Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Star Wars: The Card Game» Forums » Rules

Subject: Engagement Phase Question rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
lethal hobo
msg tools
Having recently participated in regionals, some of us had grown accustomed to settling the engagement phase a certain way, while others had their own way of settling it. I'm not sure which way is correct and was just hoping to get a little clarification. For the purposes of this battle, the Dark Side will have Darth Vader (Sith), Interrogation droid, and Dark Side Apprentice defending, while the Light Side will have Believer in the old ways, Guardian of the peace, and Han Solo Attacking.

Engagement:

Dark Side wins the edge battle. The dark side player focuses Interrogation droid to place one focus token on Han Solo. The Light side player then focuses Believer in the old Ways to do one unit damage to Darth Vader. Following that attack, The Dark Side player focuses Vader to do two unit damage to the focused Han Solo, killing him.

Now, here is where some people's interpretation of the rules differed. One camp believed that because Han was focused, he was out of the engagement at that point and therefore, void of all unit damage coming from that engagement (barring a unit with targeted strike). However, the other camp believed that although Han was focused and declared as an original attacker in the engagement, he is still an active member of that engagement and therefore, could be attacked and killed. That argument also brought up the question of this: Even though Han was focused with an enemy tactical icon when they resolved their strike, if he survives the engagement, does the light side player have to then place one ADDITIONAL focus token onto Han because he was in the engagement, giving him a total of two?

I'd love to hear opinions/rule clarifications.

Thanks!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Gordon
United States
Meridian
Idaho
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Here's how I believe it works:

1. Han, though focused, is still a legal target for blaster damage. The same way that you can target units that have already been focused to strike. Units participate in the engagement until it resolves (or a card effect removes them from the engagement).

2. Han would NOT receive an additional focus token because he would never be focused to strike.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Felipe Lopez
United States
Arizona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
I concur.

Han is a valid target for damage because he is a unit participating in the engagement. Nothing removed him from the engagement. (This would allow LS to play Double Strike effectively).

LS would not place an additional focus token on the already exhausted unit participating in battle. Page 23 of the rules under Conluding The Resolve Strikes Step has a nice paragraph. Says when all units are exhausted, this step is over.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jake Di Toro
United States
Virginia Beach
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I know you have your answer already (in multiple location ) but just wanted to add something that might clarify things.

If you were using a play mat it would probably have 2 areas defined. The "In Play" area where your units and "Enhance your play area" cards usually reside and a "Engaged Units" area. When you start an engagement and Declare Attackers or Defenders, you would move the Declared units from the "In Play" to the "Engaged Units" area. There are only two normal* ways which Units leave the "Engaged Units" area and return to the "In Play" area; they are Destroyed, or the Engagement is over.

* I'm sure there are (or will be) card effects that I'm not thinking of to remove Units from an Engagement, but that would be explicit on the cards.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Lernout
Canada
Kitchener
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is the result of attempting to interpret situations and invent rules that do not exist.

Han was declared as an attacker in the engagement. Until the engagement ends or until he is directly removed via some card effect, he is a participant in that engagement, whether he later becomes focused or not.

Would the camp arguing for Han being a non-participant also have claimed Han was unable to be damaged by Vader had the attacker won the edge and focused him to strike first (assume he didn't use tactics on Vader for the example's sake)?
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
lethal hobo
msg tools
Yeah, that was the general argument they had. If a unit had been focused to strike, they were unable to be killed. That generally meant that they focused their character units to strike first, that way, they were basically unbeatable.

I knew it sounded fishy and wrong, but I let the TO handle it. Thankfully, it resolved in my favor.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hal Martin
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Love my Oilers!
badge
I miss my boy :(
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Man, players (not the OP) need to read the rule book before jumping into regionals. It's very simple to read, lots of color pictures for those that like shiny, and is over all a pretty good rule book. Had they read it, this would never come up. I hate seeing these types of things come up in tournaments.

Sorry to vent...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Gordon
United States
Meridian
Idaho
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lethalhobo wrote:
Yeah, that was the general argument they had. If a unit had been focused to strike, they were unable to be killed.


Your opponents did not read the rule book.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Antares CD
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The people before me have all answered your questions, but I thought I'd chime in with the specific rule quotes and pages to help you in case you have some ardent people who insist that the TO just got it wrong. This should also help anyone in the future reading this thread that has a similar issue.

First, page 18 of the rule book defines "Participating Units":
"Any unit card that has been declared as either an attacker or a defender during an engagement is considered to be participating in the engagement until it is removed from the engagement, it leaves play, or all steps of the engagement are complete."

Note that that list at the end does not contain, "if the unit is exhasted" nor "if the unit has struck." Therefore Han is in the engagement still, unless some other card effect explcitly removed him.

On page 20 of the rulebook it makes it clear that only ready units may strike:
"Starting with the player who has the edge, each player in turn focuses one of his participating ready units to strike. Each strike is fully resolved before the next strike may begin."

It is explicit that only a ready unit may be focused to strike. This should also be obvious from the focus mechanic rules (page 10) as it explcitily states you may not focus a card to do something (in this case strike) if it is exhausted.

You then have on page 21 the description of how Unit Damage Icons are resolved during a strike:
"Unit Damage: The striking player chooses one participating enemy unit and deals an amount of damage to that unit equal to the [unit damage] strength of the striking unit."

It explicitly says "participating enemy unit." As per my first point, Han is a participating enemy unit, regardless of whether or not he has struck or is focused unless something explicitly removed him from the engagement.

I hope that helps you and any future people with this issue. Honestly, the rules are failry well written and FFG releases faqs and answer rule question emails fairly promptly and well. If people would take the time to read the rulebook...

Edit: Typos, sentiment, and quotes.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Blakeney
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
karrde wrote:
* I'm sure there are (or will be) card effects that I'm not thinking of to remove Units from an Engagement, but that would be explicit on the cards.


William Dee Williams.

cool
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.