Sabines and Seismics and Tractors, oh my!

[emeraldbeacon 1,996]

So, a weird situation came up in a game tonight.  The TL;DR version:  When does a Seismic Charge remove an obstacle from the field of play, and does it still have the same effect if overlapped?

The situation:  I dropped a seismic charge near an asteroid, and chose to target said rock.  The range of the explosion caught one of my opponent's small-base ships, so he suffered damage.  I then elected to use Sabine to tractor the ship onto the currently-exploding rock, to make him roll for damage, BEFORE the rock was removed.  He seemed fine with it, since the rock isn't removed until after it's done dealing damage and I'm done handing out Sabine tokens... but I'm wondering, did we play it correctly?  Again, the course of events:

1. Seismic Charge placed near asteroid
2. Bomb detonates, asteroid chosen, ship targeted for damage
3. Sabine assigns tractor token, moves ship onto asteroid
4. Ship rolls for damage
5. Asteroid removed

[Singulativ 197]

The effect of the Seismic Charge needs to be fully resolved and therefore the obstacle removed. Other player abilities are added as usual to the ability queue after it.

 

Effect of Seismic Charge:

Quote

When this device detonates, choose 1 obstacle at range 0–1. Each ship and remote at range 0–1 of the obstacle suffers 1 [hit] damage. Then remove that obstacle.

[nitrobenz 1,369]

Thanks for the quote and reference image @Singulativ! With those two things sitting in front of me I think I have to agree, removing the obstacle is listed as one of the effects of Seismic Charge and Sabine clearly states that her trigger is After bomb effects.

 

[nitrobenz 1,369]

I will point out there is some room for debate by taking up the 'does then = after?' argument and combining that with the strict reading that removing the obstacle is not technically an effect on the ship but rather an effect on the obstacle. However, there is nothing in the Rules Reference (that I'm aware of) which equates the undefined game term 'then' with the defined keyword After, but there is a general precedent that the use of 'then' more often indicates that effect should be treated as a sub-step within the same timing and should not be interrupted except by replacement effects.

TL,DR: Since Sabine is not a replacement effect I would argue she cannot interrupt the overall list of effects for Seismic Charges.

Edited January 15 by nitrobenz
Proofread

[Lyianx 1,434]

4 hours ago, nitrobenz said:

I will point out there is some room for debate by taking up the 'does then = after?' argument and combining that with the strict reading that removing the obstacle is not technically an effect on the ship but rather an effect on the obstacle. However, there is nothing in the Rules Reference (that I'm aware of) which equates the undefined game term 'then' with the defined keyword After, but there is a general precedent that the use of 'then' more often indicates that effect should be treated as a sub-step within the same timing and should not be interrupted except by replacement effects.

TL,DR: Since Sabine is not a replacement effect I would argue she cannot interrupt the overall list of effects for Seismic Charges.

Everything thats listed under the Seismic charge detonation is its effect. Removing the obstacle IS part of its effect. It's effect is not over until the obstacle is removed, and thus, Sabine cannot trigger after that. 

[Maui. 2,815]

Even if the obstacle removal and Sabine share the same timing window, the obstacle would be removed first, as it is a game effect and Sabine is a player ability.

[Lyianx 1,434]

1 hour ago, Maui. said:

Even if the obstacle removal and Sabine share the same timing window, the obstacle would be removed first, as it is a game effect and Sabine is a player ability.

I'm not entirely certain it is a game effect, as the effects are a result of a player ability. Its unclear if an upgrade/pilot ability referencing something in the rule reference specifically for it (ie to reduce printed card clutter) counts as a "game effect" or would still be a 'player ability'. 

[meffo 1,401]

you're missing some obvious similarities with other interactions that have already been ruled on as well as messing up the language for player's abilitied and game effects slightly. 😆

"When this device detonates, choose 1 obstacle at range 0–1. Each ship and remote at range 0–1 of the obstacle suffers 1 [hit] damage. Then remove that obstacle."

please note the use of the word "then". FFG has already ruled how this works.

the obstacle that seismics charge effects is not removed at the same time that the ships within range suffer the effects. it happens afterwards and is a separate effect.

both sabines ability and the detonation of a seismic charge are definitely game effects and they have the same timing. player's abilities and game effects are not mutually exclusive terms. player's abilities are just a sub category of game effects. 

sabine's ability is definitely a player's ability. so the question is if a bomb detonating is a player's ability. i seem to have a vauge memory of that being discussed before. might have been in reference to sabine, goji or something else.

in any case, i do not believe a bomb detonating constitutes a player's ability - and therefore all the effects from the bomb should be resolved before sabine's ability can be added to the queue.

i would really welcome a discussion on why bombs might be player's abilities.

[Singulativ 197]

27 minutes ago, meffo said:

the obstacle that seismics charge effects is not removed at the same time that the ships within range suffer the effects. it happens afterwards and is a separate effect.

It is the effect when a Seismic Charge detonates. Everyone in range gets damaged and the obstacle is removed. You don't stop in between to resolve some other effect. There is not even a paragraph usally denoting different effects/abilities.

What makes you think different?

[meffo 1,401]

7 minutes ago, Singulativ said:

It is the effect when a Seismic Charge detonates. Everyone in range gets damaged and the obstacle is removed. You don't stop in between to resolve some other effect. There is not even a paragraph usally denoting different effects/abilities.

What makes you think different?

because that's what the rules say about the timing of seismic charges. it says "Then, remove the obstacle.".

there is a precedence of the term "then" being used to denote the effect following the term has a different timing then the rest of the effect. it's from from the kanan/intertial dampeners ruling.

the only way it actually makes a difference is if bomb detonations are player's abilities, though.

Edited January 15 by meffo

[Lyianx 1,434]

32 minutes ago, meffo said:

you're missing some obvious similarities with other interactions that have already been ruled on as well as messing up the language for player's abilitied and game effects slightly. 😆

"When this device detonates, choose 1 obstacle at range 0–1. Each ship and remote at range 0–1 of the obstacle suffers 1 [hit] damage. Then remove that obstacle."

please note the use of the word "then". FFG has already ruled how this works.

the obstacle that seismics charge effects is not removed at the same time that the ships within range suffer the effects. it happens afterwards and is a separate effect.

both sabines ability and the detonation of a seismic charge are definitely game effects and they have the same timing. player's abilities and game effects are not mutually exclusive terms. player's abilities are just a sub category of game effects. 

sabine's ability is definitely a player's ability. so the question is if a bomb detonating is a player's ability. i seem to have a vauge memory of that being discussed before. might have been in reference to sabine, goji or something else.

in any case, i do not believe a bomb detonating constitutes a player's ability - and therefore all the effects from the bomb should be resolved before sabine's ability can be added to the queue.

i would really welcome a discussion on why bombs might be player's abilities.

Sorry, but i disagree. 

Kanan's trigger is separate from ID. If one of the bombs effects was "execute a maneuver" or some other external game effect, then you'd have a point. But that isnt whats happening here. The only reason Kanans ability is ruled that way, is because his ability is triggering off of something during another effect. But Even gaining the stress from ID is *STILL* an effect of ID. Since Kanan is triggering off of the maneuver, which happens within ID, he can 'interrupt' it. But Sabine is waiting for the ENTIRE EFFECT of the bomb to happen first, including the removal of the obstacle. 

Now, IF Sabine triggered after suffering DAMAGE, THEN she would trigger before the obstacle removal. But that isnt what is happening. 

[Singulativ 197]

10 minutes ago, meffo said:

because that's what the rules say about the timing of seismic charges. it says "Then, remove the obstacle."

The rules say: "When a device detonates, an effect triggers depending on the type of device." - Not multiple effects.

[meffo 1,401]

20 minutes ago, Lyianx said:

Sorry, but i disagree. 

Kanan's trigger is separate from ID. If one of the bombs effects was "execute a maneuver" or some other external game effect, then you'd have a point. But that isnt whats happening here. The only reason Kanans ability is ruled that way, is because his ability is triggering off of something during another effect. But Even gaining the stress from ID is *STILL* an effect of ID. Since Kanan is triggering off of the maneuver, which happens within ID, he can 'interrupt' it. But Sabine is waiting for the ENTIRE EFFECT of the bomb to happen first, including the removal of the obstacle. 

Now, IF Sabine triggered after suffering DAMAGE, THEN she would trigger before the obstacle removal. But that isnt what is happening. 

that's not what sabine says, no. she says "after a ship suffers the effect of a friendly bomb.".

if bombs detonating are player's abilities, she could even trigger and resolve after a ship suffers the effects from a bomb, before other ships suffer the effects from the same bomb.

the timing is the same for both sabine and the removal of the obstacle.

mind you, i don't like it, but since there is a "then", the obstacle is removed after the damage is dealt. the obstacle being removed is not the same effect as the ships suffering damage, even if the effects have the same source.

the kanan/inertial debate really had me until FFG ruled on it. 

if bombs are indeed not player's abilities, you are 100% right and sabine needs to let all of seismic charges effects resolve. i would still argue she would trigger and enter the queue before the obstacle is removed though.

still looking for someone to argue that bombs are player's abilities, though.

[nitrobenz 1,369]

(Ninja'd, meffo already replied)

I get the parallel that @meffo is making because Sabine does not trigger off of 'the effect of detonation' she does trigger off of 'a ship suffers the effect'

The effect of Seismic on a ship is that it takes damage at R0-1 of the selected obstacle, the removal of the obstacle is not strictly an effect on the ship even though it is an effect of the bomb. I see the similarity, but like meffo I don't think Sabine can interrupt this particular process, largely because of the Game Effect v Player Ability argument. In that I would call attention to a fairly recent addition to the 'Official Ruling Thread' that defines 'Abilities' as any effect that comes from a card. They didn't bother to specify 'Player Abilities' specifically (although that's the implication from the first sentence of the answer) and they didn't give a complimentary definition of Game Effects either. The effects of Seismic detonation does not come from a card so using an opposing definition by omission in the linked ruling I would assume that makes it a game effect for purposes of the Ability Queue while Sabine is squarely an ability.

Edited January 15 by nitrobenz
Ninja'd by meffo

[meffo 1,401]

31 minutes ago, Singulativ said:

The rules say: "When a device detonates, an effect triggers depending on the type of device." - Not multiple effects.

 i'm sorry, but that's just silly.

so all abilities are just timings with single effects now as well?

[Lyianx 1,434]

33 minutes ago, meffo said:

the timing is the same for both sabine and the removal of the obstacle.

No.. its not. Its really not the same timing at all, that's my point. Removal of the obstacle is happening DURING the effect of the bomb, Sabine happens strictly AFTER. It doesnt matter that the word "then" is part of the effect... It's *part* of the effect of the bomb. Sabine doesnt get to interject just because "then" is in there, as its still not *after* the effect. Its part of the effect. 

I mean, i get what you are trying to point out.. i think.. That removing the obstacle isnt 'the ship directly suffering the effect', but that is countered by the fact that even if the ship wasnt effected at all by the bomb (bomblet rolling blanks), it still suffering the effect of it. So even if removing the obstacle isnt directly effecting the ship, its still an effect of the bomb that ship has to "deal with". 

 

36 minutes ago, meffo said:

if bombs are indeed not player's abilities, you are 100% right and sabine needs to let all of seismic charges effects resolve. i would still argue she would trigger and enter the queue before the obstacle is removed though.

Thats the opposite of what im was implying. Regardless its not relevant. Her timing is after the obstacle removal, period. Player effect or game effect. The only effects that can trigger before the removal are effects that happen after suffering damage (from an obstacle or flat out) such as Hate. Sabine doesnt care if any damage was suffered or not. 

[meffo 1,401]

5 minutes ago, Lyianx said:

No.. its not. Its really not the same timing at all, that's my point. Removal of the obstacle is happening DURING the effect of the bomb, Sabine happens strictly AFTER. It doesnt matter that the word "then" is part of the effect... It's *part* of the effect of the bomb. Sabine doesnt get to interject just because "then" is in there, as its still not *after* the effect. Its part of the effect. 

I mean, i get what you are trying to point out.. i think.. That removing the obstacle isnt 'the ship directly suffering the effect', but that is countered by the fact that even if the ship wasnt effected at all by the bomb (bomblet rolling blanks), it still suffering the effect of it. So even if removing the obstacle isnt directly effecting the ship, its still an effect of the bomb that ship has to "deal with". 

 

Thats the opposite of what im was implying. Regardless its not relevant. Her timing is after the obstacle removal, period. Player effect or game effect. The only effects that can trigger before the removal are effects that happen after suffering damage (from an obstacle or flat out) such as Hate. Sabine doesnt care if any damage was suffered or not. 

while thank you. i appreciate that. i still don't agree with it though, since after is immediately after, sabine should trigger after the ships suffer the effects from the seismic charge and therefore before the obstacle is removed. an obstacle being removed is not an effect a ship can suffer.

i still believe that the "then" separate  two effects from the seismic charge detonation. even if sabine doesn't care about damage, she only cares about the part of seismic charge's detonation that the ships suffer, not the rest of seismic charge's effect.

no matter when sabine's ability resolves, it should enter the queue as soon as a ship has suffered effects from a friendly bomb - and that's before the obstacle is removed.

i totally get where you're coming from with the approach that the effect(s) needs to be fully resolved before the possibility of adding any other effects to the queue. i just don't think that's how the game works, especially with regards to the inertial dampeners ruling.

[Singulativ 197]

17 minutes ago, meffo said:

no matter when sabine's ability resolves, it should enter the queue as soon as a ship has suffered effects from a friendly bomb - and that's before the obstacle is removed.

Assuming the two effects are indeed separated:

Why isn‘t the second one immediately added to the queue after the first one?

You have to resolve both effects which are triggered by the detonation of the Seismic Charge and have to resolve in order:

1) Damage to all ships in range

2) Then remove obstacle

Sabine triggers from one ship getting damage from the Seismic Charge, queue:

1) Damage to all ships in range

2) Then remove obstacle

3) One ship receives the token chosen by Sabines player

Edited January 15 by Singulativ

[nitrobenz 1,369]

12 hours ago, emeraldbeacon said:

When does a Seismic Charge remove an obstacle from the field of play, and does it still have the same effect if overlapped?

Just to be clear for anyone reading this just looking for a straight yes/no answer: The obstacle is removed as part of resolving the detonation effect.

General consensus looks like we agree that Sabine cannot jump in and throw a tractor before the obstacle is removed, but there's serious debate as to why Sabine cannot interrupt the Seismic Charge detonation effect.

There's the 'then=After but Game Effects first' point of view: arguing that the timing for removal is the same as Sabine, but because the detonation effect is in the book and Sabine is on a card the Ability Queue rule that "Game Effects activate before Player Abilities" means the obstacle removal still goes first.

Then there's the 'then≠After' point of view: arguing that the obstacle removal effect cannot be separated by any means from the rest of the detonation effect and so there is no timing conflict for the Sabine ability to insert into the Queue and it must wait until the detonation is fully resolved, including obstacle removal, before triggering Sabine.

[meffo 1,401]

1 hour ago, Singulativ said:

Assuming the two effects are indeed separated:

Why isn‘t the second one immediately added to the queue after the first one?

You have to resolve both effects which are triggered by the detonation of the Seismic Charge and have to resolve in order:

1) Damage to all ships in range

2) Then remove obstacle

Sabine triggers from one ship getting damage from the Seismic Charge, queue:

1) Damage to all ships in range

2) Then remove obstacle

3) One ship receives the token chosen by Sabines player

it is already in the queue when the first one resolves.

yes, 100% agreed.

also yes, that's how it would play out. just discussing the whys and hows.

this is how i imagine it:

end of activation. seismic charge triggers, player chooses an obstacle in range and measures which ships will be affected.

1. damage all ships in range. sabine triggers and her ability is added to the end of the queue.

2. obstacle is removed. since it's a game effect and not an ability, it will resolve before abilities.

3. sabine resolves.

still hoping for someone to claim bomb detonations are player's abilities. could do it myself, but i can't be bothered at the moment. 😅

Edited January 15 by meffo

[Lyianx 1,434]

27 minutes ago, meffo said:

i totally get where you're coming from with the approach that the effect(s) needs to be fully resolved before the possibility of adding any other effects to the queue.

Not exactly. As i said, Hate can 'interrupt' the effect resolution of a Seismic bomb. 

 

29 minutes ago, meffo said:

an obstacle being removed is not an effect a ship can suffer.

This is the core of what we disagree on. Which is fine. While you maybe right from a logical standpoint, i think mechanically, for the game, this is too fiddly and i *believe* FFG just wants the entire effect to resolve before "after" effects trigger. This is, to me, the easiest way to rule it, play it, judge it, and i prefer to err on that side of things if there is leeway to do so, rather than making it more complicated. As we know, Some FFG rulings/mechanics are designed to work more simply, rather than more "logically correct" in the interest of speeding up the game play and reducing confusion among players. (then again, others are needlessly more complicated than they should be, so there is arguments for both sides). 

All that said, IF Sabine was to trigger before the obstacle removal, would it even matter? As it would then be using the ability queue, Wouldn't assigning the token just be put into the queue After the obstacle removal anyway? Or for that matter, the Tractored effect? (this is in part why i think its more fiddly to rule it this way as opposed to letting the entire effect resolve first)

I will put this out here now, if its not apparent. I wont be upset if FFG's ruling agrees with yours. As long as its spelled out, one way or the other.

[meffo 1,401]

41 minutes ago, Lyianx said:

Not exactly. As i said, Hate can 'interrupt' the effect resolution of a Seismic bomb. 

 

This is the core of what we disagree on. Which is fine. While you maybe right from a logical standpoint, i think mechanically, for the game, this is too fiddly and i *believe* FFG just wants the entire effect to resolve before "after" effects trigger. This is, to me, the easiest way to rule it, play it, judge it, and i prefer to err on that side of things if there is leeway to do so, rather than making it more complicated. As we know, Some FFG rulings/mechanics are designed to work more simply, rather than more "logically correct" in the interest of speeding up the game play and reducing confusion among players. (then again, others are needlessly more complicated than they should be, so there is arguments for both sides). 

All that said, IF Sabine was to trigger before the obstacle removal, would it even matter? As it would then be using the ability queue, Wouldn't assigning the token just be put into the queue After the obstacle removal anyway? Or for that matter, the Tractored effect? (this is in part why i think its more fiddly to rule it this way as opposed to letting the entire effect resolve first)

I will put this out here now, if its not apparent. I wont be upset if FFG's ruling agrees with yours. As long as its spelled out, one way or the other.

you're not saying a ship can suffer the effect of an obstacle being removed though, are you?

things are a bit complicated, yes, but not terrbily so. the inertial dampeners ruling messed my view of how the rules work up quite a bit. i still don't think either interpretation is messier than the other, though.

it wouldn't matter in this scenario, no, but if the bomb detonating was a player effect it would make a huge difference - and allow sabine to tractor a ship up on top of an obstacle before removing it.

over all, this discussion hardly matters since we all seem to agree that the obstacle should be removed before sabine can hand out a token. our different views and interpretations on why are very interesting and can have consequences in other discussions, though.

i'm always happy (more or less) as long as the rules are clear, no matter if i've been right or wrong.

cheers!

[Txousman 33]

After reading all your opiniones and statements, and also carefully reading The sections of The RR 

Abilities (P2)

Ability queue (P3)

Devices (P9)

Devices are player abilities (if I move through 2 mines effects are added To The queue in player order, when my bomb detonates  as muy upgrade card says, I decide The order of detonation and ships getting affected) 

So, when I'm resolving The effects added To The queue by my  seismic charge:

Each ship 0-1 suffers 1* 

Remove The obstacle.

As they are un The queue they can trigger other abilities. Which will go To The front  of The queue.

Imho:

Sabine could work.

And by The same reasoning, a quickdraw with a stone in  her arc ,would suffer The damage, lose a shield and attack obstructed 

[Lyianx 1,434]

15 hours ago, meffo said:

it wouldn't matter in this scenario, no, but if the bomb detonating was a player effect it would make a huge difference - and allow sabine to tractor a ship up on top of an obstacle before removing it.

again, thats the opposite of what i said. If it was a player ability, the removal would still happen first as its in the queue already and still (from my view) part of the detonation effect the ship suffers. 

 

15 hours ago, meffo said:

you're not saying a ship can suffer the effect of an obstacle being removed though, are you?

Game mechanically speaking, yes. I am. Effectively, The rock is being removed because the bomb blew it up, and its the blown apart rock from the bomb that is hitting the ship and dealing the damage, so yeah, removing the rock via blowing it up is affecting the ship :P. The ONLY reason they remove it last is to keep it there for range measurement to make sure all affected ships are properly affected. 

Edited January 16 by Lyianx

[meffo 1,401]

9 hours ago, Txousman said:

After reading all your opiniones and statements, and also carefully reading The sections of The RR 

Abilities (P2)

Ability queue (P3)

Devices (P9)

Devices are player abilities (if I move through 2 mines effects are added To The queue in player order, when my bomb detonates  as muy upgrade card says, I decide The order of detonation and ships getting affected) 

So, when I'm resolving The effects added To The queue by my  seismic charge:

Each ship 0-1 suffers 1* 

Remove The obstacle.

As they are un The queue they can trigger other abilities. Which will go To The front  of The queue.

Imho:

Sabine could work.

And by The same reasoning, a quickdraw with a stone in  her arc ,would suffer The damage, lose a shield and attack obstructed 

effects that are not player's abilities also end up in the ability queue, they just always end up at the front of the queue and are therefore resolved before abilities. the definition of an ability can be found on page page two of the RR. while device upgrade cards definitely contain player's abilities, the devices themselves and when they detonate do not. i've understood there are some kind of insert cards that describe the effects of devices detonating, but mostly the effects are described in the rules reference on pages 22 and 23. can you reference a description of the effects of a device detonating that fall under the definition of an ability as it is described on page two of the rules reference?



just to reiterate - placing devices are definitely player's abilities. devices detonating does not seem to be player's abilities at all. would love to find proof of the contrary, but i'm yet to see it.

other than that, your reasoning checks out. if devices detonating are player's abilities, i would 100% agree that handing out a tractor token with sabine to put a ship on top of an obstacle before removing it with a seismic charge works.

don't really understand your quickdraw example, though. quickdraw can definitely loose a shield from flying over an obstacle and perform a bonus attack with her ability. not if she's standing on top of an asteroid, though.
 

Edited January 16 by meffo