Jump to content



Photo

Moving through an Obstacle


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 DeadInkPen

DeadInkPen

    Member

  • Members
  • 136 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 01:35 AM

Page 20 of the rule book says under the Moving Into And Through Objects section:

1) Execute the maneuver as normal, but skip the "Perform Action" Step

2) The Player rolls one attack die. The ship then suffers any damage or critical damage rolled.

I ran into this quite a bit at the KRT. The TO said that only applies when you overlap (and his definition of overlap is landing physically on the asteroid).

I meantioned that to people I was playing when they would run through an asteroid to roll damage and remind them that they couldn't take their actions. I have been playing it like that for a while now. The only difference I noticed in the rules were if you ended your move overlaping the obsticle that you also could not fire. 

So I though I would check with you guys and make sure that I am not reading the rules wrong. If I am it makes that overlaping critical hit card not that bad.



#2 Carist

Carist

    Member

  • Members
  • 131 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 04:43 AM

 

When a ship executes a maneuver in which either 

the maneuver template or the ship’s base physically 

overlaps an obstacle token, follow these steps:

 
1. Execute the maneuver as normal, but skip the 
“Perform Action” step.
 
2. The player rolls one attack die. The ship then 
suffers any damage or critical damage rolled 
(see “Suffering Damage” on page 16).
 
important: When overlapping an obstacle token, 
the ship stays where it lands (on top of the token). 
A ship that is overlapping an obstacle token during 
the Combat phase cannot attack any ship but 
may be targeted by other ships as normal.
 
 
So, you roll for damage and lose your perform action step even when just your maneuver template overlaps an obstacle.  Remember, this is not like a stress token, you could still perform free actions. 


#3 Shooter McGavin

Shooter McGavin

    Member

  • Members
  • 26 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 05:38 AM

Your TO was wrong.   You are right.  It's very clear in the rule book. 



#4 Shooter McGavin

Shooter McGavin

    Member

  • Members
  • 26 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 05:39 AM

Your TO was wrong.   You are right.  It's very clear in the rule book. 



#5 DoubleNot7

DoubleNot7

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,123 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 11:34 AM

Yep, TO was wrong.  Page 20 says it all clearly.


Enimo Et Fide


#6 ziggy2000

ziggy2000

    Member

  • Members
  • 737 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 01:53 PM

I had a TO make this ruling incorrectly against me too. Ironically, Hothie and I had had a discussion earlier about this very situation (I think it's actually in a thread here somewhere). We were nearing the end of the round and I didn't want to cause a delay by arguing, so I agreed to lose my attack and kept playing. In the end it did not change the result of the match. After the event I approached the TO and politely asked him to reconsider how to rule on this situation in the future. I pointed out the exact wording on page 20, and Hothie jumped in to support our interpretation. In the end, he agreed that our interpretation was correct and will rule it that way in the future. He was a super nice guy, and it was the most smoothly and efficiently run tournament of the three I had the pleasure to participate in.

 



#7 DeadInkPen

DeadInkPen

    Member

  • Members
  • 136 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 11:19 PM

I went along with the TO's choice as well. I thought I would put this up here just in case I could have been mistaken. Have been before in the past and sure will be again in the future. 



#8 SaintGordon

SaintGordon

    Member

  • Members
  • 8 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 02:28 PM

There is a error in the german translation.

The missed the template in that rule.

 

Just as example



#9 Theterrainstudio

Theterrainstudio

    Member

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 22 December 2012 - 04:10 AM

Ok…do I have this straight.

 

A x-wing want to move (say 3 bank) and this move causes the template to narrowly miss the asteroid - but along the template the ships base will pass over of the asteroid before the ships comes out the other side.  To be clear the ship (in its final position) is not touching the asteroid but it did pass over on its movement.

Is it still rolling attack die for possible hit?

Does it lose an action?

RAW - indicate yes!

 

Are we correct?



#10 dbmeboy

dbmeboy

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 22 December 2012 - 05:24 AM

Theterrainstudio said:

Ok…do I have this straight.

 

A x-wing want to move (say 3 bank) and this move causes the template to narrowly miss the asteroid - but along the template the ships base will pass over of the asteroid before the ships comes out the other side.  To be clear the ship (in its final position) is not touching the asteroid but it did pass over on its movement.

Is it still rolling attack die for possible hit?

Does it lose an action?

RAW - indicate yes!

 

Are we correct?

Incorrect. Only the template and final position of the ship matter. You do not physically check the ship's base along the template, it just teleports to the end.

#11 radiskull

radiskull

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,360 posts

Posted 22 December 2012 - 07:56 AM

Theterrainstudio said:

RAW - indicate yes!

This is false.  Reread the RAW carefully.



#12 ScottieATF

ScottieATF

    Member

  • Members
  • 685 posts

Posted 22 December 2012 - 08:39 AM

Just think about the fact that they specifically mentioned the template overlapping an asteroid.  Why would they mention that if you traced the ships path?  Considering the ships base is wider then the template and thus would pass over everything the template did.






© 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