The last point on my post, which seems to have gone unnoticed, was that the wording being used on cards tends to be open to interpretation because of lack of structure and following specific wording.
I seem to be caught in one right now regarding whether HLC acts like its forbiding crits for itself or if it is simply modifying dice (which it does not because it changes dice not in that step of the combat phase but just before it). The argument leans on the language used in the card and I'll focus in on that for the moment to see if anyone else can see what I see.
HLC "Immediately after rolling your attack dice, you MUST change your crit results to hit results."
-There is an 'immediately'. This stipulates a timing for the effect which I missed in my first argument and puts the timing for the effect in the dice rolling, not the dice modifying step, of the combat phase, so merc copilot works as it is modifying it after the effect has been resolved, not at the same time.
What's bugging me is the 'must' change in the last half. The card could just well say "change your crit results to hit results" and it would work like everyone else here is calling for it to work. But the word 'must' IS there. So, why?
This is where I'll refer back to page 20, in Breaking the Rules, " If one card ability forbids an effect, while another ability allows it, the ability is forbidden."
By adding "must" the effect becomes a not allowed effect, in the sense that the 'change all crits to hits' is an absolute. It must be done. No choice. It stresses a purpose.
Buhallin, you used a forbidden efffect on a forbidden effect to try and justify your argument. That was incorrectly structured to be useful.
Lets see what a hypothetical opposing effect, something that allows it, how it would work.
New hypothetical effect.
" After rolling dice to attack, change all your hits to crits" This now allows for a HLC to roll and get nothing but crits. The timing is the same.
Would you have all hits or all crits?
Now what would the hypothetical effect be ruled with a 'must change'?
As an aside, whats bugging me is that FFG used specific wording to stipulate how to adjucate rules, then doesn't use them in the effects they make to help clarify how they should be adjucated. Do you know of one card that actualy says forbid? Without it, meaning is open to interpretation and these kinds of discussions.
Rebels: 5 X-Wing, 4 Y-Wing, 6 A-Wing, 2 YT-1300, 1 YT-2400 5 B-wing, 3 HWK-290, 3 Z-95, 1 E-wing, 1 GR 75
Empire: 6 Tie Fighters, 6 Tie Interceptors (1- 181st, 1- RG), 2 Tie Advanced, 2 Firesprays, 4 Tie Bombers,
2 Lambda, 2 Tie Phantom, 2 Defender, 2 VT-49 Decimator
Tournament results: (S)11/11; (S)3/11;(AoIA)2/3; [R]12/28; (S) 9/10; (S) 3/6;