Jump to content



Photo

Darth Vader, Marksmanship, and Cluster Missiles


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 cleardave

cleardave

    Member

  • Members
  • 402 posts

Posted 24 September 2012 - 06:52 PM

 I had this situation come up in a game;

Darth Vader, equipped with Marksmanship and Cluster Missiles starts the turn with a Target Lock on an opponent's X-Wing;

After movement is completed, Darth Vader has the X-Wing with the Target Lock in his front fire arc, in range of the cluster missiles.

For Darth Vader's 2 actions, can he create 2 instances of Marksmanship, with the intent of creating potentially 2 critical hits in total, if at least two "focus" results come up on the die rolls?

Sample die roll using Cluster Missiles and 2 uses of Marksmanship;

First attack;

Critical Hit, Focus, Blank

Second Attack;

Hit, Focus, Focus

Are both uses of Marksmanship resolving simultaneously in the attack phase, thereby allowing two of those focus results to be converted into critical hits, thus creating a new dice spread of 3 Critical Hits, 2 Hits and a Blank?

Alternatively, would the fact that both instances of Marksmanship still require other Focus results to convert to hits cancel each other out and create a dice spread of 2 Critical Hits, 3 Hits and a Blank?

I was digging through the rules to find some mention of using the same Elite Talent card twice, but I guess since this scenario is unique to Darth Vader, there isn't any mention of it.

Usually when we hit a bump in the road like this, we try and look at what the spirit of the game would be.  In this case, our reasoning is that 3 Critical Hits is the way to go, because it's Darth Vader, Galactic Badass using Marksmanship, so he's that much more accurate, combined with Cluster MIssiles, which blow up in a nice ball of death around the target, making hitting your prey even easier.

Granted, from a gameplay perspective, it seems kind of cheap, but it's balanced by the fact that the Cluster Missiles are a one-use item.

Actually, that just made me think, Cluster Missiles or no, can Vader use Marksmanship twice as his 2 actions and make 2 Focus icons convert to Critical Hits?



#2 Daveydavedave

Daveydavedave

    Member

  • Members
  • 291 posts

Posted 24 September 2012 - 07:12 PM

 Pump the brakes.

A. You can never do the same action 2x in a turn.

B. Marksmanship applies all round long - so though there is some controversy over exactly how it works with cluster missiles, we can be sure that all focus results from both shots become hits.  The problematic part is whether both shots get to count one focus as a crit, or do you just get one crit per round (see the thread about cluster + marksmanship)

C. You should always have a "C" when you have an A and a B.  AAAAND…

D. Marksmanship already makes ALL focus results change to hits, not just one focus result (which seemed to be what you were saying).

 

Sounds like your gaming group may need to reread the rules carefully and look for some of these nuances.  



#3 El_Tonio

El_Tonio

    Member

  • Members
  • 417 posts

Posted 24 September 2012 - 07:13 PM

On p. 9 it says, "a ship cannot perform the same action more than once during a single game round (not even when the action is a “free action”)." 


REBEL: 5 X-Wing  •  3 Y-Wing  •  3 A-Wing  •  3 YT-1300  •  4 B-Wing  •  1 HWK-290  •  7 Z-95 Headhunter  •  2 E-Wing

IMPERIAL: 8 TIE Fighter  •  3 TIE Advanced X1  •  5 TIE Interceptor  • 3 Firespray 31  •  6 TIE Bomber  •  2 Lambda Class Shuttle  •  2 TIE Phantom  •  2 TIE Defender

 

 


#4 cleardave

cleardave

    Member

  • Members
  • 402 posts

Posted 24 September 2012 - 07:27 PM

 First of all, thanks guys, for referencing the bit on not taking the same action twice in one round.  We were so focus on the Marksmanship/Cluster Missile hits issue that we overlooked that part of the rules.

So if I'm understanding this correctly, the issue is still basically boiling down to whether you can produce potentially two critical hits with Marksmanship and Cluster missiles, if each attack comes up with a Focus icon?

