Naval Pass

Naval Invasion: Reaction: After engaging, once per battle, if you are the Attacker and your current army has more Naval cards than the side opposing it, choose your performing Naval Personality: You have the first opportunity to take a Battle action, which he must perform.

Sneak Attack: Reaction: After engaging: The Attacker has the first opportunity to take a Battle action or pass in this battle.

Implication: Naval + Pass isn't valid, as Naval doesn't list Pass as a valid alternative, nor can a Naval personality perform a Pass.

Corollary: What happens when someone does say: "Naval, pass" Example: Oops, guess I don't have an action anyone can perform.

Passing is always a valid option - the "or pass" text on Sneak Attack is there for completeness, and could be reminder text.

viewtopic.php?f=59&t=98289

Doesnt the Good Faith rule prevent you from declaring a Naval action if you have no available Naval action to take?

Naval Invasion: Reaction: After engaging, once per battle, if you are the Attacker and your current army has more Naval cards than the side opposing it, choose your performing Naval Personality: You have the first opportunity to take a Battle action, which he must perform.

Ive seen no mention of being able to perform a Pass, and the naval reaction doesnt say 'which he must perform if possible'.

The Good Faith Rule does not stop you taking an action when you know its effects will fail.

Good Faith Rule: Good Faith Rule: When an action is announced, the player must be able to target all required targets, meet all conditions of the action, and pay all mandatory costs, to the best of his or her knowledge. If the action involves putting one or more cards into play as a non-optional effect, the player must be able to meet all costs and requirements to bring those cards into play legally, in order to meet the Good Faith rule. This includes having a Personality who can legally attach any attachments to be brought into play. A player cannot announce an action on the basis of a legal card to play, but then choose an illegal attachment or Personality for the actual play choice. Aspects of the game state are taken into account in determining legality under the Good Faith Rule, such as effects that reduce costs, prevent costs from being paid, or relax requirements. A player is not assumed to know the face-down contents of his or her decks, for purposes of the Good Faith Rule. Example: An action’s effect tells the player to search his or her deck and bring a card from it into play. If there is no legal card to play left in the deck, the player still may take the action in good faith. The intent of the Good Faith Rule is to prevent players from abusively attempting actions whose costs and requirements they know they cannot fulfill (for example, in order to exploit a Reaction to announcing the action), while at the same time allowing players to take actions whose costs and requirements they know they can fulfill. The rule should be interpreted in this spirit, and not as a way to block legal actions because of a technicality.

The requirement that the subsequent action is performed by the Naval Personality isn't a requirement of the Naval Invasion Reaction, it is an additional requirement on that subsequent action, and thus has no bearing on the legality under the Good Faith Rule of the Naval Invasion Reaction.

I repeat: passing is always an option. If you have no Battle action to take performed by the performer of Naval Invasion, or you choose not to take such an action, you must pass.