Sorry to ask this if it's been answered but I can't find a specific topic about this card. When Leia is destroyed, is she captured? Here's Leia's text:

If this unit leaves play, it is captured by your opponent at any dark side objective of his choice. Interrupt: When this unit leaves play, remove all focus tokens from all cards you control.

My friends and I debated about this because within the rule book, there is no connection with a destroyed unit and 'leaving play'. Here's the rule for a destroyed unit:

'Leaving play' effects are triggered by being destroyed, so yes, she is captured. This can also be trigger by an effect that would return the card to your hand, or otherwise cause the card to no longer be in play. This will override whatever card effects caused it to leave play. So as an example, if you Swindled your own Leia, her effect is also triggered.

So does Leia get captured whe you play swindled? Or does she go to my hand?

She is captured anytime she leaves play, no matter the reason. Swindled makes her leave play so yes.

I agree that Boba's ability would not work, as his target is no longer in an acceptable game state for his ability. (He cannot capture from out-of-play states)

Leia's card however does not have any such stipulation. It's a text effect that is always on, and does not care which state of play her card is in when it resolves.

Similar examples might include:

1) the human replica droid: Has card text that is used whilst outside the area of play (your hand). It's still legal and resolves. Why is Leias any different?

2) xwing escort: has a "when this unit leaves play" text effect. Do you also ignore this?

If someone was targeting leia, I would agree with you. But it's just card text that is always on. Her card moves itself.... No one is targeting her.

In and Out of Play rule, page 27 :

“Out of play” refers to the cards in a player’s hand, his facedown decks, his discard pile , his edge stack, his victory pile, and any cards that are captured.

...

A card that “leaves play” moves from a player’s play area to the “out of play” destination indicated by card or rules text. “Remove” and “Discard” are common terms that indicate a card must leave play.

Destroyed Unit Card rule, page 23 :

When a unit is destroyed, it is placed faceup on top of its owner’s discard pile . Any cards that were attached to the destroyed card are placed in their respective owners’ discard piles.

Conclusion : the destroyed unit card rule´s "out of play destination" is the discard pile.

So, when a unit is destroyed, it leaves play to the discard pile, the destruction's "out of play destination".

So Leia is captured when she's destroyed because her destruction implies she leaves play (to the discard pile)

Do you still believe she doesn't get captured?

This states that a destroyed unit goes immediately to the discard pile and that you cannot capture units from an out of play state which means when Leia is destroyed she is immediately out of play and cannot be captured. She is not leaving play. Cards that 'leave play' are being moved by another card effect or text. That is what my friends and I have agreed on. Until Fantasy Flight specifically adds some text in the rulebook that says, 'A destroyed card leaves play' then we believe that when a card reaches it's damage capacity it is immediately out of the game. Is there anybody out there that agrees with us?

Leia's text overrides the rulebook so that really doesn't matter much. I am sorry but you and your friends interpretation is wrong. Any time Leia would leave play she is captured instead. Being destroyed and going to the discard pile is leaving play. She was in play when destroyed as by being in play and active on your side of the table is "in play" then she takes damage or whatever is destroyed and then captured because she is now leaving play.

I am not sure how you can argue that being destroyed and going to the discard pile is not leaving play....

This states that a destroyed unit goes immediately to the discard pile and that you cannot capture units from an out of play state which means when Leia is destroyed she is immediately out of play and cannot be captured. She is not leaving play. Cards that 'leave play' are being moved by another card effect or text. That is what my friends and I have agreed on. Until Fantasy Flight specifically adds some text in the rulebook that says, 'A destroyed card leaves play' then we believe that when a card reaches it's damage capacity it is immediately out of the game. Is there anybody out there that agrees with us?

Leia's text overrides the rulebook so that really doesn't matter much. I am sorry but you and your friends interpretation is wrong. Any time Leia would leave play she is captured instead. Being destroyed and going to the discard pile is leaving play. She was in play when destroyed as by being in play and active on your side of the table is "in play" then she takes damage or whatever is destroyed and then captured because she is now leaving play.

I am not sure how you can argue that being destroyed and going to the discard pile is not leaving play....

