The section of trooper activation that determines if an ARO is valid contains the following table: https://infinitythewiki.com/Trooper_Activation Bullet point 4 makes all ARO declarations valid if any of those three situations are true. Under Reset and Dodge, it states that both ARO's can be declared if they are valid, or in only a few of the situations listed in bullet point 4. The 'or' of those skill requirements don't make any sense considering the broader list of situations in the bullet point already determining validity. So I ask the question why they are listed in the skills at all? https://infinitythewiki.com/Reset https://infinitythewiki.com/Dodge This allows for some weird interactions where a trooper can dodge when hacked through a repeater, or a trooper can reset in response to a guided attack (guided always a template attack), and I don't believe this is the intention behind the rules. Credit to @inane.imp for pointing this out to me in another thread.
Given the way the rules are written, I don't know any other way to read these. The N4 dodge/reset conditions appear to intentionally be more permissive to avoid some of the worst effects of forced AROs from N3.
It's redundant information, CB does that. There's also the fact the text is a hold over from a time that AROs were generated when you met a skills requirements which is not the case in N4: AROs are generated when an enemy trooper is activated, they are valid if the any of the 4 bullet points of the ARO are met. Ultimately both Dodge and Reset meet their requirements in the Reactive any time you have a valid ARO. It's that simple.
Well... This IS intentional... You can Dodge an hacking because you take the risk of the hacking to get a Dodge movement, maybe getting to objectives or engaging the enemy, You can Reset a guided attack because if you were Imm-B you cannot dodge but at least it gives you a chance to keep reacting.
I guess I saw the individual skill entries as the intent first and most people have read them as just vestiges from N3. I'll concede the point.