It seems pretty clear that "…when attacking THIS ROUND, you may change 1 of your Focus results to a Critical Hit…" so regardless of the fact that Cluster Missiles attack twice in the Combat Phase, you are still only allowed to modify one die result with Marksmanship in the entire round (or game turn, if you will).



#5 Daveydavedave

Daveydavedave

    Member

  • Members
  • 291 posts

Posted 24 September 2012 - 07:44 PM

cleardave said:

It seems pretty clear that "…when attacking THIS ROUND, you may change 1 of your Focus results to a Critical Hit…" so regardless of the fact that Cluster Missiles attack twice in the Combat Phase, you are still only allowed to modify one die result with Marksmanship in the entire round (or game turn, if you will).

God bless you sir.  I've been trying to explain that interpretation on the other thread and they aren't buyin it.

The alternative interpretation is that "this round" is only on the card to prevent you from doing the marksmanship action once and then benefiting from it turn after turn without paying an action for it.  It sounded crazy to me, but actually lots of other cards have similar language for this purpose.  

Still, I think the correct interpretation is 1 crit per round, and not 1 crit per attack.



#6 cleardave

cleardave

    Member

  • Members
  • 402 posts

Posted 24 September 2012 - 08:07 PM

Daveydavedave said:

God bless you sir.  I've been trying to explain that interpretation on the other thread and they aren't buyin it.

The alternative interpretation is that "this round" is only on the card to prevent you from doing the marksmanship action once and then benefiting from it turn after turn without paying an action for it.  It sounded crazy to me, but actually lots of other cards have similar language for this purpose.  

Still, I think the correct interpretation is 1 crit per round, and not 1 crit per attack.

I can't imagine what could be more clear, in terms of the language.  What was tripping me up in my Vader scenario above was that we forgot about "no duplicate actions in the same turn" and were focused on the alleged timing issue of using Marksmanship twice, which of course I now know is impossible.

I looked up the other thread about this Cluster Missile business, and I can't believe it's gone as far as it has.

Round=Entire Game Turn

Vader with Marksmanship and Cluster Missile can, if he chooses Marksmanship as one of his actions (being prohibited by the game rules from choosing it twice), use his other action to acquire a Target Lock on an X-Wing, and in the Combat Phase, if within range, use the Cluster missiles to fire two attacks of 3 dice each, changing one Focus result from the six total dice rolled, to a Critical Hit, and every other Focus result in the pool to a Hit.

So the advantage of Vader with this setup, is that if he can maneuver himself to get within range of Cluster Missile, he can reliably count on scoring a Critical Hit, and a number of regular Hits to put a hurting on the X-Wing that dared to get in his crosshairs.



#7 Daveydavedave

Daveydavedave

    Member

  • Members
  • 291 posts

Posted 24 September 2012 - 08:45 PM

 I agree.

 

Don't forget that with cluster missiles you roll 3 dice, make any changes to the dice via marksmanship and then your opponent rolls his defense dice.  Then you roll 3 more dice for the second attack and make adjustments from marksmanship again, followed by your opponents defense roll.

So, if you follow the 1 crit per round interpretation (as I do) then you have to decide after the first roll whether to use it immediately or wait for the second roll and hope to get at least one focus result to turn into your 1 crit this round.

One reason to potentially wait to take the crit until the second roll is if your target still has shields, because shields effectively ignore crits (no cards are even drawn when taking shield damage).



#8 cleardave

cleardave

    Member

  • Members
  • 402 posts

Posted 24 September 2012 - 09:29 PM

Daveydavedave said:

 I agree.

 

Don't forget that with cluster missiles you roll 3 dice, make any changes to the dice via marksmanship and then your opponent rolls his defense dice.  Then you roll 3 more dice for the second attack and make adjustments from marksmanship again, followed by your opponents defense roll.

