Jump to content



Photo

Targeted Strike and Shii-Cho Training


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 LORDs_diakonos

LORDs_diakonos

    Member

  • Members
  • 18 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 05:32 AM

What happens when they are together? 

Targeted Strike - "When attacking, this unit may instead damage a target enemy unit not participating in the engagement"
Shii-Cho Training - "Damage from enhanced unit's [Unit Damage] icon type may be divided among any number of participating enemy units"

Can I damage multiple units that are not participating? I would think yes as targeted strike overrides the participating rule and Shii-Choo overrides the single enemy rule. 



#2 BD Flory

BD Flory

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 05:47 AM

LORDs_diakonos said:

What happens when they are together? 

Targeted Strike - "When attacking, this unit may instead damage a target enemy unit not participating in the engagement"
Shii-Cho Training - "Damage from enhanced unit's [Unit Damage] icon type may be divided among any number of participating enemy units"

Can I damage multiple units that are not participating? I would think yes as targeted strike overrides the participating rule and Shii-Choo overrides the single enemy rule. 

 

Don't agree.

Strictly according to the way the cards are worded, Targeted strike gives you the ability to target a non-participating enemy, but only one. Shi-Cho grants the ability to target multiple enemies, but specifies that they be participating units. Since these things are mutually exclusive, you can only benefit from one at a time -- you may choose to *either* target a non-participating enemy *or* multiple participating enemies.



#3 LORDs_diakonos

LORDs_diakonos

    Member

  • Members
  • 18 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 06:45 AM

I can see what you are saying but treating them exclusive might also lead you to consider what each is doing. 

normal rule damage 1 participating unit. 

Shii-Cho overides the number of units where Trageted Strike overrides the participating. 

I was hoping to get a rulling from FFG here



#4 flipperlord

flipperlord

    Member

  • Members
  • 57 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 06:48 AM

You cannot spread your damage across more than one non-participating unit in this senario.  



#5 LORDs_diakonos

LORDs_diakonos

    Member

  • Members
  • 18 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 06:53 AM

explanation? reason you say this?  just wondering are you pointing to a rule?

I mean there are lots of options.  maybe I can hit multiple participating units and one non (targeted strike)

 



#6 Dietcokeofevil

Dietcokeofevil

    Member

  • Members
  • 45 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 07:22 AM

I read the cards a little differently. This is all based on my own views, though.. not actual hard rules.

 

Shii-Cho Training over rides the normal requirement of only targetting one unit.

Targeted Strike over rides the normal requirement of participating units.

 

My flow of logical would be as follows..

 

Luke Skywalker is focused to strike. He has several unit damage icons to apply. I read Shii-Cho Training which states I can go ahead and target multiple targets instead of one. Great! That over rides my normal limitation of targeting only one unit. I read Targeted Strike, which states that I can apply damage to a unit not participating in the combat. The card uses "a" not "one".. so I don't believe this is a numerical hard limit. Its verbage is just referring to the normal requirements of applying unit damage to a single target, which already no longer applies to Luke due to Shii-Cho training. So I would resolve the unit damage as being spreadable thanks to Shii-Cho, and targetable on non-participating units thanks to Targeted Strike.

Targeted Strike I believe not only modifies the normal rulebook, but also the rules on Shii-Cho Training as they are just enforcing the normal rules for targeting, not creating a new hard limit itself.  And at the same time, Shii-Cho Training is modifying both the normal rules outlined in the rulebook along with the reference to those rules on Targeted Strike. For the same reasons. I don't think Targeted Strike is creating new limitations, just references the normal rule of targeting just one unit.

 

 

 



#7 BD Flory

BD Flory

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 07:54 AM

Dietcokeofevil said:

Shii-Cho Training over rides the normal requirement of only targetting one unit.

But specifies participating units.

Dietcokeofevil said:

Targeted Strike over rides the normal requirement of participating units.

But specifies one unit. Note that in the full rules text from the rulebook (which specifies that reminder text is only a reminder and not actual rules) targeted strike explicitly indicates *one* target unit.

Dietcokeofevil said:

Targeted Strike I believe not only modifies the normal rulebook, but also the rules on Shii-Cho Training as they are just enforcing the normal rules for targeting, not creating a new hard limit itself.  And at the same time, Shii-Cho Training is modifying both the normal rules outlined in the rulebook along with the reference to those rules on Targeted Strike. For the same reasons. I don't think Targeted Strike is creating new limitations, just references the normal rule of targeting just one unit.

This is actually not how it works.

Targeted strike is a rules effect. Shii-Cho overrides it because Shii-Cho is a card effect. Shii-Cho specifies participating units. Therefore, if you're using Shii-Cho to divide your damage among participating units, you're restricted to participating units *only.*

 

Even if it were the reverse -- if Targeted Strike took precedence over Shii-Cho -- Targeted Strike explicitly states you can target *one* enemy unit that isn't participating. So whichever effect takes priority excludes the other effect.



#8 BD Flory

BD Flory

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 07:56 AM

LORDs_diakonos said:

I mean there are lots of options.  maybe I can hit multiple participating units and one non (targeted strike)

 

Nope. Text of shii-cho requires you to divide your damage among participating units, and the card text overrides the rulebook text of targeted strike.



