Can you use Spice Visions when you use Jabba's ability, or is the focus a cost of focusing him, or something like that.

You're right that it is a cost, however Spice Visions is an interrupt, so yes, Jabba loves being high on spice.

Can you use Spice Visions when you use Jabba's ability, or is the focus a cost of focusing him, or something like that.

whenever a focus token would be placed on one of your units, spice visions is usable. there is no stipulations what so ever on the card about what types of situations it can be used in.

Can you use Spice Visions when you use Jabba's ability, or is the focus a cost of focusing him, or something like that.

whenever a focus token would be placed on one of your units, spice visions is usable. there is no stipulations what so ever on the card about what types of situations it can be used in.

Since placing the focus token is a cost, and doing anything to prevent paying that cost will prevent the action from happening, I'm not sure what the point would be of using Spice Visions on Jabba the Hutt when using his ability.

Kind of like, if you want to use You're My Only Hope, and you somehow prevent the sacrifice from happening, then you can't use You're My Only Hope, because the cost wasn't paid.

Micah

Since placing the focus token is a cost, and doing anything to prevent paying that cost will prevent the action from happening, I'm not sure what the point would be of using Spice Visions on Jabba the Hutt when using his ability.

Micah

Incorrect, the cost is still paid it is just instead of exhausting the unit you damaged it.

we have had this identical discussion in the OTHER spice visions thread that's still on this page. if you guys don't believe the answers your getting then why not email ffg directly with the question?

here ya go. http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_faq.asp

I'm not sure what the point would be of using Spice Visions on Jabba the Hutt when using his ability.

Have two Bounties in hand and a Spice Visions? Double capture!

Can you use Spice Visions when you use Jabba's ability, or is the focus a cost of focusing him, or something like that.

whenever a focus token would be placed on one of your units, spice visions is usable. there is no stipulations what so ever on the card about what types of situations it can be used in.

Since placing the focus token is a cost, and doing anything to prevent paying that cost will prevent the action from happening, I'm not sure what the point would be of using Spice Visions on Jabba the Hutt when using his ability.

Kind of like, if you want to use You're My Only Hope, and you somehow prevent the sacrifice from happening, then you can't use You're My Only Hope, because the cost wasn't paid.

Micah

The cost was not prevented. The cost was still paid by focusing Jabba. Prevented would be something saying "Jabba cannot be focused." If Jabba was already focused, paying the cost would be prevented because exhausted units cannot be focused to begin with.

Step 4 of effects resolution of the FAQ says "Pay cost(s)." Ok, focus a ready Jabba, cost paid.

You're right that when playing You're My Only Hope, sacrificing a unit is a cost that must be paid. If sacrificing a unit is not possible, was prevented or something, then the effect does not resolve. However, if it was sacrificed, then somehow brought back from the dead, as long as it was sacrificed, the cost has been paid.

Incorrect, the cost is still paid it is just instead of exhausting the unit you damaged it.

I'm not trying to make waves, but I'm not grasping this. Focusing Jabba for his ability is a cost, as per the FAQ, just like sacrificing a unit is a cost of You're My Only Hope.

For the sake of example, let's say I had a card with the text: "When a unit would be sacrificed, focus it instead." If I played that event on the unit I was going to sacrifice for You're My Only Hope, would You're My Only Hope still happen? Wouldn't that be preventing the sacrifice?

The rulebook defines Focus as "The action of placing a Focus Token on a ready card to trigger a card or game effect." By using Spice Visions to put a damage token on Jabba instead, doesn't that mean that I did not, in fact, focus him? And therefore did not actually pay the cost?

Micah

The key is the word "instead".

In real life, a cost might be 2 American dollars. But the store owner says you may 2 Australian dollars "instead". The cost is still paid.

In the game, a cost might be to focus a unit. But Spice Visions allows you to damage a unit "instead". In the same way, the cost is still paid.

Spice visions says nothing about fulfilling cost requirements, and there is absolutely nothing in the rulebook about "Instead" and fulfilling costs. While there is some logic to your claim, it's not backed up by the rules in the slightest.

Look, I want the card to work this way, but I don't want to lose In a tournament because I was counting on it working this way.

It seems clear that "focusing" is the cost of his ability. And the rulebook seems clear that if you don't actually pay the cost, like by using an interrupt that stops the unit from actually focusing, that you didn't actually pay the cost and the action doesn't go off.