So, if you follow the 1 crit per round interpretation (as I do) then you have to decide after the first roll whether to use it immediately or wait for the second roll and hope to get at least one focus result to turn into your 1 crit this round.

One reason to potentially wait to take the crit until the second roll is if your target still has shields, because shields effectively ignore crits (no cards are even drawn when taking shield damage).

Well now we're going deeper into the tactics of it, since your opponent could have a Focus or Evade token going on their ship, which will also inform when you decide to activate the Marksmanship critical hit die swap, based on whether or not they use it on their first roll to defend the Cluster Missile.

There's certainly a lot of decisions to be made on this one, on both sides of the battle.

What I meant to communicate in my previous post, when I said "…scoring a Critical Hit and a number of regular Hits" was to produce it on a die roll.  I realize now that when I said "scoring", i was giving the impression that I was looking at it as a hit taking effect, versus showing up on the die roll.  I do realize that the opponent can react between them in the ways we just covered, so I apologize for further confusing the discussion.

This game really knocked my socks off in terms of its tactical depth.  It doesn't seem that deep on the surface, with the low model count, and easy to grasp, intuitive rules and presentation, but dear God can you create some tough calls to make.  I like how something so simple on the surface, has so many layers, like ogres and onions.



#9 drkjedi35

drkjedi35

    Member

  • Members
  • 389 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 05:11 AM

cleardave said:

I like how something so simple on the surface, has so many layers, like ogres and onions.

You know what else everybody likes? Parfaits. Have you ever met a person, you say, "Let's get some parfait," they say, "Hell no, I don't like no parfait"? Parfaits are delicious.

Roy



#10 Budgernaut

Budgernaut

    The Uncanny One

  • Members
  • 1,506 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 05:12 AM

drkjedi35 said:

cleardave said:

I like how something so simple on the surface, has so many layers, like ogres and onions.

 

You know what else everybody likes? Parfaits. Have you ever met a person, you say, "Let's get some parfait," they say, "Hell no, I don't like no parfait"? Parfaits are delicious.

Roy

+1


"There is a fine line between neutral and amoral. In fact, there may be no line there at all."

--Count Dooku


#11 ShadowJak

ShadowJak

    Member

  • Members
  • 287 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 02:33 AM


Daveydavedave said:


cleardave said:

It seems pretty clear that "…when attacking THIS ROUND, you may change 1 of your Focus results to a Critical Hit…" so regardless of the fact that Cluster Missiles attack twice in the Combat Phase, you are still only allowed to modify one die result with Marksmanship in the entire round (or game turn, if you will).

God bless you sir. I've been trying to explain that interpretation on the other thread and they aren't buyin it.

The alternative interpretation is that "this round" is only on the card to prevent you from doing the marksmanship action once and then benefiting from it turn after turn without paying an action for it. It sounded crazy to me, but actually lots of other cards have similar language for this purpose.

Still, I think the correct interpretation is 1 crit per round, and not 1 crit per attack.

"This round" is just a clarification. Not all Actions have their effects removed during the End Phase (e.g. Target Locks). Take a look at Luke for example. His card reads:

When defending, you may change one of your "EYE" results to a[n] "EVADE" result.


Obviously, if he is attacked by more than one ship (or by the infamous cluster missiles) he can change one "EYE" result per attack. I don't think you'd argue that he only gets to use that ability once per game even though that is the way it looks when reading it.

I appreciate where you are coming from in wanting to read the rules as exactingly as possible and I would even agree with your interpretation if looking at the Cluster Missiles card in a vacuum, but Cluster Missiles doesn't exist in a vacuum. You have to keep in mind that the game designers are human and most likely don't have degrees in the English language. They are using the card and rule book text to explain the rules they know very well but end up using wording that is ambiguous to us even though from their point of view it might seem crystal clear.

