILL be in a state of "Evading" or "Focused" to trigger other abilities.

For that example, DTR wont stop the Falcon Title ability.

The only tossup that could cause this to be in contention, is this line in the rule (which im leaning toward being poorly written).

Quote

..if the attacker is inside the full arc specified by the reinforce token and not in the other full arc, the token provides an effect.

But im personally still on the side that, since you are not spending the token, the token itself isn't being "used", thus DTR isnt blocking it.

The plot thickens!!! @Hiemfire @emeraldbeacon 😱

22 minutes ago, JBFancourt said:

The plot thickens!!! @Hiemfire @emeraldbeacon 😱

Personally waiting on the FAQ that'll hopefully touch on both. @Lyianx is forgetting defender can mean either the target currently defending or one that defended from the triggering attack.

Jostero + Torani does definitely work though if the ship taking damage from her ability wasn't the one she attacked. Just has to be in the bullseye and either choose to keep their token or didn't have one when her ability is processed.

1 hour ago, Lyianx said:

Regarding Dead To Rights.. , I dont see the token itself being "used" to add the evade result, but rather, showing the ship in the game state of being "Reinforced". I also think that "using a token" specifically means "spend".

Quote

A ship is reinforced while it has a reinforce token assigned to it. While a reinforced ship defends...

A ship does not spend the reinforce token when resolving its effect.

In the same respect, a ship can be blocked form 'using' (spending) an evade or focus token, but STILL be in a state of "Evading" or "Focused" to trigger other abilities.

For that example, DTR wont stop the Falcon Title ability.

The only tossup that could cause this to be in contention, is this line in the rule (which im leaning toward being poorly written).

Quote

..if the attacker is inside the full arc specified by the reinforce token and not in the other full arc, the token provides an effect.

But im personally still on the side that, since you are not spending the token, the token itself isn't being "used", thus DTR isnt blocking it.

The card ability is what is providing the effect, not the evade token.

The fact is, we don't have a clear answer on this question, because it depends on four terms that have never been CLEARLY defined in the rules: Attacker / Attacking , and Defender / Defending . Those terms are not synonymous! To claim that they are synonymous (i.e. an attacker is only an attacker when it's attacking, and a attacking ship is only attacking if it is an attacker), ends up invalidated a bunch of cards in the game, because having it both ways becomes impossible.

1. When does a ship become the Attacker / Defender ? This one, thankfully, we know: It's defined in the Rules Reference. As soon as a ship declares an intent to attack, before Combat Step 1, it becomes an Attacker. A ship becomes the Defender when it is declared as such in Combat Step 1c.
2. When does a ship cease being an Attacker / Defender ? We don't know, specifically, but there are abilities that trigger in the Aftermath step that specifically call out Attackers (Dengar pilot) and Defenders (B-Wing S-Foils). To that end, it seems logical (to me, at least) that a ship would need to remain defined as an Attacker or Defender, until the end of Combat Step 6 (Aftermath).
3. When does a ship start Attacking / Defending ? While not defined, it seems clear that when a ship becomes an Attacker (or Defender), it starts Attacking (or Defending); therefore, at the beginning of a ship's attack.
4. When does a ship finish Attacking / Defending ? This is the big question! For me, it comes down to this: Almost every ability that activates during the Aftermath step is triggered off of something like "after you defend" or "after you perform an attack." The ONLY way these abilities can trigger is if they are no longer Attacking or Defending. The only way they could work, would be if the status of "Attacking" or "Defending" ends after Combat Step 5 (Deal Damage).

In a nutshell...

In order for several abilities to function properly, the action of Attacking / Defending must terminate before Combat Step 6 (Aftermath)... but the title of Attacker / Defender must persist throughout Combat Step 6 (Aftermath)!

As an example of how this would HAVE to work, let's look at this possibility: A Republic ship with Clone Commander Cody is attacking Dengar, from within Dengar's front arc. You now have 2 Aftermath triggers that require the action of Attacking / Defending to be finished, but that the state of Attacker / Defender to still be in place. If Cody is still "attacking," it's not "after you perform an attack." The state of "attacking" is over at this point... but there is still a defender referenced in the card, so Dengar would, by necessity, still be considered a Defender. Likewise, for Dengar's snapback attack, he is no longer "defending," becuase if he were, he wouldn't be at the "after you defend" step. But there's still an attacker for him to reference!

.

Taking Comander Cody as an example, isn't it very possible to interpret the "the defender gains" part as short hand for "the defender of that attack gains"? Same as "if 1 or more hit/crit results where canceled" must refere to the attack we are now after?

Basicaly, you never stop being the defender of that specifik attack, nore do you stop being the attacker of that specific attack. All references to attacker and defender must be tyed to a specific attack (that could be in the recent past as with the "after attacking/defending" triggers), not a current game state (as you are no longer attacking or defending after the attack).

8 hours ago, Smuggler said:

Taking Comander Cody as an example, isn't it very possible to interpret the "the defender gains" part as short hand for "the defender of that attack gains"? Same as "if 1 or more hit/crit results where canceled" must refere to the attack we are now after?

