The FAQ'd Rieekan

[ripper998 508]

22 minutes ago, TheEasternKing said:

He's not an upgrade.

He's a fleet commander. 

Two very different things.

Per rrg:

 

A commander is a special type of upgrade card with the icon on its card back and no upgrade icon in the lower-left corner of the card front. 

[TheEasternKing 607]

Yes I realised not long after I posted what I had, even though they are mandatory, they are still classed as an upgrade card. I blame sleep deprivation!

[psybite 0]

With his new wording and the way I understand people are taking it as meaning, he should have had exhaust in his sentence somewhere so it is understood to be a once a round a ability (only then abuseable with an unexhaust effect if one is created). Which would then give you a choice as to when to use it.

A question posed to me recently with his new wording was this. If his effect is "switched on" for a unique squadron such as Luke Skywalker, if Luke is destroyed a 2nd time in that same round (before he's activated for sake of arguement) is he now actually destroyed and removed from game? 

I believe the answer is yes.

But I have my own question to do with his new wording. Why is there no full stop after "once per round"? It could be interpritated that being part of the same sentence as the rest of his ability, means that in his escence it has NOT changed his ability as much as we think. Rather the "once per round" actually means you have to kill each ship/unique squadron twice, to destroy and remove it. But it still actually works across multiple ships/unique squadrons in one game round! Even the FAQ article is not clear on that, as it does give an example of use. Re-read the article with my new interpritation in mind and you will see what I mean. (btw I'm just arguing for the word exhaust being a fix for how I feel that it's now supposed to be used)

Edited July 4, 2017 by psybite
Because I could not spell interpritated

[Lemmiwinks86 934]

20 minutes ago, psybite said:

With his new wording and the way I understand people are taking it as meaning, he should have had exhaust in his sentence somewhere so it is understood to be a once a round a ability (only then abuseable with an unexhaust effect if one is created). Which would then give you a choice as to when to use it.

A question posed to me recently with his new wording was this. If his effect is "switched on" for a unique squadron such as Luke Skywalker, if Luke is destroyed a 2nd time in that same round (before he's activated for sake of arguement) is he now actually destroyed and removed from game? 

I believe the answer is yes.

But I have my own question to do with his new wording. Why is there no full stop after "once per round"? It could be interpritated that being part of the same sentence as the rest of his ability, means that in his escence it has NOT changed his ability as much as we think. Rather the "once per round" actually means you have to kill each ship/unique squadron twice, to destroy and remove it. But it still actually works across multiple ships/unique squadrons in one game round! Even the FAQ article is not clear on that, as it does give an example of use. Re-read the article with my new interpritation in mind and you will see what I mean. (btw I'm just arguing for the word exhaust being a fix for how I feel that it's now supposed to be used)

There is no way to destroy something twice. Even with the effect of Rieekan the ship/squadron is already destroyed and only treated as if it's not destroyed. But once destroyed you cannot destroy it again no matter how many damage is dealt then

[psybite 0]

Think the "once per round" wording confused me, making me forget about how "destroyed" is worded in the rules. As without Rieekan destroyed ships/sqds are removed immediatly so had not looked closely at "destroyed"

[RobertK 709]

Side effect of making Rieekan an exhaust effect would be that MS-1 ion cannons would turn him off. Not sure you would want that.