The game is awesome, but the wording they use is very clunky. Instead of using the name of the card, "this ship", "this pilot", or any other non-ambiguous way to refer to the elements of the game, they constantly use "You" which isn't accurate and just doesn't sound right. Instead of using "each", "every", or "all", they sometimes use no clarifying words and leave it to us to figure out. Part of it may have been just a formatting issue. They needed to be able to fit all the words on the cards but also wanted to be consistent across cards as well so we ended up with wording that isn't clear enough because consistently clear wording wouldn't fit on every card.

Summary: Cluster Missiles allows for two crits.



#12 ArcticSnake

ArcticSnake

    Member

  • Members
  • 125 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:56 AM

This thread again? hahaha.

So what if Luke's card said: "When defending this round, you may change one of your "EYE" results to a[n] "EVADE" result."? Know what? Let's call him Luuke. What makes Luuke's wording different from Luke's "When defending, you may change one of your "EYE" results…"? Can you really say that the two differently worded abilities play the same?

Let's say Luuke and Luke get's attacked with the cluster missile.

It's pretty clear that Luke's "When defending, you may change one…" would allow you to change one "EYE" to an "EVADE" per attack. But how about Luuke? How would his "When defending this round, you may change one…" interact with cluster missiles?

My summary: Cluster missiles = two attacks, one crit


Battlescribe X-Wing Miniatures Data file links:
Index.bsi file: https://dl.dropboxus...tures/index.bsi
Index.xml file: https://dl.dropboxus...tures/index.xml

 


#13 dbmeboy

dbmeboy

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 05:20 AM

ArcticSnake said:

This thread again? hahaha.

So what if Luke's card said: "When defending this round, you may change one of your "EYE" results to a[n] "EVADE" result."? Know what? Let's call him Luuke. What makes Luuke's wording different from Luke's "When defending, you may change one of your "EYE" results…"? Can you really say that the two differently worded abilities play the same?

Let's say Luuke and Luke get's attacked with the cluster missile.

It's pretty clear that Luke's "When defending, you may change one…" would allow you to change one "EYE" to an "EVADE" per attack. But how about Luuke? How would his "When defending this round, you may change one…" interact with cluster missiles?

My summary: Cluster missiles = two attacks, one crit

Problem with your counter example: Luke has a constant ability, not an action, so he has no need to specify a duration. If it was instead an action that had to be used, then that wording would indeed give him one evade per attack.



#14 Budgernaut

Budgernaut

    The Uncanny One

  • Members
  • 1,506 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:17 AM

dbmeboy said:

ArcticSnake said:

 

This thread again? hahaha.

So what if Luke's card said: "When defending this round, you may change one of your "EYE" results to a[n] "EVADE" result."? Know what? Let's call him Luuke. What makes Luuke's wording different from Luke's "When defending, you may change one of your "EYE" results…"? Can you really say that the two differently worded abilities play the same?

Let's say Luuke and Luke get's attacked with the cluster missile.

It's pretty clear that Luke's "When defending, you may change one…" would allow you to change one "EYE" to an "EVADE" per attack. But how about Luuke? How would his "When defending this round, you may change one…" interact with cluster missiles?

My summary: Cluster missiles = two attacks, one crit

 

 

Problem with your counter example: Luke has a constant ability, not an action, so he has no need to specify a duration. If it was instead an action that had to be used, then that wording would indeed give him one evade per attack.

Right. It's not "this round" alone that limits the cluster missile to one attack (for that interpretation), it's combining the "one [critical hit]" with "this round" giving you "one crit per round". No other card mentions a single anything (that I'm aware of) so both interpretations make sense to me, whether it be one crit on each attack, or one crit between the two. I really think this one just needs a ruling.


"There is a fine line between neutral and amoral. In fact, there may be no line there at all."

--Count Dooku


#15 AlKusanagi

AlKusanagi

    Member

  • Members
  • 65 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:58 AM

"Luuke's" text still implies that if he's attacked more than once per round, he still gets to change one focus into an evade. The text that would truly limit him would be "Once per round, when defending, you may change one…"



#16 ArcticSnake

ArcticSnake

    Member

  • Members
  • 125 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:19 AM

All valid points. I love these forums. :)

FFG should hurry up with that FAQ though.


Battlescribe X-Wing Miniatures Data file links:
Index.bsi file: https://dl.dropboxus...tures/index.bsi
Index.xml file: https://dl.dropboxus...tures/index.xml

 


#17 ShadowJak

ShadowJak

    Member

  • Members
  • 287 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 09:37 AM

Budgernaut said:


dbmeboy said:

ArcticSnake said:

 

This thread again? hahaha.

So what if Luke's card said: "When defending this round, you may change one of your "EYE" results to a[n] "EVADE" result."? Know what? Let's call him Luuke. What makes Luuke's wording different from Luke's "When defending, you may change one of your "EYE" results…"? Can you really say that the two differently worded abilities play the same?

Let's say Luuke and Luke get's attacked with the cluster missile.

It's pretty clear that Luke's "When defending, you may change one…" would allow you to change one "EYE" to an "EVADE" per attack. But how about Luuke? How would his "When defending this round, you may change one…" interact with cluster missiles?

My summary: Cluster missiles = two attacks, one crit

 

 

Problem with your counter example: Luke has a constant ability, not an action, so he has no need to specify a duration. If it was instead an action that had to be used, then that wording would indeed give him one evade per attack.

Right. It's not "this round" alone that limits the cluster missile to one attack (for that interpretation), it's combining the "one [critical hit]" with "this round" giving you "one crit per round". No other card mentions a single anything (that I'm aware of) so both interpretations make sense to me, whether it be one crit on each attack, or one crit between the two. I really think this one just needs a ruling.

I'm not sure I know what you mean by saying that "no other cards mention a single anything" but every other time a present participle has been used on the cards, it has been usable more than one time. "This round" is on the card text to clarify that the effect ends at the end of the round. Let me list the cards where this is the case for you:

Garven Dreis
Luke Skywalker
Wedge Antillies
"Dutch" Vander
Horton Salm
R2-D2
R5-K6
"Backstabber"
"Dark Curse"
"Howlrunner"
"Mauler Mithel"
"Night Beast"
"Winged Gundark"
*Marksmanship (contentious, I know)

That's literally every card that's worth points in the game that uses a present participle to designate when the card's effect happens. I didn't leave any out (that I know of). Notice how every single one of them is usable more than once? Are you really saying that Marksmanship is the only card in the game whose text uses a present participle but can't be activated more than once? Really?

When this point of view is proven right, the smugness will be intoxicating. Too bad the card itself itself isn't even that good anyway.

 



#18 ArcticSnake

ArcticSnake

    Member

  • Members
  • 125 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 10:39 AM

After mulling it over a lot and weighing all the arguments for and against it, I'm changing sides. I now believe Markmanship applies to all of Cluster Missiles' attacks with the possibility of changing a focus to a crit per attack.

If a card ability appears which would grant a pilot three or more attacks, Markmanship would apply to all those attacks as well, giving the possibility of changing a focus to a crit per attack.


Battlescribe X-Wing Miniatures Data file links:
Index.bsi file: https://dl.dropboxus...tures/index.bsi
Index.xml file: https://dl.dropboxus...tures/index.xml

 


#19 Budgernaut

Budgernaut

    The Uncanny One

  • Members
  • 1,506 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:57 PM

ShadowJak said:

 

Budgernaut said:


dbmeboy said:

 

ArcticSnake said:

 

This thread again? hahaha.

So what if Luke's card said: "When defending this round, you may change one of your "EYE" results to a[n] "EVADE" result."? Know what? Let's call him Luuke. What makes Luuke's wording different from Luke's "When defending, you may change one of your "EYE" results…"? Can you really say that the two differently worded abilities play the same?

Let's say Luuke and Luke get's attacked with the cluster missile.