Basicaly, you never stop being the defender of that specifik attack, nore do you stop being the attacker of that specific attack. All references to attacker and defender must be tyed to a specific attack (that could be in the recent past as with the "after attacking/defending" triggers), not a current game state (as you are no longer attacking or defending after the attack).

This is the kind of 'use of words that aren't there' that I would expect from the Official Ruling thread. Although we typically accept those explanations when they're handed down from an official source, I don't like to "expand shorthand" as part of the community because it opens up arguments of intent for every rules dispute past and present.

In the interest of preserving the letter of Rules As Written + precedent I think @emeraldbeacon offered the best summary of understanding in this thread:

10 hours ago, emeraldbeacon said:

In order for several abilities to function properly, the action of Attacking / Defending must terminate before Combat Step 6 (Aftermath)... but the title of Attacker / Defender must persist throughout Combat Step 6 (Aftermath)!

19 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

@Lyianx is forgetting defender can mean either the target currently defending or one that defended from the triggering attack.

Emeraldbeacon actually explained this better. I'm not forgetting it, its just not very clear that there is officially a difference. So you can understand my position. Unfortunately, FFG blends these two together so they are not very distinct, and are used somewhat interchangeably. As shown here.

Quote

Aftermath substep
a. Resolve any of the defending player’s abilities that trigger after a ship defends or is destroyed, excluding abilities that grant a bonus attack.
c. Resolve any of the defending player’s abilities that trigger after a ship defends or is destroyed that grant a bonus attack.

If the ship is no longer 'defending', then these steps makes no sense, because there are no more "defending" players as, is stated by you and Emerald, a ship is no longer 'defending' during the aftermath. Up until now, i did see there was a difference, other than using the proper 'grammar accurate' version of the same word/term. It wouldn't make grammatical sense to say "Resolve any of the Defender player abilities". But now that they are splitting Attacking into its own timing window (and they havent specifically said they were doing the same for defending), logic suggests "Defending" would get the same treatment, but has yet to.

It really is a mess. There's no clear RAW for how its should work. And i can only go back to the RAI for Jostero in that he wasn't (initially) designed to work on the ship being engaged. Granted, this is leaning on how he worked in 1E, but given the lack of RAW, its all we have to go on.

17 hours ago, Lyianx said:

Emeraldbeacon actually explained this better. I'm not forgetting it, its just not very clear that there is officially a difference. So you can understand my position. Unfortunately, FFG blends these two together so they are not very distinct, and are used somewhat interchangeably. As shown here.

If the ship is no longer 'defending', then these steps makes no sense, because there are no more "defending" players as, is stated by you and Emerald, a ship is no longer 'defending' during the aftermath. Up until now, i did see there was a difference, other than using the proper 'grammar accurate' version of the same word/term. It wouldn't make grammatical sense to say "Resolve any of the Defender player abilities". But now that they are splitting Attacking into its own timing window (and they havent specifically said they were doing the same for defending), logic suggests "Defending" would get the same treatment, but has yet to.

It really is a mess. There's no clear RAW for how its should work. And i can only go back to the RAI for Jostero in that he wasn't (initially) designed to work on the ship being engaged. Granted, this is leaning on how he worked in 1E, but given the lack of RAW, its all we have to go on.

This can be solved if the "defending player" and the "defending ship" are two different things.

Let’s not forget that there’s also the question of D2R and reinforce, too, people!

Please enter final comments before we close and vote on the issues.

I have always been of the opinion that the aftermath step does not occur "during" the attack, because you can't have abilities that trigger after an attack happen during the attack; that's simply not possible. However, you can refer to the ship that was attacking/defending as 'the attacker' or 'the defender' even though that ship is no longer actively attacking/defending at that precise moment. This is a contextually accurate application of language.

I can see why it might be confusing at first blush, but if you accept that the attack's duration ends before the aftermath step, it remains 100% clear which ships are being referred to by the "attacker" and "defender" labels in the aftermath rules. Conversely, if one attempts to include the aftermath as "during" the attack, it creates confusion and ambiguity, as bonus attacks become nested within other attacks and it becomes possible to have multiple attackers/defenders at the same time. This is far, far messier and more complicated than the attack simply ending before the aftermath step.

in my opinion, torani kulda's effect does trigger josero's ability, since the ship in question is no longer defending, even though it may be considered a defender for other intents and purposes.

or in other words, i 100% agree with @emeraldbeacon

also in my opinion, a reinforce token is a token that provides an effect. it does not a just indicate that a ship is reinforced. it provides an effect, and thus i think it's fair to say that it is being used to modify dice. especially since the section on reinforce in the RR specifies reinforce tokens are not spent when their effect is resolved - and that the dead to rights ship ability says "using", not "by spending" or anything similar.

i'm not happy with that line of reasoning, though. we should do what the cards and rules say, not deduct what we think they mean by what they don't say. still, that's my interpretation. i also think it's in the spirit of the ship ability.

dead to rights and reinforce could certainly use clarification.

It seems pretty cut and dry to me that Reinforce is modifying the dice by adding an evade result. Adding a result is listed as a type of dice modification. The green Reinforce token is effecting the dice, causing the modification. Making me believe that the green Reinforce token cannot be used to modify the dice by adding an evade result.