Search found 1669 matches

by Lukes Bionic Hand
March 12th, 2016, 11:50 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Current Rulings and Errata
Replies: 44
Views: 20975

Re: Current Rulings and Errata

Here is a big ruling dump of pending stuff left over from post AR 3.0 rules questions. They are effective immediately. They are ordered by the Chapter and Appendix in the AR. Unless otherwise noted, new text is underlined and removed text is crossed out in strikethrough. Chapter 4 The following is a...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
March 12th, 2016, 11:33 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Surprise Assault and Leia RP
Replies: 1
Views: 250

Re: Surprise Assault and Leia RP

Seems like that would work.
by Lukes Bionic Hand
December 14th, 2015, 4:31 am
Forum: Rules FAQ/Archives
Topic: Current Rulings Archive August 2012 - December 2015
Replies: 70
Views: 30244

Re: Current Rulings/Errata

Here is a ruling dump for some pending issues. They are sorted by the order of their where they would appear in the AR. Chapter 1 The following is a new entry in Chapter 1: Removing Cards From A Hand, Deck, Pile, or Stack When a card removes any card(s) from a hand, deck, pile, or stack, do not reve...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
December 2nd, 2015, 2:13 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Card Type Questions with Leesub V
Replies: 3
Views: 556

Re: Card Type Questions with Leesub V

The ruling is that current rule will remain, that is - systems, sites, and sectors are all part of a single card type - location.
by Lukes Bionic Hand
November 18th, 2015, 5:57 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Quick Reflexes and One Rule
Replies: 2
Views: 262

Re: Quick Reflexes and One Rule

I would say that both sentences are part of one action, even though there is a period break there, so it would be affected by the one rule. It's an unusual templating difference for sure, but a couple other cards have use that wording, so I don't think Decipher intended it to be functionally differe...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
November 18th, 2015, 5:05 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: tarkin v
Replies: 6
Views: 315

Re: tarkin v

You cannot. It falls under the one rule because it specifies a timeframe (during battle) and a singular action (if you just drew A destiny).
by Lukes Bionic Hand
October 3rd, 2015, 10:56 pm
Forum: Rules FAQ/Archives
Topic: Current Rulings Archive August 2012 - December 2015
Replies: 70
Views: 30244

Re: Current Rulings/Errata

The Players Committee would like to announce the Errata of Imperial Decree (v) to the following text effective immediately: Imperial Decree (V) [Virtual Set 0 – Cloud City – U] EFFECT Text: Deploy on table. Whenever you lose Force (except from Force drains, battle damage, or your card), may reduce l...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
October 1st, 2015, 3:50 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Stealing an escort
Replies: 9
Views: 744

Re: Stealing an escort

Just noticed the ruling didn't include the "converting/persona replacement" or cross-over addition, only stealing. Was this intentional? Thanks, that is an oversight and will be patched. Crossing over / converting will work the same way - it's as though the escort has been removed, so the captive r...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
September 30th, 2015, 4:21 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Take This!
Replies: 3
Views: 438

Re: Take This!

As a final final note about this ruling, the above ruling has been added to the AR as an entry in Appendix B. It can be found here: /viewtopic.php?p=977214#p977214 Here is the new entry as found in the above ruling post: Take This! [new entry] The second function of this Interrupt may only be used i...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
September 30th, 2015, 4:19 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Weapon Of A Fallen Mentor
Replies: 9
Views: 511

Re: Weapon Of A Fallen Mentor

Sorry for the long wait on the final ruling here. We have added an entry in Appendix B that explains what happens to this immediate effect if the targeted lightsaber leaves table or goes inactive. The ruling can be found here: I will quote the entry from that ruling below: /viewtopic.php?p=977214#p9...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
September 30th, 2015, 4:15 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Stealing an escort
Replies: 9
Views: 744

Re: Stealing an escort

Update to this ruling: the result of the ruling is unchanged, but the ruling itself has been added to the AR under the "Captives - Releasing" entry in Appendix C.