On another similar note, Leia's other ability is an Interrupt, which according to the timing structure of the game, resolves before the resolution of the triggering effect IE: Leia is dealt enough damage to be destroyed and would then leave play. Firstly her Interrupt takes place and you are able to remove all focus tokens from all cards you control. Once that is resolved, then she would be captured, as Constant Effects are always active.

Great, some discussion. Look I would totally agree with you all but no one has still showed me where it says that a 'destroyed unit 'leaves play'. If that sentence is in the rule book then I'm good. As far as what everyone is saying, again no one is getting that when a unit is 'destroyed' it's immediately placed in the discard pile. Of course you have to physically move the card to the discard pile. But in essence what I interpret the rules to mean is that a destroyed card is immediately eliminated from the game. It just seems to me that 'destroyed', 'leaving play', 'sacrifice', 'discard', are all specific actions that have different meanings during game play. 'Leaving play' is another strategic move that you must account for. I just can't get that a card that has a damage capacity on it could not ever be destroyed by targeting it with unit damage. Why have damage capacity on it then?

Gnoblar

Human Replica Droid is a 'Reaction' and is not a destroyed card so I believe that is a legal play. But the X-wing escort, yes, if it's destroyed it does not trigger the 'Interrupt'. Case in point, if Chewbacca is destroyed, he does not trigger his 'Reaction' as pointed out in numerous topic on this forum which would then contribute to my point that Leia's card effect would not trigger.

Caal-FR

Your conclusion:

Conclusion : the destroyed unit card rule´s "out of play destination" is the discard pile.
So, when a unit is destroyed, it leaves play to the discard pile, the destruction's "out of play destination".

Where does it say 'a unit is destroyed, it leaves play to the discard pile'? Rule says it's placed in the discard pile but like I stated earlier, you have to physically move it there because it is eliminated. Card effects that state 'remove', 'discard', 'sacrifice', etc. is how a card 'leaves play'. That's what I'm reading from the rule book.

Look, I get it that you guys believe that a destroyed card leaves play. I'm under the impression that card text and rule book text need to be closely followed. I'm trying not to assume anything with the rules or create a rule that doesn't happen by combining words especially words that are defined in the rule book. I also just think that this is an added strategy to the game. I really don't like the fact that a card can never be destroyed basically, it doesn't fit the overall feeling of Star Wars.

Also, one more think until you guys tell me I'm an idiot. In the preview for the new Force Pack that contains a Rebel Han Solo and other such cards, some possess 'leaving play' abilities but the sets also come with cards to help move them to out of play destinations. It points out a way to use the Falcon and Rebel Han Solo with cards to trigger the abilities. And the topic is Evacuate. It clearly points out to survive the Dark Side attacks. One of the lines in the article:

'The Rebel Alliance’s new units in the Evacuation Procedure set make sure that the Imperials pay for every step they take into Echo Base, and that you get the maximum benefits whenever your units evacuate, whether by being discarded, returned to your hand, or sacrificed.'

It doesn't say destroyed.

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=4338

I just really think it takes a lot of strategy from the game which is what I love about it. Thanks guys. I'd love to keep discussing.

When a card has a number of damage tokens with
value equal to or greater than its damage capacity, it is
immediately destroyed . - page 21

Destroyed Unit Cards
When a unit is destroyed , it is placed faceup on top of
its owner’s discard pile -page 23

in play and out of play
A player’s unit cards, enhancement cards, and the current
objective cards in his play area are considered “in play.”
“Out of play” refers to the cards in a player’s hand, his
facedown decks, his discard pile , his edge stack, his
victory pile, and any cards that are captured. - page 27

A card that “leaves play” moves from a player’s play area
to the “out of play” destination indicated by card or rules
text. “ - page 27

Dcortingham21, you're not an idiot.

You want things to be crystal clear, and that's a quality.

I assure you we are right, even if you won't find in the rulebook the sentence "a destroyed unit leaves play to the discard pile".

You just need rulebook to be rewritten to correct the use of "is placed in the discard pile" by "leaves play to the discard pile".

But I could ask you the same about Escape from Hoth promo you're quoting! The "evacuate" keyword is nowhere described as "leave play" in the rulebook.

@dcortingham21: You now have had 2 people show you from the rules how being destroyed does cause the unit to leave play. I hope that's enough for that part of your question. Notably, nowhere in the rules book entry does it state that "remove" and "discard" are an exhaustive list of terms for leaving play. It gives them as an example of common terms, but destruction certainly takes a unit from in play and places it in an out of play destination, which is the criteria listed for "leaves play."

Your arguments comparing Chewie not triggering his reaction when he leaves play to cards like Leia and the X-Wing Escort which are Interrupt abilities and not Reactions is flawed because Reactions follow different timing rules than Interrupts. Chewie doesn't get to react because reactions don't happen until after the triggering condition and thus Chewie would be already out of play and unable to use his reaction. Interrupts, on the other hand, execute before the triggering condition and thus happen before the unit actually leaves play, which is why Leia and the X-Wing Escort's abilities actually do work.

Caal-FR

Thanks for not calling me an idiot. And I didn't mean to say that 'evacuate' was a term for 'leaving play'. I was just saying that they are describing the situation as if it was in the movies. When a unit 'evacuates', he's still not destroyed and able to carry out certain functions. Anyway, I probably shouldn't have brought another term in the discussion. Sorry.

dbmeboy

To your first paragraph, I understand that 'remove' and 'discard' are just some of the terms but they are ways that instruct you to move a card from the play area to a destination 'indicated by card or rules text'. For example, Fall Back card tells you how to make a card 'leave play'. When a card is destroyed, its 'immediately' placed in the discard pile and therefore 'immediately' out of play just as you describe with Chewie in your second paragraph. I also understand the timing rules. Chewie is destroyed so he doesn't have the chance to use his reaction. I'm just saying that must hold true for all cards destroyed. I'm saying that the 'leaving play' is a trigger when the card has not been destroyed. For example again, Fall Back would trigger the Interrupts from Leia and X-Wing Escort and that would also mean Leia is captured. I totally agree with everyone on that. I'm just saying, when destroyed, they're gone. And I guess, part of me sees that as a very good part of the game.

All in all, I totally understand what everyone is saying, and I really appreciate the discussion. Since no one has agreed with me on this at all or sees it the same way I do, we'll start playing the way you all suggest. I just think this is a very big flaw in the game. If I'm the Dark Side and I'm in an engagement with Leia and eventually a Rebel Han, there is no reward for me to win the edge battle and destroyed one or more of those units. Leia would simply be captured and then the Light Side would clear all focus tokens and then destroying Han would mean the Light Side can search their deck for a card like Home One and put it in their hand. Does no one see that as a problem? I'm sorry, but I do. I think it takes away from the strategy.

dbmeboy

To your first paragraph, I understand that 'remove' and 'discard' are just some of the terms but they are ways that instruct you to move a card from the play area to a destination 'indicated by card or rules text'. For example, Fall Back card tells you how to make a card 'leave play'. When a card is destroyed, its 'immediately' placed in the discard pile and therefore 'immediately' out of play just as you describe with Chewie in your second paragraph. I also understand the timing rules. Chewie is destroyed so he doesn't have the chance to use his reaction. I'm just saying that must hold true for all cards destroyed. I'm saying that the 'leaving play' is a trigger when the card has not been destroyed. For example again, Fall Back would trigger the Interrupts from Leia and X-Wing Escort and that would also mean Leia is captured. I totally agree with everyone on that. I'm just saying, when destroyed, they're gone. And I guess, part of me sees that as a very good part of the game.

So let's break this down a bit more carefully now that I've pulled out my laptop and a real keyboard instead of my phone:

For the Chewie example, it does indeed apply to all cards that have Reactions . Chewie cannot use his reaction if he leaves play before he can use it (being destroyed is not the only way that can happen, just the most common). Boba Fett cannot capture a unit if his strike destroys it first because his ability is a Reaction as well. Interrupts, on the other hand, can be used when the card is leaving play because they happen before the unit leaves play.

Fall Back indeed gives you a way that a unit leaves play (Return to hand). Destruction also gives a method for the card to leave play (Place in discard pile). Note that destruction does not actually say "immediately place in discard pile" as you seem to imply. It's actually that having damage >/= a card's damage capacity causes it to be immediately destroyed (hence why reactions to dealing the damage don't happen before the destruction). I challenge you to find the difference between "return to hand" and "place in discard pile" in terms of leaving play. Both are just instructions for how to move a card from in play to out of play.

