Nonsense. This part:"Set aside that die after it is resolved or removed" is a reminder, or if you prefer, a delayed effect. The event is discarded after rolling the die. Reminder text is italicized, though. I don't think it qualifies as a delayed effect either, since it doesn't specify a future point in time. What you quoted is really just a simple "after" trigger. Limbo is a very confusing concept here, because the rules don't explicitly define what "resolve" means within the context of using events. There's also the whole queue apparatus, which is what actually manages the triggered effects. Ideally, cards should remain in limbo just long enough to check for triggers, and then have all of their effects dumped into the queue while the card itself goes to the discard pile. That would neatly solve the problem with the card, but not the die; the current rules, I think, are insufficient to deal with this issue in its entirety. All they really need to do is modify the wording of the cleanup step / upkeep phase so that the entire dice pool is emptied. Huge nonsense.

Nonsense. This part: "Set aside that die after it is resolved or removed" is a reminder, or if you prefer, a delayed effect. The event is discarded after rolling the die.

This is a game. He can Use the force, Deflect a die and do Mind tricks. He's Chirrut enough. It will be good to have decks with blue that are actually different than typical blue deck.

Here you are: When a character is dealt damage, place that much damage on the character. "Damage", page 15.

Just think about this for a minute and you will see all makes sense: If you play Cannon fodder you need to be successful to use "then" part. So if your trooper has two shields and the die has 2 value, then you successfully dealt 2 damage. Damage was not taken but still dealt. Note that this: Damage is taken only when one or more damage tokens are placed on the character. If all damage dealt was blocked by shields or some other ability, then no damage was taken. describes the "breaking through shields" concept. Don't use it out of context. This: When damage is moved to a new character, it ignores shields and the character is not considered to have taken damage. is needed to describe the different concept - you don't deal damage to your team partner by using Draw attention. (You don't breaking through his shields.) And BTW this is not true.

Moved damage isn't TAKEN, I believe it is indeed still DEALT. MOVE Some effects allow players to move cards or tokens. • When something moves, it cannot move to its same (current) placement. If there is no valid destination for a move, the move cannot resolve. • When damage is moved to a new character, it ignores shields and the character is not considered to have taken damage. TAKING DAMAGE Damage is taken only when one or more damage tokens are placed on the character. If all damage dealt was blocked by shields or some other ability, then no damage was taken. • Damage not taken is still dealt. Nonsense. "Damage not taken is still dealt" is for cards like Cannon fodder. You need the word "deal" to deal damage. But if you still unsure read this: Shields block damage. Each shield blocks 1 damage that would be dealt to the character. So "this ignores shields" on cards like Backup muscle is just a reminder not a rule.

During the action phase, players alternate taking turns. The player who controls the battlefield takes the first turn. When it is a player’s turn, they can perform one action or pass. Actions are taken by a player whenever it is their turn. On a player’s turn, they must take an action or pass. When a player is allowed to take additional actions on their turn, they must immediately take them or pass. They cannot save the actions for later. If they are allowed to take an action outside of their turn, they also must take it immediately. To resolve this ability, a player must spend one action on it during their turn and then follow the instructions on the card. AMBUSH If a player is allowed to take an action outside of their turn, they immediately take it. What is the difference between a turn and a round? A turn is one player’s action. A round consists of an action phase and an upkeep phase. REY (r38) If you play an upgrade with Ambush on Rey, you may take two additional actions during your turn. So you probably want to say that turn=action but it's oversimplification.

"Destroyer droid P-59" or "Destroyer droid P-60"?

Or people could just be reasonable I guess, but I play games for fun, so what do I know Yes, the same with two copies of Falcon and only one die. The same with missing die - just use the card for reroll. Reasonable. Exactly.

What makes you think Krennic doesn't require the Death Trooper die? Even the "matching the card's collector number" works, because the ability specifically references the collector number for the Death Trooper. Sigh... Are you all seriously do not see this emoticon: ? Current text says "matching that card’s collector number", so they need to update this text to include special cases like Krennic.

Well, that didn't take long. We now have a character who cannot be played properly if you lose a die (Krennic). Not that that didn't apply to any character dice. It's a painful rule, but I don't think it's an insane one. As you said, it's already true for ANY character die. Krennic doesn't change anything. If a player includes any cards in his or her deck that require a die, he or she must have the die matching that card’s collector number for each copy of that card. So by tournament rules you don't have to have trooper die

Ambush goes to the queue and waits until Tactical mastery finish resolving. So the end effect is as WexAwn described above.

I would submit that Luke's ability is what is meant by mandatory ability under the tournament doc. quoted above. Luke: After you activate this character, draw a card. There is no may in Luke's ability so it has to trigger and be added to the queue and resolve. I think this techniquely wrong, but in practice works out virtually the same in nearly every instance. ------ Rulebook pg16 After Abilities If, during the course of a game, an after ability meets its trigger condition, it resolves following the resolution of the trigger condition. Unlike before abilities, after abilities do not interrupt the flow of the game, and instead wait their turn in the queue to resolve. ------- Since the action of activating a character includes exhausting the card and rolling all of its dice any after ability that triggered on activating the character would resolve last. You are confusing resolving and triggering.

Note that "after" effect triggers automatically, so technically the choice is mandatory. Another thing to consider: trigger is "activate this character" - that means it should be added to the queue immediately when he turns Vader card. If he doesn't say anything after the roll, the activation is done and it's technically too late (it's not really "after" - people are often confused by the words before/after). So I understand why you think this is a problem. I think this is more a sportsmanship problem. Each player will have own opinion in that matter. Some players don't want to "help" opponent, so they will wait 2 seconds and do their action.

And of course your opponent won't use Guardian, Cannon fodder and The best defense. Hmm, now with this stupid time limit 4 troopers might be actually a viable deck. Try it and report back please? I never play all non-unique. Just saying that someone might try to abuse the time limit. So you have no practical evidence to support you claim nor will you provide such evidence. Why make the claim at all then? Because this is a friendly forum where we discuss our thoughts about the game? Sheesh, man. His claim was also "might be... a viable deck". That's not exactly a set in stone sort of claim. It's not something I would play, but if it became viable wouldn't that be a good thing? If there are more viable tournament builds there will in theory, be more people attracted to the game because they can find something that suits their fancy. No, that would not be a good thing, because I was thinking that someone might abuse the time limit, that is stall on purpose. Stalling on purpose could be a good tactic versus a mill/control deck if you're playing an aggro deck. If you don't think you'll be able to defeat your opponent's characters, causing the game to go to time almost guarantees a win since most mill decks don't deal as much damage as most aggro decks. An example would be versus a mill deck where you're close to the end of the game and the mill player has a character with full health, three shields and upgrades like Diplomatic Immunity in play to renew shields. You're unlikely to burn through that level of protection, so stalling for a tie breaker is more likely to guarantee you the win. I don't think it would be a good tactic in other scenarios. I also don't think it shows good sportsmanship. I feel like slow playing to force a tie breaker isn't a friendly move. That's why I am against such low time limit. It's bad for the game and creates pathology.