Can you use Spice Visions when you use Jabba's ability, or is the focus a cost of focusing him, or something like that.

whenever a focus token would be placed on one of your units, spice visions is usable. there is no stipulations what so ever on the card about what types of situations it can be used in.

Since placing the focus token is a cost, and doing anything to prevent paying that cost will prevent the action from happening, I'm not sure what the point would be of using Spice Visions on Jabba the Hutt when using his ability.

Kind of like, if you want to use You're My Only Hope, and you somehow prevent the sacrifice from happening, then you can't use You're My Only Hope, because the cost wasn't paid.

Micah

The cost was not prevented. The cost was still paid by focusing Jabba. Prevented would be something saying "Jabba cannot be focused." If Jabba was already focused, paying the cost would be prevented because exhausted units cannot be focused to begin with.

Step 4 of effects resolution of the FAQ says "Pay cost(s)." Ok, focus a ready Jabba, cost paid.

You're right that when playing You're My Only Hope, sacrificing a unit is a cost that must be paid. If sacrificing a unit is not possible, was prevented or something, then the effect does not resolve. However, if it was sacrificed, then somehow brought back from the dead, as long as it was sacrificed, the cost has been paid.

But the "interrupt" on Spice visions actually stops him from getting the focus token in the first place. So he never actually focuses. If it was a reaction that removed the focus token, then maybe it would work the way you explain.

The meaning of "instead" has been set by Nate in other rulings though. Of course, you may be right. Look at the Falcon ruling! If its that important, your only recourse is to ask FFG directly.

The meaning of "instead" has been set by Nate in other rulings though. Of course, you may be right. Look at the Falcon ruling! If its that important, your only recourse is to ask FFG directly.

I actually can't think of any rulings where "instead" has been allowed to circumvent paying a cost. Maybe he has ruled on this kind of issue before, but I can't think of it.

No he hasn't, and that's why there's room for debate. I was only saying that "instead" is an important and defined word in the template, and it's been the subject of a previous ruling ... so it's not a throwaway word to be easily ignored. And I think the expectation of most of us would be that its usage within a cost will be no different.

No he hasn't, and that's why there's room for debate. I was only saying that "instead" is an important and defined word in the template, and it's been the subject of a previous ruling ... so it's not a throwaway word to be easily ignored. And I think the expectation of most of us would be that its usage within a cost will be no different.

Can someone point me in the direction of Nate's post regarding "instead?" Might help me understand things a little better.

Micah

I have confirmation from Nate that Spice Visions does work with Jabba, I'll post full text later when not on my phone at work.

Q: If you use Spice Visions to damage a unit instead of focusing it when using an ability that has "focus this unit" as a cost (eg Jabba), does that ability still resolve or does the game "see" that the cost hasn't been paid?

A: The ability still resolves. Spice Visions is just changing the type of token being placed, not the reason for why it is being placed. If it is still being placed to pay a cost, and the type is changed from focus to damage, the damage token has now paid the cost.

wow, that's awesome for my main darkside deck.

You know, part of me is thrilled to know that spice visions works with Jabba. And other characters as well. Awesomesauce.

The other part is reeling from this from a judge's perspective. So say, for the sake of argument and my clarity, there's a card that said, "When a unit would be focused, place a shield token on it instead." Would this also satisfy Jabba's cost requirement?

Or is it only in the specific case of when a focus token is being changed to damage , as in the case of Spice Visions? Can you not substitute any other kind of token for a focus? Only damage?

Again, not trying to make waves, just trying to really understand the thinking of the rules team so I can judge properly if ever called upon.

Micah

It comes back to what I said before, the key word is "instead". If you're allowed to pay this "instead" of that as the cost, then the cost is paid. Its irrelevant whether its focus, damage, shields, widgets, dancing girls, ...

So the answer to your question is yes, as long as there was no shield on Jabba (so that the shield could be legally placed), then the cost is paid.

It comes back to what I said before, the key word is "instead". If you're allowed to pay this "instead" of that as the cost, then the cost is paid. Its irrelevant whether its focus, damage, shields, widgets, dancing girls, ...

so if this is the case, that the cost changes to a damage, which i am in agreement with, and according to the rules, if you can interrupt someone paying the "cost" then the effect can not be completed. So would spice visions be countered if someone used "it could be worse" to negate the damage (the cost), they paid to utilize something such as bib's resources, or jabbas ability?

The question is whether "damage this" (re SV) is identical to "deal 1 damage to" (re ICBW) ... if they're the same (which I think they are, but have never confirmed), then yes, you could.