#9 BD Flory

BD Flory

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 07:57 AM

LORDs_diakonos said:

Shii-Cho overides the number of units where Trageted Strike overrides the participating. 

 

Shii-Cho specifies participating. Targeted Strike, because it's rules text, can't override a card.



#10 AUCodeMonkey

AUCodeMonkey

    Member

  • Members
  • 228 posts

Posted 01 January 2013 - 01:55 PM

I had the same situation arise yesterday. We decided that Shii-Cho specifies participating units, so I couldn't divide up all of Luke's damage amongst non-participating units, due to the wording of the card. It was pretty straightforward.



#11 stormwolf27

stormwolf27

    Member

  • Members
  • 623 posts

Posted 01 January 2013 - 07:24 PM

BD Flory said:

LORDs_diakonos said:

 

Shii-Cho overides the number of units where Trageted Strike overrides the participating. 

 

 

Shii-Cho specifies participating. Targeted Strike, because it's rules text, can't override a card.

 

I'm of the opinion to agree with the fact of only being able to use either/or (either multiple participating, or one non), however, your argument is invalid. I refer to the box statement in most FFG LCG rulebooks:

"If the text of a card would conflict with…" the rules in this book… "the card text takes precedence"


"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka


#12 stormwolf27

stormwolf27

    Member

  • Members
  • 623 posts

Posted 01 January 2013 - 07:25 PM

stormwolf27 said:

BD Flory said:

 

LORDs_diakonos said:

 

Shii-Cho overides the number of units where Trageted Strike overrides the participating. 

 

 

Shii-Cho specifies participating. Targeted Strike, because it's rules text, can't override a card.

 

 

 

I'm of the opinion to agree with the fact of only being able to use either/or (either multiple participating, or one non), however, your argument is invalid. I refer to the box statement in most FFG LCG rulebooks:

"If the text of a card would conflict with…" the rules in this book… "the card text takes precedence"

nevermind. eyes were playing tricks on me as I was reading your statement. please disregard that last statement.


"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka


#13 Arma virumque

Arma virumque

    Member

  • Members
  • 217 posts

Posted 02 January 2013 - 08:31 AM

LORDs_diakonos said:

I was hoping to get a rulling from FFG here

FFG doesn't give rulings in the forums.  However, they will give a ruling to you individually if you click on the link at the bottom of the page that says "Rules Questions."

If you receive an answer, and if you post both the question and the answer (exact quotes, please) in this forum, it's almost as good as having them respond directly.



#14 divinityofnumber

divinityofnumber

    Member

  • Members
  • 640 posts

Posted 02 January 2013 - 10:04 AM

AUCodeMonkey said:

 

I had the same situation arise yesterday. We decided that Shii-Cho specifies participating units, so I couldn't divide up all of Luke's damage amongst non-participating units, due to the wording of the card. It was pretty straightforward.

 

 

  

 

I agree. This seems pretty straightforward. Since Luke has Shii-Cho Training attached, he has the option to deal his unit damage among any number of participating units. But, Targeted Strike gives Luke another option; he can instead damage a single non-participating unit. As was mentioned above, the player will have to decide which of these two options make the most sense in the given situation -- is it a better move to damage a non-participating unit, of to damage multiple participating units? One can think up many situations where either move would be quite wise. 


Star Wars LCG: FFG EC Regional 2014 - Top 4; Star Wars LCG: FFG Event Center Store Championship 2014 - Top 4; FFG Event Center Season One 2014 - Minneapolis Regional Game Night - Top 4; May the 4th Be With You 2013 - Second Chance Tournament Champion; A Game of Thrones LCG: Days of Ice and Fire 2013 - Joust Top 16

abUse the Force author on CardGameDB.com


#15 BD Flory

BD Flory

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 16 January 2013 - 08:43 AM

I agree with the interpretation that allows the player to apply only one enhancement or the other.

That said, I submitted this to FFG's rules question link a couple weeks ago, and Monday heard back, answer unclear, ask again later.

Not a direct quote, of course, but that was the gist of it. Keep an eye out for the FAQ on this one.



#16 Tappiocca

Tappiocca

    Member

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 16 January 2013 - 09:03 AM

LORDs_diakonos said:

I can see what you are saying but treating them exclusive might also lead you to consider what each is doing. 

normal rule damage 1 participating unit. 

Shii-Cho overides the number of units where Trageted Strike overrides the participating. 

I was hoping to get a rulling from FFG here

think of it like this: card A tells card B what to do, card B tells card A what to do, card A tells card B what to do, enter infinite loop of one telling the other what to do. 

It is best not to put these on each other. =)

Anyways, I also feel that these are exclusive and you must choose one or the other option. As they both are Very Specific on what they do. Also, since they are not a "Forced Action" you do get to choose.



#17 Andrew.Taon

Andrew.Taon

    Member

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 16 January 2013 - 11:53 AM

They are both separate "may" effects.  This is grey enough that we're going to need an official ruling.  It appears to me (after reading everyone's arguments and giving the rules a good re-looking over myself) that you can apply one or the other but not both.



#18 Toqtamish

Toqtamish

    Toqtamish

  • Members
  • 3,275 posts

Posted 16 January 2013 - 12:39 PM

You "may" turn left or right, pick one. It really is that simple for this particular question.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS