No-one is saying that the dial can't take damage. The question is how it can take damage. If it can take damage from units with blast damage icons that only (according to the rules) damages "the engaged objective" then it should also be an "engaged objective" for the purposes of other effects (fate cards and unopposed bonus) during the engagement.

The card does not specify that only blast damage can be dealt to the dial, that is the point ScottieATF is trying to make.

But it's quite clear that we disagree, we'll just have to wait for the FAQ.

If it is engaged like an objective then like an objective it takes blast damage while engaged. That part is pretty obvious, the other card effects that target objectives or engaged objectives we will just have to agree to disagree. Anyway I am done with these threads now until the FAQ comes out as nothing is getting resolved in any of the dozens of them.

I recommend everyone email FFG rules questions to get them to get the FAQ out sooner rather than later.

I asked FFG via the rules link last week.  If I ever get an answer I will post it.

houjix1138 said:

If anyone is curious, here is the link to that discussion (or at least one discussion on Trench Run with Patrick Brennan).

Now when a man and a woman love each other, or are very attracted to each other, or are bored…

And to chime in on the actual discussion, why are people concerned about the word card? Did I miss something?  C-T-L-CG 101 pretty much states that once a card hits the table it is no longer a card, but becomes a creature,unit,enchantment,land,objective,resource,etc… so I don't get this part of the argument

Also, if the dial can be attacked like an objective, anything which deals with attacking an objective should be fair game. Run a few rounds like this and see if it even starts to border on being overpowered. I'm confident that it won't be.

Toqtamish said:

Alright since you clearly did not read my post I'm going to be as clear as possible.  Nowhere did I argue that the dial can not take damage.  I'd ask the small courtesy of reading a post before responding to it.

The Trench Run does not specify how it is damaged, only that it can be damaged and engaged.  There is no text on the Trench Run that alters the rules for striking or icons, or the rules of engagement beyond the first step.  We all agree that for the card to work you need to be able to deal damage to it correct?  For a unit to deal damage to it when striking, then it must be considered the "engaged objective".  Why?  Because thats what the striking and icon rules say units deal damage to with thier blast icons.  As stated above the Trench Run has no text to alter that rule so the Golden Rule doesn't apply.  So if it is the "engaged objective" for that purpose, and the Trench Run has made no stipulation on how it is damaged, then there is no logical reason to not treat the Trench Run as the "engaged objective" for the length of the engagment.  If it is not the "engaged objective" then units can't strike it, because again the Trench Run does not change the striking or icon rules, which would make the card non-functioning.

Let me pose this question:  Objective cards have the word "Objective" on them.  It's a trait.  If a card that says, "Target Force User" or "Target Character" has to be applied to a unit with the "Force User" or "Character" trait, doesn't it make sense that "Target Objective" or "Engaged Objective" has to apply to a card with the "Objective" trait?  And since Trench Run doesn't add that trait to the dial, those cards can't affect it?

ScottieATF said:

If it's "like an objective," it makes sense that you damage it "like an engaged objective."

It's possible for the dial to take on aspects of an objective without actually becoming an objective.

The card says you engage it.  You can't engage without doing damage.  Just because it's not an "engaged objective" doesn't change that.

ScottieATF said:

Yes I read your post. But you ass ume I did not. This is the second time in this thread you have been condescending to someone that has a different opinion on this "debate" than yourself. If you cannot discuss your argument in a polite manner then why should anyone listen to you. I for one will not be.

Daily Rich, you hit it right on the nail with both of your responses.

DailyRich said:

This is not actually a true statement.

If we can step back for a moment and not attack one another please? It's a freaking card game. An awesome card game, but a card game.

Now. It is obvious that the intent of the card is that the Death Star Dial can be engaged and take damage from the engagement as if it were an objective card. It is obvious that the intent of the card is that the Death Star Dial cannot be the target of effects that target an objective, as it is not an objective. It is questionable if the intent of the card is to have effects that refer to the "engaged objective" apply to the Death Star Dial or not. These are the premises that no one is arguing.

The question is similar to effects like Fleet Command Center and Fleeing the Empire. The intent of those cards was obviously that the end of your refresh step, you could put a shield on a target unit/objective. However, as the rules are currently written, those cards have ultimately no effect despite the intent of the effect being clear.

The argument being set forth is the same. If, rules as written, the Death Star Dial is unaffected by effects such as Target of Opportunity, then it stands to reason that, rules as written, the Death Star Dial is also unaffected by a unit's blast damage icons. The intent of Trench Run is irrelevant to this argument, in the same way the intent of Fleet Command Center is irrelevant. As the rules stand, if the text "it is not an objective" prevents it from being damaged by the effect of Target of Opportunity, the logical conclusion is that the same text prevents it from being damaged by the blast damage icons of a unit during an engagement.

Yes, this conclusion is clearly against the intent of the card. But if Target of Opportunity cannot affect the Death Star Dial because it refers to the "engaged objective" in its rules text, it follows that blast damage icons, which also refer to the "engaged objective" in the rules do not afffect the Death Star Dial either. That is the argument being made.

DailyRich said:

So if it makes sense that you'd damage it like an engaged objective, then it makes sense that all rules/cards/abilities that damage the engaged objective also apply.  What does not make sense is saying that one instance works and that other do not.  The Trench Run card doesn't make that stipulation. 

Also it is just completely incorrect to say you can't engage without doing damage.  I can think of many scenarios off the top of my head where you'd engage and deal no damage, or that you only way of dealing damage is through everything but striking with your units.

Toqtamish said:

I apoligieze if I seem impolite, however you completely missed my clearly stated arguement and turned it into something I did not say.  So either you did that intentionally or you skimmed over my post to the statement you qouted and took it out of context ignoring the bulk of the post it was contained it.  So I choose to give you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you didn't read my post instead of accusing you of purposefully twisting my arguments and putting words in my mouth. 

And DailyRich did hit one nail on the head.  If it make sense to damage the Trench Run as if it were the engaged objective (as I said that the only way that card actually works) then you damage it like its the engaged objective, in every instance, not just striking.

dbmeboy said:

I meant you can't engage without focusing to strike, which can do damage.

D.Knight Sevus said:

We're arguing that it's implicit in the wording of the card that that blast damage DOES damage the Death Star, even if it's not an "engaged objective."  The important part is "engaged."  Currently, by the rules, the only thing that can be engaged are objectives.  Trech Run expands that to allow you to engage the Death Star, but makes very clear that this in no way makes it an objective.  It just means you apply all rules regarding engaging objectives to it, up to but not including actually making it an objective.