It's pretty clear that Luke's "When defending, you may change one…" would allow you to change one "EYE" to an "EVADE" per attack. But how about Luuke? How would his "When defending this round, you may change one…" interact with cluster missiles?

My summary: Cluster missiles = two attacks, one crit

 

 

Problem with your counter example: Luke has a constant ability, not an action, so he has no need to specify a duration. If it was instead an action that had to be used, then that wording would indeed give him one evade per attack.

Right. It's not "this round" alone that limits the cluster missile to one attack (for that interpretation), it's combining the "one [critical hit]" with "this round" giving you "one crit per round". No other card mentions a single anything (that I'm aware of) so both interpretations make sense to me, whether it be one crit on each attack, or one crit between the two. I really think this one just needs a ruling.

 

 

I'm not sure I know what you mean by saying that "no other cards mention a single anything" but every other time a present participle has been used on the cards, it has been usable more than one time. "This round" is on the card text to clarify that the effect ends at the end of the round. Let me list the cards where this is the case for you:

Garven Dreis
Luke Skywalker
Wedge Antillies
"Dutch" Vander
Horton Salm
R2-D2
R5-K6
"Backstabber"
"Dark Curse"
"Howlrunner"
"Mauler Mithel"
"Night Beast"
"Winged Gundark"
*Marksmanship (contentious, I know)

That's literally every card that's worth points in the game that uses a present participle to designate when the card's effect happens. I didn't leave any out (that I know of). Notice how every single one of them is usable more than once? Are you really saying that Marksmanship is the only card in the game whose text uses a present participle but can't be activated more than once? Really?

When this point of view is proven right, the smugness will be intoxicating. Too bad the card itself itself isn't even that good anyway.

 

 

 

First off, I was one of the first supporters of the interpretation that you get to turn a [focus] result to a [critical hit] result on each attack with Cluster Missiles, so we're on the same side. But I am adamant that all stances on this issue at present are opinions only, not merely because no official word has been given, but because both interpretations are completely logical.

None of the cards you listed are actions, so there is no expectation that they should end. Marksmanship does not belong on that list because it is not an ongoing effect, it is an action with a defined time limit. The only other card I can find that has a similar delimitation of time is R2-F2, whose ability only lasts until the end of the game round in which its action is performed. Therefore, R2-F2 is, in my opinion, the best card to use for comparison with Marksmanship. However, R2-F2 is pretty clear in giving you +1 agility for the whole round, no matter how many times you get attacked. Marksmanship is not so clear. Does the ability to change one [focus] to a [critical hit] apply to "this round" with the phrase "when attacking" only there to clarify that you can't change a [focus] to a [crit] when defending or using another ability, -or- does the one-[focus]-to-a-[crit] apply to each attack, with "this round" telling you that the effect ends at the end of the round?

R2-F2 would have the same problem if it said something like, "Action: Until the end of the round, increase your agility by 1 and you may reroll 1 blank result when defending." Then we'd wonder if we can reroll a blank each time we defend, or once per the entire round, but we'd all agree that the +1 agility lasts the entire round. It's just like how we agree that all [focus] results can be converted to [hit] results with Marksmanship, but it's just not clear how many critical hits you can get.

For my part, though I side with a crit per attack, I think the only thing clear about this card is that it is ambiguous.


"There is a fine line between neutral and amoral. In fact, there may be no line there at all."

--Count Dooku


#20 ShadowJak

ShadowJak

    Member

  • Members
  • 287 posts

Posted 05 October 2012 - 03:34 AM

Budgernaut said:

ShadowJak said:

 

Budgernaut said:


dbmeboy said:

 

ArcticSnake said:

 

This thread again? hahaha.

So what if Luke's card said: "When defending this round, you may change one of your "EYE" results to a[n] "EVADE" result."? Know what? Let's call him Luuke. What makes Luuke's wording different from Luke's "When defending, you may change one of your "EYE" results…"? Can you really say that the two differently worded abilities play the same?

Let's say Luuke and Luke get's attacked with the cluster missile.

It's pretty clear that Luke's "When defending, you may change one…" would allow you to change one "EYE" to an "EVADE" per attack. But how about Luuke? How would his "When defending this round, you may change one…" interact with cluster missiles?

My summary: Cluster missiles = two attacks, one crit

 

 

Problem with your counter example: Luke has a constant ability, not an action, so he has no need to specify a duration. If it was instead an action that had to be used, then that wording would indeed give him one evade per attack.

Right. It's not "this round" alone that limits the cluster missile to one attack (for that interpretation), it's combining the "one [critical hit]" with "this round" giving you "one crit per round". No other card mentions a single anything (that I'm aware of) so both interpretations make sense to me, whether it be one crit on each attack, or one crit between the two. I really think this one just needs a ruling.

 

 

I'm not sure I know what you mean by saying that "no other cards mention a single anything" but every other time a present participle has been used on the cards, it has been usable more than one time. "This round" is on the card text to clarify that the effect ends at the end of the round. Let me list the cards where this is the case for you:

Garven Dreis
Luke Skywalker
Wedge Antillies
"Dutch" Vander
Horton Salm
R2-D2
R5-K6
"Backstabber"
"Dark Curse"
"Howlrunner"
"Mauler Mithel"
"Night Beast"
"Winged Gundark"
*Marksmanship (contentious, I know)

That's literally every card that's worth points in the game that uses a present participle to designate when the card's effect happens. I didn't leave any out (that I know of). Notice how every single one of them is usable more than once? Are you really saying that Marksmanship is the only card in the game whose text uses a present participle but can't be activated more than once? Really?

When this point of view is proven right, the smugness will be intoxicating. Too bad the card itself itself isn't even that good anyway.

 

 

 

First off, I was one of the first supporters of the interpretation that you get to turn a [focus] result to a [critical hit] result on each attack with Cluster Missiles, so we're on the same side. But I am adamant that all stances on this issue at present are opinions only, not merely because no official word has been given, but because both interpretations are completely logical.

None of the cards you listed are actions, so there is no expectation that they should end. Marksmanship does not belong on that list because it is not an ongoing effect, it is an action with a defined time limit. The only other card I can find that has a similar delimitation of time is R2-F2, whose ability only lasts until the end of the game round in which its action is performed. Therefore, R2-F2 is, in my opinion, the best card to use for comparison with Marksmanship. However, R2-F2 is pretty clear in giving you +1 agility for the whole round, no matter how many times you get attacked. Marksmanship is not so clear. Does the ability to change one [focus] to a [critical hit] apply to "this round" with the phrase "when attacking" only there to clarify that you can't change a [focus] to a [crit] when defending or using another ability, -or- does the one-[focus]-to-a-[crit] apply to each attack, with "this round" telling you that the effect ends at the end of the round?

R2-F2 would have the same problem if it said something like, "Action: Until the end of the round, increase your agility by 1 and you may reroll 1 blank result when defending." Then we'd wonder if we can reroll a blank each time we defend, or once per the entire round, but we'd all agree that the +1 agility lasts the entire round. It's just like how we agree that all [focus] results can be converted to [hit] results with Marksmanship, but it's just not clear how many critical hits you can get.

For my part, though I side with a crit per attack, I think the only thing clear about this card is that it is ambiguous.

You shouldn't give up this amount of smugness just to be a level-headed and reasonable human being. It's going to be great.

R2-F2's effect happens during the round regardless of being attacked and doesn't require anything else to happen such as die rolls. The cards I listed all used present participles to define when the effect takes place and it is obvious that the effect can be triggered more than once (or else all of those cards would totally suck).

It isn't really a big deal because the card isn't even that good. 3 points and using an upgrade slot for something that is only marginally better than an offensive focus doesn't make sense to me. The only time it is significantly better (1 crit or 2) is with Cluster Missiles and that is a one use attack anyway.

Like I implied, I'm just in it for the smug.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS