Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DraconPyrothayan

New FAQ surprises

Recommended Posts

Reading it, it does make sense now but still makes no sense. Why does inquisitor get to ignore autothrusters but tactician can still trigger on a range 1 attack?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Reading it, it does make sense now but still makes no sense. Why does inquisitor get to ignore autothrusters but tactician can still trigger on a range 1 attack?

It can't. Read it again.

 

if it attacks the Firespray-31, it would roll 1 additional attack die, because the closest point to closest point measurement between the K-wing and the Firespray-31 is range 1, and trigger Tactician, because the Firespray-31 is inside arc at range 2

 

That reads as if part of you is in range 2 then tactician triggers while it clearly sates a range 1 attack .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Reading it, it does make sense now but still makes no sense. Why does inquisitor get to ignore autothrusters but tactician can still trigger on a range 1 attack?

It can't. Read it again.

 

 

In the example tactician DOES trigger on a range 1 attack.  It's just a range 1 out of arc attack with a turret, while the in-arc part of the ship is at range 2 so tactician triggers still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading it, it does make sense now but still makes no sense. Why does inquisitor get to ignore autothrusters but tactician can still trigger on a range 1 attack?

The inquisitor's ability reads essentially 'treat the attack as in arc at range 1'. Of course the attack is always in arc but it's applying that paragraph to the attack to cancel thrusters. The tactician example is showing that for a turret you look at the phrase 'in arc at range 2' exclusively in arc not as 'in arc in some way and the attack is range 2' it's 'what range in arc is the ship' and if that answer is '2' then you tactician them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading it, it does make sense now but still makes no sense. Why does inquisitor get to ignore autothrusters but tactician can still trigger on a range 1 attack?

It can't. Read it again.

if it attacks the Firespray-31, it would roll 1 additional attack die, because the closest point to closest point measurement between the K-wing and the Firespray-31 is range 1, and trigger Tactician, because the Firespray-31 is inside arc at range 2

 

That reads as if part of you is in range 2 then tactician triggers while it clearly sates a range 1 attack .

Don't think of the 2 ranges are the same there basicly now measured sepretly. So u measure for the range of the attack. In the case of the Turret is closest to closest sp range 1. Now that's finished u move on the the Tactician he is range 2 and in ark so u now measure for that if the part of the ship is in ark (thay the big part the part that in ark not out of ark) is at range 2 tactition triggers. Cause u are meeting the requirements for both affects. Range one foe the shot and range 2 IN ARK for tactition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading it, it does make sense now but still makes no sense. Why does inquisitor get to ignore autothrusters but tactician can still trigger on a range 1 attack?

The Tactician at range 1 scenario is a very specific situation that should be an extremely rare occurrence. You have to be getting a range one turret attack and also have the target ship in arc at range 2 only without being in arc at range 1. If you get all that to happen, congratulations. That will not be a regular occurrence.

The Inquisitor negating Autothrusters is very straightforward. He can't attack out of his own arc so the only way Autothrusters would normally trigger against a ship like that is if it's a range 3 attack. Because a range 3 attack by the Inquisitor is treated as a range 1 attack Autothrusters cannot trigger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also like the way they handled the TIE Advanced Title and the TIE Advanced Prototype.  No non-sense about an abbreviation not meaning the same then some back justification for the Raider.

 

Just a simple FAQ and the title doesn't go with that ship, period!  I think I said in a way early post I was hoping this would be the fix rather than some jumping through hoop stuff.  They could have also said the 'Prototype' is the title so another one isn't allowed.  But just a simple nope works  :)

While i am glad they gave us a ruling on the subject i hate that it is just a "No!". 

I am fine with the outcome but i would have preferred an ruling that is based in the rules.

Would have been fine with an errata on Vader to make him a Tie Advanced.

Same goes for the X1 title.

Edited by Reaver027

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading it, it does make sense now but still makes no sense. Why does inquisitor get to ignore autothrusters but tactician can still trigger on a range 1 attack?

You're justified in being confused. It doesn't make sense. Either the FAQ outright contradicts itself or there's something even more subtle and complex going on beneath these rulings that it still doesn't explain.

For now, all we can do is apply its explicit rulings when it covers specific interactions and follow the general example when it doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does make sense when you read what's there - Tactician is a separate measurement which has nothing to do with range of the attack. If the closest point of the defenders base in arc is in Range 2, Tactitian triggers. That's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does make sense when you read what's there - Tactician is a separate measurement which has nothing to do with range of the attack. If the closest point of the defenders base in arc is in Range 2, Tactitian triggers. That's it.

 

That does make sense. What doesn't make sense is that that is the block that is supposed to establish that Autothrusters does use the range of attack to trigger has an example using Tactician that explicitly does not trigger on range of attack. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It does make sense when you read what's there - Tactician is a separate measurement which has nothing to do with range of the attack. If the closest point of the defenders base in arc is in Range 2, Tactitian triggers. That's it.

 

That does make sense. What doesn't make sense is that that is the block that is supposed to establish that Autothrusters does use the range of attack to trigger has an example using Tactician that explicitly does not trigger on range of attack. 

 

 

That's what he just said?

 

Tactician explicitly DOES NOT TRIGGER on range of attack.

 

You have to measure, and check arc for, Tactician distinctly from any attack you perform.  (Although this will only ever come up on turret ships)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It does make sense when you read what's there - Tactician is a separate measurement which has nothing to do with range of the attack. If the closest point of the defenders base in arc is in Range 2, Tactitian triggers. That's it.

 

That does make sense. What doesn't make sense is that that is the block that is supposed to establish that Autothrusters does use the range of attack to trigger has an example using Tactician that explicitly does not trigger on range of attack. 

 

 

That's what he just said?

 

Tactician explicitly DOES NOT TRIGGER on range of attack.

 

You have to measure, and check arc for, Tactician distinctly from any attack you perform.  (Although this will only ever come up on turret ships)

 

 

 

I was replying to costi in the context of the post I believe that he was responding to (though he didn't quote it): 

 

 

 

Reading it, it does make sense now but still makes no sense. Why does inquisitor get to ignore autothrusters but tactician can still trigger on a range 1 attack?

You're justified in being confused. It doesn't make sense. Either the FAQ outright contradicts itself or there's something even more subtle and complex going on beneath these rulings that it still doesn't explain.

For now, all we can do is apply its explicit rulings when it covers specific interactions and follow the general example when it doesn't.

 

 

 

That block of the FAQ is confusing if you are reading it to try and figure out why the newly rewritten Autothrusters card uses the range of the attack while Tactician, which uses similar wording, clearly does not.

Edited by WWHSD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...