The ruling can be found near the end of this post in the current rulings/errata thread: viewtopic.php?p=977214#p977214
by Lukes Bionic Hand
September 30th, 2015, 4:14 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: beldon's eye v
Replies: 11
Views: 657

Re: beldon's eye v

Update to this ruling: the result of the ruling is unchanged, but the ruling itself has been added to the AR under the "Taking Cards From A Deck/Pile" entry in Chapter 1.

The ruling can be found at the very beginning of this post in the current rulings/errata thread: /viewt ... 14#p977214
by Lukes Bionic Hand
September 30th, 2015, 4:12 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: We Have A Prisoner and All Wrapped Up
Replies: 4
Views: 420

Re: We Have A Prisoner and All Wrapped Up

Sorry for the absurdly long wait on this one. This ruling took a long time to be worked out, went through several revisions, and was then delayed in posting for some time (my fault). The final ruling is that anything removed before We Have A Prisoner or All Wrapped Up capture a character remains rem...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
September 30th, 2015, 4:05 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: immune to attrition and voluntary forfeited
Replies: 6
Views: 611

Re: immune to attrition and voluntary forfeited

This ruling has been formally added to current rulings/errata thread as a slightly amended version of the "damage segment - attrition" entry posted above, and can be found here: /viewtopic.php?p=977214#p977214 Damage Segment – Attrition If you have no cards left to forfeit, any remaining attrition a...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
September 30th, 2015, 4:01 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Imperial Domination + Black Sun Fleet
Replies: 4
Views: 457

Re: Imperial Domination + Black Sun Fleet

Just an update to this question. The ruling is unchanged, but we have added an Appendix B entry for Imperial Domination that explains the mechanics and timing of how the card functions (which is exactly as Gergall theorized in his final reply here). The ruling can be found here, under the Appendix B...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
September 30th, 2015, 3:38 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Can a character react back to a battle he moved away from?
Replies: 4
Views: 649

Re: Can a character react back to a battle he moved away fro

You can react to a battle with a card, even if it cannot participate. However, it will be immediately excluded upon completing its react movement. As for the 2nd issue of reacting back into a battle that a card has already participated in, we have closed that loophole by rewording the Participating ...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
September 30th, 2015, 3:33 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Deployment and Movement Questions
Replies: 2
Views: 388

Re: Deployment and Movement Questions

Update on issue 2. Unpiloted vehicles may now use docking bay transit.

Ruling here (under Chapter 9 "Starships - Unpiloted"): /viewt ... 14#p977214
by Lukes Bionic Hand
September 30th, 2015, 3:31 am
Forum: Rules FAQ/Archives
Topic: Current Rulings Archive August 2012 - December 2015
Replies: 70
Views: 30244

Re: Current Rulings/Errata

Here's a big ruling dump from a few things that have piled up. Most of these are minor issues or fixing inconsistencies. For changes to already existing entries, removed text is in strikethrough and new text is underlined. Rulings are organized by the Chapter/Appendix of the AR that they appear in. ...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
August 26th, 2015, 12:12 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: RE: Luke's Bionic Hand and implied targeting
Replies: 1
Views: 393

Re: RE: Luke's Bionic Hand and implied targeting

We all tried to dig up some old rulings on both of those 2 cards and could find none. That's not to say it wasn't ruled that way, just that we have no record of a discussion about it in any of our rules correspondence from that time, and anything from back then on these forums has likely been pruned...
by Lukes Bionic Hand
August 25th, 2015, 11:59 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: barich
Replies: 13
Views: 1179

Re: barich

It looks like those 2 rulings were based on the rules entry that allowed "satisfy/cancel all attrition and battle damage" cards like Ephant Mon to work when one or the other value was not present, which isn't quite the same thing as Barich, who works on total power and attrition. Because there is no...

Go to advanced search