Star Wars Unlimited Resources

Rules clarifications from Ryan Serrano, SWU Rules Admiral:

This section covers questions asked via the Nexus judge program with answers directly quoted from Ryan Serrano.

Question:

Does consecutive apply to 'turn' or to 'action' when passing?

Scenario 1 P1 passes. Player 2 uses Kazuda Xiono leader action then Claims initiative. This happened on 'consecutive turns' (2 actions but same turn) so the Action phase is over. Should P1 have had a chance to respond to the change in game state?

CR 1.15.5.c If a player takes the initiative on the turn immediately after their opponent passes, the action phase ends.

Scenario 2 P1 passes. Player 2 uses Kazuda Xiono leader action then also passes. Is the Action phase over? Per is this considered to be 'consecutive'?

CR 1.4.4 The first active player in a game is the player that started the game with the initiative counter. Once that player takes their first action, their opponent becomes the active player and takes an action, then the first player becomes the active player again and takes an action, and so on. Players continue taking turns this way until each player has passed consecutively, which ends the action phase.

CR 1.15.6.D When each player has passed consecutively (including when one player takes the initiative after their opponent passes), the action phase immediately ends and play proceeds to the regroup phase.

CR 11.2.4 Once each player passes consecutively, the action phase ends.

In other words, does consecutive apply to 'turn' or to 'action'?

Answer:

The intention is that "consecutive" refers to actions, not turns. The appropriate CR entries will be updated in CR5 to make this clear. Kaz's leader ability being used to Pass will give the other player a chance to respond unless they've already claimed the Initiative.

(Answer shared on 2025-05-19)

Question:

If JTL Lando uses his leader ability to play Brain Invaders, is the shield token still able to be placed?

Assume there is already a friendly unit in the space arena.

Lando's ability says: Play a unit from your hand (paying its cost). If you do and you control a ground unit and a space unit, give a Shield token to a unit.

Brain Invaders says: Each leader loses all abilities except for epic actions and can't gain abilities.

CR 6.4.5 says: Resolve the action ability. If the cost was successfully paid, resolve as much of the ability as possible and ignore any part of the ability that cannot resolve.

CR 7.2.2 says: A player must pay the full cost of an action ability in order to resolve that ability. After a player pays the cost to use an action ability, they resolve that ability’s effect, described by the non-bold text after the word “Action."

Since the costs were paid, it seems the entire ability still needs to finish resolving and thus a shield token would be able to be placed, despite leaders losing their abilities when the unit enters play, prior to the shield token being placed. Is that correct?

Answer:

Brain Invaders cannot blank a currently resolving ability. Lando loses the ability, but the ability that has already begun resolving resolves in full.

(Answer shared on 2025-05-19)

Question:

Does the lasting effect of "Attached unit can't be attacked this phase" still protect the unit if the upgrade is defeated?

AP plays On Top of Things on a friendly unit. NAP plays Confiscate to defeat the upgrade. The When Played ability has already created the lasting effect of "Attached unit can't be attacked this phase" that continues to exist, but does it still protect the unit since it is no longer the "attached" unit, or is this now an "orphaned" lasting effect? In essence, how much of the ability text is relevant to the effect that is created?

Answer:

Because "Attached unit can't be attacked this phase" is a When Played ability, it is a lasting effect that continues to persist after the upgrade is defeated (CR 7.7.3B). When the ability resolves, it checks which unit is the "attached unit" and applies its effect. The lasting effect applies to that unit, regardless of what happens to the upgrade. As another example, if the upgrade were to be moved onto a different unit, the "can't be attacked" would not apply to the newly-attached unit.

(Answer shared on 2025-05-19)

Question:

If a lasting effect is created by another lasting effect expiring at the same timing point, what happens?

Assume Desperate Commando is buffed by Overwhelming Barrage, and has two damage tokens. At the end of the Action phase, the lasting effect expires, defeating the Desperate Commando. This triggers its When Defeated ability, which creates a lasting effect which would expire at the end of the phase, but we are already at that point.

Do we loop through the "cleanup" at the end of phase repeatedly until nothing remains, or have we passed the timing point and now "this phase" in the effect actually refers to the regroup phase? Or some other option?

If the lasting effect exists for a brief moment and then expires immediately, that would imply we are able to defeat a unit with 1 HP remaining, and if JTL Thrawn leader is triggered during this resolution, we are able to defeat two such units, or a single unit with 2 HP remaining. Is that correct?

Desperate Commando When Defeated: You may give a unit -1/-1 for this phase.

Overwhelming Barrage Give a friendly unit +2/+2 for this phase.

Grand Admiral Thrawn When you use a "When Defeated" ability: You may exhaust this leader. If you do, use that ability again.

Answer:

The end of a phase is a moment in time. At the end of the action phase, Desperate Commando's buff wears off and it's defeated, which triggers its "When Defeated" ability. When resolving and applying the effects of this ability, the action phase is already over, so the debuff will last until the end of the regroup phase.

(Answer shared on 2025-05-19)

Question:

Is the text of Heroic Sacrifice all one modified action?

The "draw a card" portion of Heroic Sacrifice is written in the same sentece as the modified action created by the attack. Is it also part of the modifications that create a modified action, or is it a separate ability and thus not relevant for trigger nesting?

CR 7.1.6.A says:

Some abilities instruct the controlling player to take an action (“Play a card,” “Attack with a unit,” or “Use an Action Ability”), often with additional effects attached; such an ability is considered a “modified action.” A modified action is resolved as though the player had taken the corresponding action, with any modifiers applied as appropriate. The player must perform the action if possible (unless it involves hidden information, as with “Play a card from your hand”) and complete each step of the action in order, applying any modifiers during the appropriate step.

An example where this matters: Active Player plays Heroic Sacrifice with an SOR Bossk in play. Non-Active Player has Seasoned Fleet Admiral in play. Since Seasoned Fleet Admiral triggers from the "draw a card" component, would it be Bossk resolving last and the Seasoned Fleet Admiral would resolve after the attack but before Bossk?

Or would Bossk and Seasoned Fleet Admiral pending triggered abilities be in the same window and thus can be resolved in either order?

Answer:

"Draw a card" is not part of the modified attack action. AP plays Heroic Sacrifice to draw a card and attack with a unit. Bossk triggers from playing the card, and Seasoned Fleet Admiral triggers from drawing a card, but neither can resolve until the current action is finished resolving. Heroic Sacrifice tells AP to take a modified Attack with a Unit action, and all the triggers resulting from that are nested. Once the attack and resulting triggers are fully resolved, we can turn to resolving waiting triggers (Bossk and SFA).

(Answer shared on 2025-05-19)

Question:

What Happens to Captured Cards When a Player Is Eliminated in Twin Suns?

In a Twin Suns game, when a player is eliminated, what happens to units captured by that player’s cards?

Is the guarding unit considered to “leave play” when removed as part of the player elimination process, which would normally rescue captured cards (per rule 8.34.4) or is this removal a distinct process that does not constitute "leaving play" in this specific case?

CR 8.13.1 says: A card leaves play when it moves from an in-play zone to an out-of-play zone or when it is turned facedown. Defeating a unit or returning a unit to hand from play both cause the unit to leave play. If a unit leaves play, any upgrades attached to it are defeated, but lasting or delayed effects from its abilities remain active.

CR 8.34.4 says: If a unit that is guarding any number of captured units leaves play, immediately rescue all captured cards that were guarded by that unit.

CR 11.3.1 says: Once a player’s base has no remaining HP, that player is eliminated from the game and they cannot take any more actions. All cards they own are removed from play and any cards owned by other players in their play area are placed in their owners’ discard piles. (The removed cards are not considered defeated or discarded, and do not cause abilities to trigger.) Any of their triggered abilities still waiting to resolve are ignored.

Answer:

A unit captured by an eliminated player's unit does return to play under its owner's control. CR5 will have a clarifying note for this.

(Answer shared on 2025-05-19)

Question:

Does SOR Luke Leader ability mean [heroic unit] [played this round] or [heroic unit played this round] as it applies to piloting?

Player A plays JTL Luke Skywalker - You still with me? as a pilot upgrade on a Space Vehicle Unit. That unit is then defeated during the same phase, Luke pilot is then moved to the ground arena exhausted. Can Player A activate SOR Luke Skywalker - Faithful Friend leader ability to give that unit a Shield?

Answer:

SOR Luke leader's ability means [heroic unit played this round], so the JTL Luke pilot must have been played as a unit. In general, phrases that apply restrictions to cards like this should be treated holistically as opposed to breaking them apart into sub-restrictions.

(Answer shared on 2025-04-30)

Question:

How does Shadow Caster actually function? Can it double Grim Valor?

From a previous clarification:

Last Known Information remembers values that the game state might have otherwise lost, like the power of a defeated unit whose When Defeated ability deals damage equal to its power. Abilities are not active from the discard pile while resolving the "When Defeated" abilities, however, so Targeting Computer does not let you assign the indirect damage.

Grim Valor is granting a when defeated ability to a unit that triggers at the moment the unit is defeated. When Shadow Caster "looks" for When Defeated abilities that can be used again, when and how does it do this?

Is it Last Known Information based on the state of the unit at the moment it was defeated, including abilities granted, or does the ability granted by Grim Valor not count?

Answer:

In order for it to function, Shadow Caster's ability specifically asks you to care about what "When Defeated" abilities the defeated unit had, so which When Defeated abilities were on the unit are covered by LKI. Compare this to Targeting Computer - if a specific ability cared about "how many abilities" a unit had when it was defeated, LKI would cover the fact that the unit had been given an ability by Targeting Computer. However, the specific ability that Targeting Computer gives isn't still active on the unit. Last Known Information specifically covers information that is necessary in order to resolve abilities.

(Answer shared on 2025-04-30)

Question:

Further clarifications on Last Known Information behavior?

Regarding the previous answer to Targeting Computer not applying to “When Defeated: Indirect Damage” abilities, LKI applies to modified names (Clone), Power/HP (various) and other modified attributes, but does not apply to modified abilities/ability text?

How does this compare to General Krell - Heartless Tactician? If units defeated have that ability through LKI, gain “When Defeated” abilities from attached upgrades, etc... Should they not then have the ability from Targeting Computer as well based on LKI?

Answer:

As mentioned above, Last Known Information specifically covers information necessary for resolving abilities when the game state no longer holds that information. General Krell's ability and upgrades that grant "When Defeated" abilities do not use Last Known Information to apply their effects. At the moment of defeat, if a unit has a "When Defeated" ability, that ability triggers. Once the "When Defeated" ability is triggered, it must resolve. The game does not need to remember how the "When Defeated" ability existed.

(Answer shared on 2025-04-30)

Question:

Does SOR Falcon trigger if the controller doesn't ready any cards during regroup?

This unit enters play ready.

When you ready cards during the regroup phase: Either pay 1 or return this unit to her owner's hand.

The actual language of the ability implies if nothing is readied during regroup, then Falcon would not need to be paid for, while the timing point for other cards refer to actual steps in a phase. Is that the correct intent?

Furthermore, if a card is readied during regroup, outside of the ready step, such as if Super Laser Technician or Admiral Motti are defeated due to an effect like Sneak Attack’s delayed effect, does Falcon trigger?

Answer:

"When you ready cards during the regroup phase" refers to the step of the regroup phase during which cards ready (5.5.1D). This step occurs regardless of whether there are cards to ready, and readying that occurs outside of this step doesn't trigger the Falcon's ability.

(Answer shared on 2025-04-30)

Question:

Must JTL Annihilator's ability discard from opponent’s hand?

AP uses JTL Annihilator to defeat a copy of Kylo’s TIE Silencer and finds a copy in NAP's hand, and one in the deck. It is clear that AP can "fail to find" the copy in NAP's deck due to hidden information rules, but is AP obligated to discard the copy in NAP's hand? Or does this also fall under hidden information rules and they may choose to "fail to find" the copy in hand as well?

1.17.2 “Hidden information” refers to information that has restrictions on when it can be known, and by whom. All information that is not open is considered hidden, such as the order of cards in each player’s deck. Certain information may be considered hidden information for only one player and not both players, such as cards in a player’s hand or a player’s resources.

1.17.4 A player may choose to resolve an action or ability that involves information hidden to an opponent as though they have fewer options than they really do. That player still must do as much as they can when resolving such an ability, up to the point of hidden information being revealed. The player must still change the game state in some way for this to be considered an action.

4.7.4 The cards in a player’s hand may be looked at only by that player, and the faceup sides of those cards are considered hidden information for that player’s opponent. The number of cards in a player’s hand is considered open information.

8.26.1 To “reveal” a card means to make a card temporarily open information by showing it to both players. Abilities can cause a player to reveal cards from their deck, hand, or resource zone.

8.27.3 While searching a zone whose cards are hidden information, players must keep searched cards hidden from any player (other than themselves) to whom the cards are hidden information.

