I just appreciate that it took a BISS ruling ("because we said so") to finally close the book on Rhymer. For people like me who who don't like implied abilities, Rhymer became a sticking point for the discrepancies between strict RAW interpretations of the rules, and a more nuanced RAI approach. As I look at the latest rules update, I personally think Rhymer only properly functions because of the FAQ entry, not his own card text... and I fully understand others disagree with that rules interpretation, and that's fine. At least we have an official answer, now. Regardless... no matter whether one believes that he always worked, or that he had to be fixed, we can all agree now that he does indeed function as intended all along.

More specifically... by Ship Initiative (player's choice if they have multiple ships at a given initiative), then use Player Order to break ties.

Also notable: someone like Deathrain, equipped with Trajectory Simulator, could drop one thermal, boost, THROW the other one forward, barrel roll for stress, then perform a blue maneuver and take a lock action to send a missile out on his turn. Thermal Detonators also become a rather nice shield-regen tool for Rebel Chopper (astromech)... but that begs the question, is recovering 1 shield as an action really worth it on a Y-Wing?

My understanding - which I acknowledge may be in error or out of date - was following a previous ruling for Old Teroch. That ruling stated that if, at the time you would place his ability into the queue, if there were no legal ships in range, his ability would not be able to be queued (even if another ability, like Ketsu Onyo's tractor ability, could pull another ship into range). As I read further, though, I don't see any reference to that previous ruling in the FAQ or the Official Rulings thread at the top of this page, so I will concede the point. It was merely a concern I had about how different rules interacted.

If you're not able to resolve an effect at the time it would ENTER the queue, you can't queue the effect. That means that, if Rampage moves and does NOT have SOME ship in his turret arc at range 0-1, he couldn't trigger. If there was SOME legal target there, he could put the ability into the queue (along with I.L.O. or other similiar abilities), and resolve them in the order of choice. The actual SELECTION of the ship isn't done until the ability resolves, but I thought that being ABLE to select something is considered a backdoor requirement of the ability.

Doesn't Rampage need to be ABLE to choose a unit at the time his ability enters the queue? I.e., if Rampage moves and there ISN'T a valid target for him, he doesn't get to ILO barrel roll, THEN check again... or am I overthinking things?

In essence, you're correct: Intercept Boosters give the Tri-Fighters the ability to SLAM, at the cost of being able to attack. It helps them get into fighting position during the first few rounds of combat, by moving faster than the opponent might have expected. In that way, they can create the first engagement in a more advantageous location on the battlefield. The cost for this is, of course, de-activating the droid's weapons, whether or not you choose to SLAM. On any turn, of course, you can choose to flip the boosters over in the System Phase; this turns off the SLAM action for good, but you're now at full combat efficiency.

Yup... all damage is suffered sequentially, one at a time, resolving any triggers off of that damage in turn. In your case, you started with an active Hull Breach, facing 2 hits and a crit... You suffer the first Hit, which becomes a Crit due to Hull Breach. Let's assume it was nothing immediately relevant (Damaged Engine, Blinded Pilot, etc). You suffer the second Hit, which becomes a Crit due to Hull Breach. In this case, it's a Fuel Leak. The damage card is dealt, and you move on. You suffer the last damage, Crit. When you suffer it, you first suffer all of the bad stuff on the card (taking stress for Panicked Pilot, or another damage card for Direct Hit). Then, after suffering that damage, Fuel Leak triggers. You suffer one hit from Fuel Leak, which Hull Breach ALSO flips face up. If that crit were, for example, a Direct Hit... you would be suffering ANOTHER damage, which Hull Breach would ALSO cause to be suffered as a crit. It's important to note that Hull Breach treats every damage that you SUFFER as a critical damage... damage cards that are DEALT to you (via Seyn Marana, Concussion Bombs, or other similar means) are not considered to be "suffered damage," and therefore do not react to Hull Breach.

Yup. The only time that a Buzz Droid swarm cares about a friendly ship, is when it is forced to relocate due to an enemy ship's movement. Since the relocation can't overlap any object (ship, obstacle, or other device), it looks at everything, friendly, allied*, and enemy alike. * - Allied ships are something new, that's coming up sometime in the future. We don't know yet what qualifies a ship as "allied," but we do know that they're neither friendly nor enemy, so they wouldn't trigger either kinds of effects. (Personally, I have my suspicions about the potential for mixed-faction play, to come in the new year; likely adding the ability to "hire" a ship from another faction, at an extra cost. Those hired ships would be "allied.")

I think the big question is, is there anything that would make the new Slave 1 good on Krassis? The only options that really look appealing on her (with that loadout) are missiles; none of the cannons are particularly noteworthy (Ion, Tractor, and Jamming have no benefit for the extra Slave 1 crit, and Autoblasters are a distinct downgrade from the primary weapon), and Snap Shot can't be modified anyway. And when you look at the 6 possible missiles, three of them (Ion, Mag-Pulse, and Thread Tracers) don't care about the crit either. Regarding Homing Missiles, your opponent will probably gladly take 1 damage rather than face 4 dice with modifiers. That leaves the unimpressive 3-dice attacks from Cluster or Concussion Missiles. Clusters might have some value here, given that you're guaranteed at least 1 reroll (Krasis) and might get 1 hit-to-crit mod (nu-Slave 1) on the second shot.

You called?

(double post)

Specifically... the cost of performing a red action is stress. As @Magnus Grendel pointed out above, the timing of when you receive that stress is after performing the action.

What I mean is, Cova Nell could start the turn stressed, dial in a red maneuver, wait to see the board state, then elect to NOT use Leia, and end up performing the white two straight... which R4 Astromech turned blue.

It's just like the old Monopoly Housing Shortage tactic! (it's a real thing: if you have all the houses in play, nobody else can improve their properties)

I'd agree that R4 Astromech changes the difficulty of the maneuver that is actually being executed. This is precisely how people were abusing the Cova Nell/R4/Leia situation, by dialing red, NOT using Leia, and using R4 to turn the 2-straight stress maneuver from white to blue. It's one reason why the rules were changed to PREVENT stress moves from being changed by R4. As far as stress goes, though, I'd also agree that the red SLAM stress lands AFTER the completion of the maneuver. That means a blue maneuver would not be able to remove the stress from the SLAM, specifically.

Welcome to the Wild World of FFG Technical Writing!

One thing that is clear, is that each of us is interpreting the RAW situation in two very different ways, and that neither of us can understand how the other can't see the "simple logic" of their argument. I could try and break down each of your points and explain how they simply don't make sense to me, but you'd do exactly the same for me, and we'll be going in circles about this endlessly forever. To that end, I recommend that we simply drop the issue and agree that each of us is right, and the other one is hopelessly confused. For what it's worth, aside from all of this pedantic "this is what the RULES say" discussion, Rhymer is clearly INTENDED to be able to use ordnance at Range 0, and should be played as such for the forseeable future (barring a crazy ruling from FFG).

There's nothing about ANY ship in that sentence. The rule applies to EVERY ship. ALL of the time. WITHOUT exception... until there IS an exception. This is how permission/exception-based rulesets, like X-Wing, function. The rules lay out a groundwork for what you are permitted to do, then the individual cards grant special exceptions to the standard rules. How is the "Range 0" rule out of context? It is part of the rules explicitly defining the restrictions of an attack. Not only a primary attack, or only an attack by Joe X-Wing over there (but not for Mister TIE Fighter)... but every attack. Every single attack falls under those rules. I agree that you need context to interpret rules... but the context here is (to me, at least) crystal clear.

...except that it is, literally, specifically, exactly, precisely written in the rules.

I'm going to go back and reiterate my take, in the hopes that it helps resolve things a bit. THE HISTORY: Rhymer originally worked just fine, since there was no rule restriction against performing Range 0 attacks. Primary weapons were always Range 1-3 (save for a few outlying cards that allowed Range 0 attacks), and no secondary weapon was naturally Range 0, so it didn't matter... until someone came up with the edge case that two touching ships can have a non-zero attack range. FFG "closed" that loophole by stating that you may not attack another ship at Range 0, no matter the attack range. THE DILEMMA: This created an edge case exception for Major Rhymer, whose pilot ability can "create" Range 0 special weapons. However, he lacks the explicit game text (found on Arvel, Oicunn, Zeb, etc) that would permit Range 0 attacks. Hence, this entire (currently 7 page) dispute. At the heart of the problem is whether you take a literal or an interpretive view of his ability. Both views are valid interpretations in the scope of rules analysis. Literalists hold that the Rules Reference has a strict ban on attacks at Range 0, and a card only overrides a rule if it explicitly does so. Arvel, Zeb, and Oicunn all override the Range 0 attack prohibition, but Rhymer does not. Interpretivists believe that a weapon's range requirement carries with it implicit permission to THE QUESTION: Does a weapon's range requirements convey an override to the existing game rule against attacking at Range 0? MY ANSWER: I personally believe that while Rhymer is intended to be able to attack at Range 0. I believe that Judges & Marshalls should rule that he can attack, because that is the intent (judgement via RAI and BISS, essentially). However, if you as the rule is explicitly written (RAW), Rhymer cannot attack targets at Range 0, even if his weapon has 0 as a valid attack range. MY SOLUTION: Outside of creating errata for Rhymer (which would solve the dispute very quickly), the Rules Reference should be changed from "A ship cannot attack a ship at range 0, even if the attack range would be range 1," to read "When two ships are at Range 0 of one another, their attack range to each other is always considered to be Range 0."

Well, coordinate has nothing to do with BB-8, so... The question is, what does "red" modify, in BB-8's text box? Is it: Red (Barrel Roll) or (Boost), or Red (Barrel Roll or Boost)?

A notably less helpful example is BB-8... and it's a very important reminder that this game exists at the border of natural language and technical writing. Confusion (and disputes) can arise very quickly when two different methods of analysis come head to head.

I do the same thing on my desktop, but instead of "save image as..." I choose "copy image location," and paste that into the forum thread.

No, you do not gain stress for using Nom Lumb's ability. The card does not say to perform a rotate action; it merely causes you to rotate your arc. Since it is not an action, you don't even bother looking to see what color the (non-)action is: you just do it. To extend on that explanation, if a card does tell you to perform an action, you should always assume that particular action is white, unless the card text specifically says otherwise.