When a card is destroyed, it is indeed gone (unless it has an ability that explicitly works from an out of play location), but that doesn't mean that abilities cannot interrupt the proccess of destruction and change the end result.

Challenge Accepted! Sorry, that's a How I Met Your Mother reference.

I see it as this. Fall Back tells you to (Return to Hand) as a function of the card. The only place I see in the rule book that says 'place in discard pile' is the definition of a destroyed card but that is what you 'must' do to a destroyed card since a destroyed card can't just sit there in the play area. When a card tells you to 'discard', to me that's the function of moving card to discard pile. 'Place in discard pile' is not a defined term in the rule book so to me there is a difference. Is there a card that tells you to 'place in discard pile'? I don't think there is. The term 'discard' is used to describe that. So, I think someone mentioned it earlier that they need to change the rule to 'A destroyed card 'is discarded' or 'leaves play' and placed in the discard pile.' That to me is a clear definition of a rule for destroyed. I hope my interpretation makes sense.

I did find something that outlines this a little bit better on page 27.

in play and out of play

A player’s unit cards, enhancement cards, and the current

objective cards in his play area are considered “in play.”

“ Out of play” refers to the cards in a player’s hand, his

facedown decks, his discard pile, his edge stack, his

victory pile, and any cards that are captured .

Card effects only interact with, and can only target,

cards that are in play, unless the effect text specifically

refers to an out-of-play card or area.

A player’s affiliation card is always considered in play,

and cannot be removed from play by any card effect.

A card “enters play” when it moves from its “out of play”

origin to a player’s play area. For example, a card enters

play when it is played from a player’s hand, put into play

from his objective deck, or is placed in a player’s play area

by some card effect.

A card that “leaves play” moves from a player’s play area

to the “out of play” destination indicated by card or rules

text. “Remove” and “Discard” are common terms that

indicate a card must leave play.

I hope this helps. A card that is in play and moves out of play either by card text or rules (like being destroyed) is concidered to "leave play".

Basically look at it this way: Leia is on the board "in play" - then something happens that causes her to not be in play anymore.

ex. If she is destroyed she is placed in the discard pile (which is referred to as "out of play") ergo she is "leaving play" (moving from the play area "in play" to the discard pile "out of play")

Her interrupt can now be executed

Man you're good :-)

Is having Rebel Han and Leia both in the same engagement a big problem for the DS?

Definitly.

As is New Luke on Red 5.

Is it intended?

Oh yeah!

Space lovers and Pocket Jedi slammed the biggest dunk on the Death Star and got an entire Galactic Empire down, right?! :-)

Isn't this game all about dealing with situations?

"It could be worse!"

"It's worse!"

Well played Caal-FR. Well played.

So your argument boils down to "discard" is different than "place in discard pile," correct? (Trying to make sure I understand where you're coming from). And that "place in discard pile" as an instruction is inherently different than "return to hand" as an instruction?

Let's take a look at how "discarding" is described in the rule book (pg 13):

"The term “discarding” describes the act of removing a card from a player’s hand, deck, or play area (depending
on the discard instructions) and placing it faceup on the top of his command deck discard pile."

So basically, if a card or rule instructs you to discard a card, it's instructing you to move it from the current location to the discard pile. Being discarded does not necessarily mean that the card has left play, as it might not have been in play to start with. However, discarding an in play card certainly causes it to leave play.

I guess what I'm trying to point out: both discarding and destroying are defined in the rule book as placing a card in the discard pile. Both destroying and discarding are in fact defined game terms. If you're going to argue that "place in discard pile" is not a defined rules term, then "discard" itself is now no longer defined because that's what it does too.

How lethal is she in battle? Multi-attackers and she gets to wipe out all their focus tokens and they can attack again, right?

Yes, one of the more common uses of Leia is to be able to send big hitters on 2 different attacks.

This is why I love these games. The simple absence of a single careful word in a rules reference will send folks in droves to the developers for clarification. It's truly a computer program, and we're the computers, throwing syntax errors and asking for a debug...

You guys rock...