Answer:

Yes, Annihilator's ability means you are obligated to discard named cards you find in your opponent's hand. You can't "fail to find" from that zone because that zone is not hidden information for your opponent.

(Answer shared on 2025-04-30)

Question:

Does a replacement effect on a defeat count for abilities that check for defeat?

If AP's JTL L3-37 would be defeated but is instead attached as a pilot, does NAP get the discount on Bravado, because of replacement effect rules, or no discount, because no unit was actually defeated? 1.18.1 tells us how to determine who is responsible. 7.7.5.D references the "trigger" of abilities only from the replacement effect, but this isn't a trigger. 8.10.2 only instructs us about a single ability with "if you do" templating.

1.18.1

Some card abilities care about whether a player was responsible for defeating a unit (e.g. “If you defeated a unit this phase”). Players are always responsible for defeating units they are directly instructed to defeat (such as when resolving an ability that says “Choose a unit and defeat it” or when resolving the uniqueness rule). In all other cases, to determine player responsibility for defeat, follow the below steps in order until responsibility is determined.

7.7.5.D

If a replacement effect replaces all of the standard resolution of a condition, ability, or action step, the standard resolution does not resolve and is ignored. In such a case, abilities can only trigger off of the replacement effect, and not the standard resolution of the ability. If a replacement effect replaces part of the standard resolution of a condition, ability, or action step, the resolution of the replacement effect and unreplaced standard resolution occur simultaneously.

8.10.2

If a replacement effect replaces the resolution of the text before “If you do” with another effect, the controlling player is still considered to have resolved that text. That player still resolves the text after “If you do.”

Suspect the answer is "no" but this appears to be something we have to infer from silence in the CR

Answer:

Your suspicions are correct - if an effect replaces a defeat, the unit is not considered defeated. 7.7.5D says the standard resolution (the unit being defeated) does not resolve and is ignored.

(Answer shared on 2025-04-30)

Question:

How does defeating upgrades that are providing HP to a unit factor into determining responsibility?

A player has a unit with 2 HP and an upgrade that gives +3 HP. Opponent deals three damage to the unit. Player gives the unit +1 HP through a lasting effect. Opponent defeats the upgrade.

Per 1.18.1.D, the player who controls the unit is the most recent player whose ability changed the remaining HP of the unit and they are responsible for it being defeated.

Does attaching or removing an upgrade from a unit count as an ability or effect changing the remaining HP? Should this say “reduce the remaining HP” instead of change?

Answer:

Yes, attaching or removing an upgrade from a unit can count as changing the remaining HP of the unit.

(Answer shared on 2025-04-30)

Question:

Does "and" templating refer to sequential or simultaneous ability resolution?

We have "then" and "if you do" and separate sentences of abilities defined as sequential. We know abilities can be considered simultaneous resolution.

Should both effects in a single sentence written with an "and" be considered simultaneous or sequential?

Example, SOR Palpatine leader action ability:

Deal 1 damage to a unit and draw a card.

Answer:

Resolve the ability in order. Deal 1 damage to a unit, then draw a card. We will consider making future templating use "then" in these instances to reduce confusion.

(Answer shared on 2025-04-30)

Question:

Should "instead" in rules text always be read as 'colloquial English' as opposed to the SWU specific term?

Previous clarification about token units being captured was that they counted as captured and you could collect bounties on them. This is somewhat difficult to justify in the rules text, however.

CR 1.34.5

If a token unit would be captured, set it aside instead. It is still considered to leave play.

Is this a replacement effect, or is that only the case when a card ability text uses the word "instead" in it?

Does this actually count as a capture? We believe so, but it seems that the CR text didn't get the additional text to support it.

CR 3.7.3

Tokens cannot enter out-of-play zones such as a player’s hand or discard pile. If a token would leave play for any reason, set it aside. It is still considered to have left play.

Should 1.34.5 be read as:

If a token becomes captured (thus satisfying Bounty requirements) it is set aside immediately afterward.

If a token unit would be captured, set it aside. It is still considered to leave play, and is still considered to have been captured.

Answer:

I'll adjust templating here to clear up confusion. A token leaving play being set aside is not a replacement effect for it leaving play.

(Answer shared on 2025-04-30)

Question:

Timing in Twin Suns of when an opponent is defeated vs the healing reward?

If Confederate Tri-Fighter is in play preventing base healing in the final phase of the game and the controlling opponent is the first to be eliminated, would the player that caused that elimination be able to claim the healing?

Basically, is 11.3.1 resolved first, before 12.6.2 is applied?

CR 11.3.1

Once a player’s base has no remaining HP, that player is eliminated from the game and they cannot take any more actions. All cards they own are removed from play and any cards owned by other players in their play area are placed in their owners’ discard piles. (The removed cards are not considered defeated or discarded, and do not cause abilities to trigger.) Any of their triggered abilities still waiting to resolve are ignored.

CR 12.6.2

Any player who eliminates another player (such as by being the last player to damage the eliminated player’s base) immediately heals 5 damage from their own base. If a player eliminates themself through an ability, no player heals damage from their base this way.

Answer:

All of a defeated player's cards are removed from game before the player that knocked them out heals 5 damage from their base. CR5 will add more clarity to the order of operations here.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

What effect, if any, does Commandeer have when played on a unit you already control?

Consider the 3 sentences of card text:

Take control of a non-leader Vehicle unit that costs 6 or less without a Pilot on it.
If you do, ready it.
At the start of the next regroup phase, return that unit to its owner's hand.

CR 8.10.1

Some abilities use the phrase “if you do.” In order to resolve the text following “if you do,” the text preceding “if you do” must be resolved in full. Additionally, the text following “if you do” must resolve if the text preceding “if you do” is resolved in full.

CR 1.5.4.F

A ready card can be chosen for a readying effect, but the chosen card does not change orientation and is not considered to have been readied for the purpose of “If you do” effects. An exhausted card can be chosen for a exhausting effect, but the chosen card does not change orientation and is not considered to have been exhausted for the purpose of “If you do” effects.

Applying sentence 1 to a valid unit that we already control seems reasonable based on the precedent of CR 1.5.4.F, but then would likely not count for sentence 2 based on CR 8.10.1. Is that correct?

Then, does sentence 3 also fall under the "if you do" logic, or does it resolve separately, so that you could return the chosen unit to the owner's hand even if it was not readied by sentence 2?

Answer:

Yes, you can choose a unit you already control with Commandeer. You don't take control of it, so you don't ready it. The final sentence isn't under the "if you do" clause, so you do return it to its owner's hand. I'll update 8.10.1 to avoid ambiguity in CR5.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

Does Sneak Attack defeat a card it played as a unit that is no longer a unit at the start of regroup phase?

If we consider the new Iden Pilot unit played via Sneak Attack, and then attached to Corvus as a Piloting upgrade, would Iden still be defeated by Sneak Attack at the start of regroup phase, since it is still the same copy of the card that was played, or would the delayed effect "fail to find" the unit that it is looking for because it is no longer a unit?

Answer:

A unit played with Sneak Attack is defeated at the start of the regroup phase as long as it's still in play. Because Corvus's ability doesn't remove Iden from play to make her an upgrade, she's still under the lasting effect. If the unit leaves and then returns to play (e.g. A New Adventure) before the start of the regroup phase, the unit is not defeated.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

Do triggered abilities resolve during attack steps or in between/after attack steps?

While it doesn't typically matter, in some cases the rules wording can leave us in an unclear timing point:

Activate Leia leader with 4 ready Rebels
Attack with Ezra
Ezra completes an attack, triggering his ability
Reveals Rebel Assault
Plays Rebel Assault - is this "during the attack" or "after the attack" due to resolving at the end of "Complete the Attack" step?
Attack with 2 of the 3 ready Rebels 1 at a time (creating a 'nested' attack inside the Complete an Attack part of attacking?)
Attack with last remaining Rebel to finalize Leia's leader action

Do you resolve the attacks from Rebel Assault (per CR 7.6.8) as part of Ezra's Complete an Attack trigger in the middle of combat, resulting in multiple simultaneously active "attack" actions or is there some kind of bookkeeping/cleanup timing point that is not specified in the rules?

Answer:

"When this unit completes an attack" has to see the attack complete in order to trigger, much like "When Played" has to see the card enter play in order to trigger. When resolving a "When this unit completes an attack" triggered ability, the attack has already been completed (6.3.3A). To give add some more details to your example:

We use Leia leader's action ability, which lets us attack with 2 Rebel units. Since this is multiple attack actions in one ability, 7.1.7 tells us to make those attacks sequentially, with any nested abilities from the first attack resolved before moving on to the second attack.
We use our first attack to make a modified attack action with Ezra. We follow all the normal rules for attacking with a unit in 6.3.1-3.
We complete our attack with Ezra. Since he's still in play, his ability triggers on the completion of the attack. Since this triggered during or as a result of our first attack action, we need to resolve it before moving to our second attack action.
We resolve Ezra's ability, revealing Rebel Assault. We know that wherever he is, the Rules Admiral's left ear just twitched involuntarily.
We play Rebel Assault, which lets us attack with 2 Rebel units. Since this is multiple attack actions in one ability, 7.1.7 tells us to make those attacks sequentially, with any nested abilities from the first attack resolved before moving on to the second attack.
We use our first attack to make a modified attack action with a Rebel unit. We follow all the normal rules for attacking with a unit in 6.3.1-3. Any abilities triggered during or as a result of this attack are resolved.
We use our second attack to make a modified attack action with a Rebel unit. We follow all the normal rules for attacking with a unit in 6.3.1-3. Any abilities triggered during or as a result of this attack are resolved.
We finally are done resolving abilities that triggered during our first Leia attack, so we can now proceed to our second Leia attack, which is with a Clone unit copying Ezra. Our opponent concedes.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Editorial note: this is my favorite rules clarification ever.

Question:

What happens to a captured unit guarded by a pilot unit that becomes an upgrade without leaving play?

Easiest example, a pilot is guarding a captured unit when Corvus is played, and the pilot is converted to an upgrade.

Is the captured unit rescued since the guarding unit is no longer a unit, or does the unit it becomes attached to become the new guard?

Answer:

If a PILOT is guarding a unit and becomes an upgrade, that upgrade is now guarding the unit.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

How does Last Known Information interact with constant abilities of an upgrade?

A Droid Missile Platform attached to Targeting Computer is defeated.

Does the ability to assign indirect damage still apply due to Last Known Info, or not because the upgrade is no longer attached and is in the discard after the unit is defeated?

Answer:

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

When "same arena" is referenced, how much can be resolved?

AP has 2 space units in play and NAP has a ground unit in play. When AP plays Reckless Torrent, is the When Played ability able to damage NAP ground unit based on "do as much as you can", or does it require a friendly and enemy unit to index what "same arena" means, thus nothing happens?

Answer:

This is a "do as much as you can" situation, and Reckless Torrent can deal 2 damage to an enemy unit if there's no friendly unit in the same arena. This is a somewhat awkwardly templated card and we will consider an errata to make it clearer.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

Is there any rules text mitigating an infinite loop?

Assume both players have a Snoke and 2 Clone cards in play that cloned Snoke. All were granted an experience token at some point.

We now have a constant -6/-6 aura applied to both sides of the board. One player plays a Stolen AT-Hauler.

If neither opponent refuses to play the free Hauler every time it is immediately defeated, we are now stuck in an infinite loop.

How do we handle this kind of loop per comprehensive rules? Or does this end up in a double DQ for stalling?

Answer:

So there are three kinds of infinite loops: a single-player loop that one player can pull off entirely by themselves, locking the game from continuing if their opponent can't disrupt the loop; a two-player loop in which both players must cooperate in order for the loop to go infinite; and a forced loop in which the game state can't resolve (or keeps resolving infinitely). I don't believe a single-player or forced loop is currently possible in the game, but it's a good idea to add a line or two to the CR on how to resolve these situations (most likely: decide an arbitrary number of loops and then move on). How to resolve a two-player loop falls more under the collusion rules of the Tournament Regulations.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

For Each/Focus Fire simultaneously dealing damage?

“FOR EACH” Abilities that use the phrase “for each” to create multiple effects are resolved by determining how each effect of the ability will be resolved, then resolving all effects simultaneously.

The main point of contentions are that the clarifications seem to make a correlation that the word "simultaneously" means "combined", but nothing in the CR clarifies that.

The "FOR EACH" rule above seems pretty clear that I'm creating multiple effects in all the instances above, yet if I deal the damage all to the same target, the multiple effects get combined into one instance of damage. How is this supported in the CR?

Answer:

There will be an entry in CR5 to clear this up. An ability worded as "Deal 1 damage, then deal 1 damage" is two separate instances of damage. Something like "For each X, deal 1 damage" is calculated and applied as one instance of damage.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

If a card that generated a trigger changes control before that trigger resolves, who controls that trigger?

The example given here is NAP controls a Krayt Dragon, and AP plays Change of Heart.

While they don’t control the Dragon when the ability triggers, AP does control the unit when the ability resolves.

