The problem is, and has always been, that there are no rules telling you you only check after damage has been dealt. That makes it a generally-timed rule. Most people justify the timing as Bazinga does - "This wouldn't be possible unless you check after."

So by most you mean everyone except for you and CW?

Wow did he just claim to speak for everyone ? You polled everyone? Literally everyone? You've been busy.

There are people arguing both sides, and you're taking HIM out of context now, as you are accusing us of doing. He meant "most people [on the other side of the argument]..." not most people in general, everywhere. His point was that some of the people who disagree with our interpretation simply use other arguments to do so.

The problem is, and has always been, that there are no rules telling you you only check after damage has been dealt. That makes it a generally-timed rule. Most people justify the timing as Bazinga does - "This wouldn't be possible unless you check after."

So by most you mean everyone except for you and CW?

Not sure if being trolled.

The "it's impossible to exceed hull unless you wait until after all damage to check for destruction" is, far and away, the most common argument in support of that particular timing. Jehan, to a certain amount of credit, has at least gotten creative by hanging everything on the narrative structure of an example, but he's by far the exception rather than the rule.

But the argument is pretty clearly incorrect. I find it telling that when I point out how what you claim to be impossible is actually possible, you go to a "Everyone agrees with me!" bit of trolling rather than actually dealing with the point. So I guess I take that back - I am sure I'm being trolled.

And look, for what it's worth, I am sorry for being snarky. You kind of started it, but I didn't have to respond in kind.

My point, though, is simply that when we're breaking down how certain rules work, when we get to the point of analyzing the fictional character Darth Vader's tenacity and never-say-die attitude, and whether that should influence how we handle his ability in the game, we have wandered so far afield from actual mechanical analysis of the rules and into the realm of personal feelings and wishful thinking that it's hard to take seriously. And it really doesn't have a place in a careful reading of the rules - because it has nothing to do with the game's rules.

We ask everyone to be civil on these forums. They are here so we can all share conversations about the games we enjoy.

To that end, please be respectful of your fellow forum members. If you choose to debate a rules question, we ask that you debate rather than argue.

When all is said and done, unless you are an FFG Staff member on that game's design team, you are only making a guess that may or may not agree with the designer's intent.

Enjoy playing,

FFG Webmaster