It’s generally assumed/known to be that NAP retains control of the trigger based on previous clarifications, but having something explicit to support that would be great.

Answer:

Appreciate notes like this about things the CR could be doing to make y'all's lives easier. NAP controls the trigger, and I'll look into making that more explicit in CR5.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

Is Annihilator based on LKI when choosing a Clone in play?

If I use Annihilator's when played ability on a Clone card in play, do I discard Clones or or the cloned card from the deck and hand?

Essentially, if Chewbacca was cloned, would Annihilator be searching for Chewbacca or Clone?

Answer:

Yes, LKI covers attributes like names, so it searches for cards that share a name with the card Clone was a copy of while in play.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

How to handle lasting effects, delayed effects, and change of control interactions?

Similar but different from previous Sneak Attack question.

If I play Triple Dark Raid and attach Chewbacca-Faithful First Mate via piloting on to that ship, then my opponent plays Traitorous and takes control of that ship with Chewbacca attached, will that ship return to my hand at regroup?

Answer:

No, it wouldn't be returned to your hand, since the unit now has the text "This unit can't be returned to hand by enemy card abilities" and, because it has changed control, the effect that would return it to hand is coming from an enemy card ability.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

Is a triggered ability with a '/' separating multiple triggering conditions one ability or multiple abilities?

From CR 7.6.2: If a triggered ability has a forward slash (‘/’) separating multiple triggering conditions, the ability triggers for each of those conditions. For example, an ability with a “When Played/When Defeated” condition triggers both when the card it is on is played and when the card is defeated. Such an ability is considered both a “When Played” and a “When Defeated” ability.

The language here seems to be referencing one single ability that counts as both a When Defeated and a When Played ability. So does this mean that Grand Admiral Thrawn from JTL is able to double the ability when an Elite P-38 Starfighter is played, since per CR it counts as a When Defeated ability?

Answer:

“When Played/When Defeated” is a concatenation of two abilities, a “When Played” ability and a “When Defeated” ability. You cannot use Grand Admiral Thrawn to double the “When Played” ability.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

Editorial note: Due to the multi-part complexity of this question and answer it is laid out a little differently from the others.

Question: Based on the new upgrade eligibility restrictions rule 3.6.3.B hotfix, how should we interpret upgrade restrictions?

3.6.3B When an ability attaches a unit or leader to another unit as an upgrade (for example, the PILOTING keyword), any restriction from that ability continues to apply to that card until it leaves play. For a unit to be considered “eligible” for that upgrade, the upgrade must have been able to attach to that unit via the original ability.

First, a general question:

Is printed text in the ability box of an upgrade that restricts attachment considered an ability or an effect of some kind?
Are the "implied" restrictions caused by an ability that attaches a leader or unit as an upgrade considered to be a lasting effect attached to the upgrade, or something else?

Answer:

The implicit "Attach to a unit" attachment restriction of any upgrade is part of the card type and not an ability. Any printed attachment restriction for a given upgrade is an ability that modifies this implicit restriction. Restrictions put into place by abilities that attach a non-upgrade as an upgrade are lasting effects for that upgrade while it is in play as an upgrade. This will be clarified in CR5.

Scenaro 1:

Generic Pilot and Survivors Gauntlet

Player A plays a pilot on one of their units.
Player B takes control of that unit, while the upgrade remains controlled by Player A.
Player B attacks with Survivors Gauntlet.
Player B cannot move the pilot, as none of the elegible units for Survivors Gauntlet (under the same player's control) are considered friendly to the upgrade.

Is that correct?

In general, since Piloting keyword looks for friendly vehicle units, stolen vehicles with enemy pilots (that are not Sidon) cannot be moved by Survivors Gauntlet, due to the Pilot being attached to a non-friendly vehicle.

Answer:

This is correct. The attachment restriction for a PILOT is a "friendly Vehicle unit". For Survivors' Gauntlet's ability in this case, an "eligible" unit would be a "friendly Vehicle unit", where "friendly" is determined by that upgrade, whose controller is still Player A.

Scenario 2:

Sidon Ithano and Survivors Gauntlet

Player A plays Sidon on Player B's Bright Hope.
Player B plays a Lurking TIE Phantom.
Player A attacks with Survivors Gauntlet.
Player A can move Sidon to Player B's LTP.

In general, Survivors Gauntlet can move an upgrade to another unit controlled by the same player as the previous unit. Sidon's criteria is that the attached vehicle must be an enemy unit without a pilot on it, and Sidon is still controlled by player A, so Player B's Lurking TIE still is eligible.

Answer:

Yes, this is correct. The attachment restriction for Sidon Ithano is an "enemy Vehicle unit without a PILOT on it". For Survivors' Gauntlet's ability in this case, an "eligible" unit would be an "enemy Vehicle unit without a PILOT on it", where "enemy" is determined by that upgrade, whose controller is still Player A.

Scenario 3:

Legal Authority and Survivors Gauntlet

Player A plays Legal Authority on their Bright Hope.
Player B attacks Bright Hope with Survivors Gauntlet, moving Legal Authority to a ground unit controlled by Player A.

Answer: Yes, this is correct. The attachment restriction for Legal Authority is a "friendly unit". For Survivors' Gauntlet's ability in this case, an "eligible" unit would be a "friendly unit", where "friendly" is determined by that upgrade, whose controller is Player A.

Scenario 4:

Iden Versio, Corvus, and Kazuda Xiono

Player A Kazuda leader has a unit Iden Versio (Adapt or Die) in play, and use Kaz's leader ability to remove Iden's abilities.
Player A plays Corvus, and attaches Iden to Corvus.
Corvus does NOT get a shield token, but what are the upgrade attachment restrictions created at this point?

Corvus - Inferno Squadron Raider When Played: You may attach a friendly Pilot unit or upgrade to this unit.

Does this mean that the restrictions on Iden as an upgrade is "must attach to this unit" and thus can't be moved? Or does Kazuda's "blanking" of Iden result in a blank upgrade that only grants stat modifiers with no restrictions on where it can be moved?

Answer: Corvus's ability is what makes Iden Versio an upgrade, so Corvus's ability determines the attachment restriction, regardless of whether Iden Versio has lost her abilities due to Kaz. Corvus's ability says that you may attach a friendly PILOT unit as an upgrade to this unit, so the attachment restriction is "Attach to this unit". In general, for cards that don't have the Upgrade card type, the attachment restriction is created by the ability that turns that card into an upgrade and persists while that card remains an upgrade in play.

Scenario 5:

Iden Versio, Corvus, and Eject

Does the eligibility restrictions go away when the upgrade stops being an upgrade?

Play Iden on a Vehicle using piloting
Play Eject on Iden, is now a unit on the ground
Play Corvus to attach Iden as an upgrade

Iden never left play. Do both sets of eligibility restrictions now apply? Does the first restriction apply since that's what initially turned her into an upgrade? Does only the most recent restriction apply, since that's what most recently turned her into an upgrade?

What happens if you eject Iden again and play another Corvus? Can you not attach Iden because the previous restriction specified that unit, and the new Corvus isn't that unit?

What happens if you Eject Iden again and play another Corvus?

Answer:

For cards that don't have the Upgrade card type, attachment restrictions created by abilities that attach them as upgrades only persist as long as that card is in play as an upgrade. In your example, if Iden Versio is detached and becomes a unit via Eject, any attachment restrictions that applied to her while an upgrade no longer apply.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-25)

Question:

What is the eligibility criteria of a Pilot attached as an upgrade determined by?

7.5.17A “Piloting” is a keyword whose effect is the same as the constant ability: “You may play this unit as an upgrade on a friendly VEHICLE unit without a PILOT upgrade on it by paying cost Y instead of its printed cost,” where Y is the cost in brackets following “Piloting.” Paying this cost follows all normal rules for paying costs, including accounting for any aspect penalties that modify this cost.

2.12.3 Units with the PILOT trait can be in play either as a unit or as an upgrade.

We have two clarifications of intent:

Survivors Gauntlet can not move a Pilot to a non-Vehicle.
Survivors Gauntlet can move a Pilot to a Vehicle that already has a Pilot.

Both the attachment to a Vehicle unit, and the limit of no pre-existing Pilot, come from the same text in the Piloting keyword that only references playing the upgrade, not what it's ongoing attachment eligibility should be.

We also have leaders with the Pilot trait and no Piloting keyword (Boba Fett, for example), as well as units like Sidon Ithano with the Pilot trait and no Piloting keyword, so their eligibility criteria for valid attachment can't be based on the keyword text.

It seems that the limit of 1 Pilot attachment was meant to be able to be bypassed in certain cases, while the limit of Vehicle attachment was not, so should it be baked in to the definition of the Pilot trait?

In other words, should 2.12.3 have been written as: 2.12.3 Units with the PILOT trait can be in play either as a unit or as an upgrade attached to a Vehicle unit.

Answer:

CR5 will contain a small rework of upgrades to create a more robust picture of "attachment restrictions", rather than the current somewhat unwieldy "play restrictions" version.

Changes in CR5:

All upgrades have implicit attachment restrictions. When playing an upgrade or attaching it to an "eligible" unit, you have to consider those restrictions.
If an upgrade has no printed attachment restriction, the implicit restriction is "Attach to a unit."
If an upgrade has a printed attachment restriction, use that.
If a non-upgrade card is attached as an upgrade by an ability, the attachment restriction is created by the ability that turns that card into an upgrade. It persists while the card remains an upgrade in play.

Since this is too large of a change for CR4, the plan is to hotfix the issue by adding the following entry to a CR4 update:

CR4 Update (3.6.3B):

When an ability attaches a unit or leader to another unit as an upgrade (for example, the PILOTING keyword), any restriction from that ability continues to apply to that card until it leaves play. For a unit to be considered “eligible” for that upgrade, the upgrade must have been able to attach to that unit via the original ability.

3.6.3B will be posted on websites and social media while the CR is updated behind the scenes, hopefully by next week. Judges should apply this rule when judging immediately.

"One Pilot per vehicle" is a restriction.
Phantom II's attachment to The Ghost is also a restriction.
Both apply if you attempt to move the upgrade to a new unit.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-06)

Editorial note: this supercedes previous clarifications related to Survivors' Gauntlet interacting with Phantom II and Pilots. They have been removed from this page.

Question:

With the changes to smuggle explicitly stating that it is always a modified action, how does this impact nested triggers and especially Hondo Leader?

Answer:

Nested Trigger Scenarios with Hondo

Scenario #1

Board state: Hondo leader

I take a modified Play a Card action to Smuggle Weequay Pirate Gang from my resource row (Hondo and Ambush trigger).
I resolve Hondo/Ambush in either order.

Scenario #2

Board state: Hondo leader

I take a modified Play a Card action to Smuggle Timely Intervention from my resource row (Hondo triggers).
TI tells me to take a modified Play a Card action. I play Lieutenant Childsen from hand (Ambush and Childsen's WP trigger).
I resolve the WP/Ambush in either order.
I resolve Hondo.

Explanation:

In the first example, both WPG’s Ambush and Hondo’s ability are "abilities triggered during or as a result of" the modified action that is Smuggling WPG. They are resolved in the same window (once the steps of the action are finished).

In the second example, Hondo is triggered as a result of playing TI and resolves after you’re finished resolving TI’s event ability. That event ability is taking another action, though, and that modified action triggers other abilities that need to resolve before you can go back and resolve Hondo.

(Answer shared on 2025-03-06)

Question:

Can A New Adventure on a pilot unit play the pilot as an upgrade?

If A New Adventure is played on a pilot unit in play, it is returned to hand, and then can be played again for free. Can the pilot be played for free as an upgrade, or is the "play it for free" on ANA referring to the unit mode only?

Answer:

No, you can't pick up a pilot unit and play it as an upgrade. "Unit" applies to the entire ability, the same as "search for a unit and play it".

(Answer shared on 2025-02-18)

Question:

Does Red Leader discount for any friendly upgrade or only friendly PILOT upgrades?

Red Leader probably should be read as "each friendly PILOT (unit and upgrade)" however the language templating is very different on Padawan Starfighter.

Answer:

Red Leader discounts for each Pilot unit and Pilot upgrade.

(Answer shared on 2025-02-18)

Question:

Does sentinel granted by a triggered ability and then removed also turn off the triggered ability?

8.15.1 states that an ability giving the lost keyword is also lost for the duration of the lose effect. So if it is a conditional constant ability that is "on", it stops giving sentinel until the end of the phase, regardless of whether you turn it "off" then back "on". Such as with Gamorrean Guards vs SpecForce Soldier. Calculating Magnaguard can give sentinel more than once due to it having multiple trigger conditions for the triggered ability. If the sentinel granted by the When Played ability is removed by SpecForce Soldier, can the triggered ability still grant Sentinel again in that phase? Specific scenario: Player A controls a Battle Droid token and plays Calculating MagnaGuard, resolving its triggered ability to gain Sentinel. Player B plays SpecForce Soldier, resolving it's when played ability and removing Sentinel from Calculating MagnaGuard. Player A attacks the SpecForce Soldier with the Battle Droid, causing Calculating MagnaGuard to trigger to give itself Sentinel. As the new lasting effect originates from the same ability source, does the lose effect from SpecForce Soldier stop the Sentinel?

Answer:

We are changing how "lose" works in CR4 to simplify complex interactions like this. More info coming soon!

(Answer shared on 2025-02-18)

Question:

What timing needs to be considered in 6.2.3.A Determine Costs?

When calculating a card’s modified cost, start with the card’s printed cost, then apply any modifiers that increase the cost of the card (including the aspect penalty) before any modifiers that decrease the cost of the card, including abilities like Exploit. The result is the card’s modified cost. Example: Player A has a JTL Krennic unit in play. Player A plays a Battle Droid Legion, exploiting the Krennic unit. The Battle Droid Legion is the first unit played this round by player A. Does it cost 7 or 6, assuming no aspect penalty? Since Krennic is in play for determining costs, does his constant ability apply the discount, or does Exploit defeating Krennic mean his discount can't be applied?

Answer:

You can apply discounts in any order you want, so you can apply Krennic's -1 discount and then exploit him for an additional -2.

(Answer shared on 2025-02-18)

Editorial note: this is expected to be clarified in CR5.

Question:

Does “Starting Hand” also mean “Opening Hand” or does it mean “First opening hand”?

The CR references a player’s opening hand, but the base Colossus refers to Starting Hand.

Answer:

"Starting hand" is the same as "opening hand"; this is a templating inconsistency. If your base is Colossus, you draw one fewer card, even when you mulligan.

(Answer shared on 2025-02-18)

Question:

How does Piloting and Last Known Information interact?

Player A has Gar Saxon leader that is currently in play as a leader unit. A Pilot unit (let's say JTL Bossk, Hunt By Instinct) is played via piloting, and is attached to a TIE/LN Fighter. The TIE unit is defeated, sending the TIE and the attached upgrade that is Bossk to the discard. We now have a Pilot unit in the discard that was defeated in this phase, but it was an upgrade at the time of defeat. Is the pilot eligible to return to hand via Gar's leader ability? Is the pilot eligible to return to hand via The Emperor's Legion? Is the pilot eligible to be used by Spark of Hope to be converted in to a resource?

Answer:

Gar: Yes, Gar's ability only looks for whether a card was an upgrade attached to a unit, using last known information.

Emperor's Legion & Spark of Hope: Any card ability that cares about whether a certain card in your discard pile was defeated this phase cares about whether it was defeated as that type of card. (See the current Card Clarification for Spark of Hope that it does not work if a unit was defeated while a resource, e.g. by Han's leader ability.)

(Answer shared on 2025-02-18)

Question:

Is it the potential for multiple actions or the actual existence of multiple actions that requires the sequential resolution and thus nesting of triggered abilities in 7.1.7?

7.1.7. If an ability instructs a player to take multiple actions (e.g. “Play three cards,” “Attack with two units”), that player performs each action sequentially. Any abilities triggered during or as a result of each action are considered nested abilities, and must be resolved before proceeding to the next action.

If only a single unit is played by a U-Wing Reinforcements, are those When Played triggered abilities nested?

Fleshing out the example:

Say the single unit played by U-Wing Reinforcements is The Ghost, Specter Home Base, while the opponent has a Krayt Dragon in play. As a result, we will have 4 “When Played” pending abilities to resolve:

7 damage from Krayt, 6 damage from Krayt, Shielded from Ghost, and Shield another Spectre unit from Ghost. If we assume Active Player always resolves first, does this go

Shielded from Ghost and Shield another Spectre unit from Ghost in either order, and then 7 damage from Krayt and 6 damage from Krayt in either order.

Shielded from Ghost and Shield another Spectre unit from Ghost in either order, and then 6 damage from Krayt, and then 7 damage from Krayt.

Another example:

If you have a Bossk, Deadly Stalker in play and play U-Wing Reinforcements, choosing to play only one unit from this ability, can Bossk's event trigger resolve prior to anything from the single unit played by U-Wing?

Answer:

This is a great thing to poke at, and we appreciate the attention to detail here and in your other questions! Having talked about some of the implications of the various answers to this question, we are going to move forward by separating the "nested" rule from the "sequential" rule in CR4. With some possible wording adjustments, CR4 will say: If an ability instructs a player to take a modified action, any abilities triggered during or as a result of that action are considered nested abilities. If an ability instructs a player to take multiple actions (e.g. “Play three cards,” “Attack with two units”), that player performs each action sequentially. Any nested abilities must be resolved before proceeding to the next action.

Editorial note: this led to the change in CR4 that all triggers from a modified actions are nested

(Answer shared on 2025-01-20)

Question:

What is done with a card that becomes no longer valid to play, but was originally valid?

This is a complicated chain of events, but it’s all legal:

Play U-wing Reinforcements and choose Fleet Lieutenant x2. Play the first Fleet LT, which allows you to attack with an Ezra. Ezra attacks and, on completing his attack, his ability allows you to play A New Adventure, forcing your opponent to return and then replay Regional Governor. The opponent does so, naming Fleet Lieutenant. You no longer can play your second Fleet Lieutenant, despite being able to when you were initially choosing the cards for U-Wing.

Does the second Fleet Lieutenant return to the deck with the remainder of the searched cards, does it go to the discard, is it removed from the game, or does it somehow bypass the Regional Governor restriction?

Answer:

This was not covered adequately in CR3. Good catch! We have added wording in 8.27.8 to account for this situation.

(Answer shared on 2025-01-20)

Question:

If Caught In The Crossfire is played in Twin Suns by Player A and they select a unit from Player B and a unit from Player C in the same arena, and Player C's unit has a bounty and is defeated, does Player A or Player B get to collect the bounty?

And why? Does 1.18 apply to Bounty control? Following the current CR as written it seems that Player A, as the active player who played the event, would NOT collect the bounty, it would instead go to Player B, but this seems counter to other rulings such as how Lurking TIE Phantom functions.

Answer:

According to 1.18.1A, the player whose unit deals lethal damage is considered before the player whose ability is played, so in your example, Player B collects the Bounty.

(Answer shared on 2025-01-20)

Question:

Does Lurking TIE Phantom take damage from indirect damage?

If not, is it a valid target to assign indirect damage to?

What we know so far: 8.4.2. When “can’t” is used in a card ability, that ability adjusts or overrides a default rule of play. The player controlling a card with such an ability must follow that ability over the default rule of play. 8.4.3. Restrictive abilities override permissive abilities. If an ability with the word “may” or “can” directly contradicts an ability that uses the word “can’t”, then the ability that uses “can’t” takes precedence.

LTP text: This unit can't be captured, damaged, or defeated by enemy card abilities.

3.7.6. A Shield token is a type of token upgrade. A Shield token is an upgrade with the Armor trait that gives the unit it is attached to +0 power and +0 HP and has the text: “If damage would be dealt to attached unit, prevent that damage. If you do, defeat a Shield token on it.” When an ability instructs a player to give a Shield token to a unit, they take a Shield token that has been set aside and attach it to that unit.

Clarifications so far: Indirect damage can't be "wasted" by assigning it to a unit with less remaining HP LTP wouldn't be wasting it due to remaining HP. Damage can be assigned there, it isn't a "prevent damage" effect. It's a "can't" which takes precedence over the default rule of play.

How should this actually be ruled?

Answer:

Lurking TIE Phantom can be assigned damage from indirect damage. "Can't be damaged" is a prevent effect, as clarified in CR4. We are considering the additional step of errataing LTP to use "prevent" wording but aren’t 100% on that yet.

(Answer shared on 2025-01-20)

Question:

Does Spare The Target on Unrefusable Offer work if the controller is not the owner?

A follow up to an older question. A bounty is always resolved by the opponent of the controller of the unit which is USUALLY not the owner of said card. We know Spare The Target played on a unit with Unrefusable Offer attached results in not being able to play the unit when resolving the bounty because it's in your opponent's hand, which is a hidden zone. How does it change if Spare the Target returns the unit in question to your own hand, such as if it had previously been swapped control with Change of Heart? Are you then able to play it from your own hand since it is NOT in a zone hidden to the controller of the bounty when resolving?

Comparing similar effects, we know the effect of A New Adventure works from your hand, or your opponent’s hand, to play the unit for free. Does this mean STT+UR could actually play the unit if your opponent allowed you to, but normally it fails because there’s no reason for them not to “fail to find” the unit that the effect is looking for?

Answer:

No, Spare the Target can never play a card from hand. Unrefusable Offer was a templating error and will be corrected in the coming errata.

(Answer shared on 2025-01-20)

Question:

What is the exact timing of deployed leader unit Bossk's triggered ability?

Since it triggers on the collection of a bounty, it is always triggered by the resolution of a triggered ability. Does this mean the second bounty resolution is always nested inside the first bounty resolution, or since the trigger is the completion of the resolution of the first bounty does Bossk trigger at the end and it is sequential instead of nested?

Example 1: Player 1: has deployed Bossk leader unit and Wampa in play, and a Snowtrooper Lieutenant in the top 5 of the deck.

Player 2: has Clone Trooper in play with Bounty Hunter's Quarry attached.

Player 1 attacks and defeats Clone Trooper with Bossk, resolves bounty by playing Snowtrooper Lieutenant. When Played ability from Snowtrooper is now nested within the first bounty resolution. Can Player 1 choose to resolve bounty again using Bossk's ability before resolving the Snowtrooper (granting an attack to Wampa) because it is also nested inside the first bounty, or is the second bounty only triggered after the first bounty is fully resolved, and thus is resolved at the top layer instead of in the nested layer?

Answer:

Bossk leader's triggered ability triggers when you collect a Bounty, which 7.5.13D defines as resolving a Bounty ability. 7.6.11 says that all abilities triggered while resolving a triggered ability A are nested, so Bossk's ability is always nested.

(Answer shared on 2025-01-20)

Rules clarifications from the dev team collected from social media:

Set 4 - Jump to Lightspeed

Set 3 - Twilight of the Republic

Set 2 - Shadows of the Galaxy

Set 1 - Spark of Rebellion

Rules clarifications from FFG via Jonah (Nexus manager):

Official Card Text Errata

Blizzard Assault AT-AT (Spark of Rebellion, 88) - While attacking, this unit may deal its excess damage to an enemy ground unit."
Bo-Katan Kryze (Shadows of the Galaxy, 12) - On Attack: You may deal 1 damage to a unit. Then, if you attacked with another Mandalorian unit this phase, you may deal 1 damage to a unit. (The same unit or a different unit.)
Migs Mayfeld (Shadows of the Galaxy, 163) - When a player discards a card from a hand: You may deal 2 damage to a unit or base. Use this ability only once each round.
Unrefusable Offer (Shadows of the Galaxy, 226) - Attach to a non-leader unit. Attached unit gains: “Bounty — Play this unit from its owner's discard pile or from capture for free (under your control). It enters play ready. At the start of the regroup phase, defeat it."
I Have the High Ground (Twilight of the Republic, 72) - Choose a friendly unit. For this phase, while that unit is defending, the attacker gets –4/–0.
Sly Moore (Twilight of the Republic, 211) - When Played: Take control of an enemy token unit and ready it. At the start of the regroup phase, that token unit's owner takes control of it.
Wingman Victor Three (Jump to Lightspeed, 86) - When played as an upgrade: You may give an Experience token to a unit other than the attached unit.

"Unofficial" Rules explainers:

Official Resources:

Commonly asked questions

Trigger timing is not the same as timing of resolution of that ability.
Events only affect units that are in play when the event is played, unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Overwhelm will still damage the base if the defending unit is defeated by an On Attack ability.
Chirrut doesn't die to negative HP modifiers during action phase.
Krayt Dragon always triggers.
Bounties are not inherently upgrades, but upgrades can give bounties to attached unit.
Tokens and leaders enter play but are not played (for the purposes of When Played triggers).
Pay costs as normal for ambushing a unit when using Energy Conversion Lab Epic Action.
Lurking TIE Phantom is immune explicitly to defeat, capture, and damage from enemy abilities, which means actual combat damage, HP modifiers, and return to hand are usually the best options for removing it.
Fan made projects like Force Table and Karabast are not an official source of rules. If something seems off, double check with your friendly local judge and/or SWU discord rules chats, and let the maintainers know if you found something incorrect!

macfergusson/SWU_Resources.md

Star Wars Unlimited Resources

Table of Contents

Rules clarifications from Ryan Serrano, SWU Rules Admiral:

Rules clarifications from the dev team collected from social media:

Set 4 - Jump to Lightspeed

Set 3 - Twilight of the Republic

Set 2 - Shadows of the Galaxy

Set 1 - Spark of Rebellion

Rules clarifications from FFG via Jonah (Nexus manager):

Official Card Text Errata

"Unofficial" Rules explainers:

Official Resources:

Commonly asked questions

Other useful resources/community tools: