So I had this come up during a game on vassal last night. The situation was similar to the image I made below. I had a shot at his ship and the firing arc DID NOT go through the asteroid between us.

Now I've always thought that firing arc matters first when checking for asteroids, then you check to see closest point to closest point to determine if you go through the asteroid or not.

My opponent thought you check closest point to closest point, and if that goes through the asteroid it counts as shooting through the asteroid even if the actual firing arc doesn't pass through it.

I didn't want to spend too much time arguing so I just chose a different target instead to fire at.

So which of us is correct?

You are correct and your opponent is mistaken.

You can only shoot inside your fire arc, thus, following your example, the closest route must be the closest route that you can trace inside your firing arc... So, no obstruction for that especific attack.

And of course, it your ship happened to be an YT-1300, which is able to fire outside its firing arc, then, the 'asteroid line' would be valid, and so the obstruction would apply.

It was a firespray so no 360 arc.

Your opponent, sir, is a dingleberry.

From the rulebook:

Your opponent, sir, is a dingleberry.

I think this is a little harsh

Because in this case, the rulebook does actually contradict itself. Target selection says to measure shortest path in arc. Obstacle check says to use shortest path. Very much not the same, and we had a hefty discussion on this a while back.

We did get a clarification from FFG that you use the same line, in the arc, for both. But you really wouldn't know it from reading the rulebook, and we've been through at least two FAQ updates without them bothering to add it, so...

For the OP, here's the BGG thread with the posted response:

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/12142943#12142943

The updated the FAQ and put this in as errata on page 20.

“When measuring range during combat, if the edge of the range ruler between the closest points of the two ships and inside the attacker’s firing arc overlaps an obstacle token, the attack is considered obstructed.”

Your opponent, sir, is a dingleberry.

I think this is a little harsh

Because in this case, the rulebook does actually contradict itself. Target selection says to measure shortest path in arc. Obstacle check says to use shortest path. Very much not the same, and we had a hefty discussion on this a while back.

We did get a clarification from FFG that you use the same line, in the arc, for both. But you really wouldn't know it from reading the rulebook, and we've been through at least two FAQ updates without them bothering to add it, so...

For the OP, here's the BGG thread with the posted response:

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/12142943#12142943

It was a joke, man. Nobody in the history of ever has used the word "dingleberry" by way of actual insult. It is a word that is literally impossible to take seriously.

I thought.

But yes, it has now been clarified in the FAQ to state both places that you draw from the closest point to closest point, inside the firing arc, which in this example would indeed bypass the obstacle completely. Fair ball.

And of course, it your ship happened to be an YT-1300, which is able to fire outside its firing arc, then, the 'asteroid line' would be valid, and so the obstruction would apply.

I agree that this makes sense, but I am having a hard time finding something to back this up. Please help me find something that clarifies this, especially considering that inside/outside the YT's firing arc relates to Backstabber's pilot ability. The new FAQ states,

"A ship with a turret primary or a [turret] secondary

Basically, the line you draw will be the actual line of fire, and that line will be used for both range and obstruction (LOS) checks. If that's a ship with a standard firing arc, that line must be within that arc. If it's a 360 degree weapon like a turret, then the line is simply the shortest between the two ships.

It certainly can create some odd situations where a shot one direction is obstructed but the return shot isn't, but it's not too strange.

And of course, it your ship happened to be an YT-1300, which is able to fire outside its firing arc, then, the 'asteroid line' would be valid, and so the obstruction would apply.

I agree that this makes sense, but I am having a hard time finding something to back this up. Please help me find something that clarifies this, especially considering that inside/outside the YT's firing arc relates to Backstabber's pilot ability. The new FAQ states,

"A ship with a turret primary or a [turret] secondary

weapon is still affected by Backstabber if no

portion of his base is inside the printed firing

arcs on the defender’s ship token."

Assuming that we are indeed correct, why does an obstruction check differ for the YT-1300, thematically?

Backstabber's ability depends on being -or not- inside the enemy's printed firing arcs. His ability has nothing to do with Lines of Fire.

However, Obstructions checks depend on Lines of Fire. If the closest line crosses over an obstacle, the shot is considered obstructed.

Thematically, Even having the capability of firing at 360º, the YT-1300's pilot is still limited by its cockpit to a forward field of vision. Thus, the pilot has a hard time dodging Backstabber's shots when he is unable to see him. Even if his gunners have a clear shot to Backstabber, the pilot is unable to react in time to effectively evade those extra-accurate shots of our beloved TIE pilot, hence his incresed lethality when firing from outside the pilot's direct visual field.

Excellent. That thematic explanation helps a lot. Now, how do we support this interpretation in light of the new FAQ? It states:

“When measuring range during combat, if the edge of the range ruler

I'm frequently accused of excessively literal readings of the rules, and even I think that's overdoing it.

Backstabber's ability matters when he's attacking, not when he's the target. If a ship with a turret is attacking something outside its arc, you literally can't draw a line to it in the arc.

It's really not that tricky. If a ship with a turret is attacking, you use the shortest line. If a ship without a turret is attacking, you use the shortest line that is within the arc. I'm really not sure where the confusion is at this point.

Corner case: If a ship with a turret is attacking and the situation is as the situation in the first post. I'm pretty sure the intention is that the obstacle would come into play in that situation, but a strict reading of the rules would suggest that since you could draw a shortest line within the firing arc (and the turret abilities say you may attack outside of the firing arc), you could choose to ignore the turret ability and trace the line within the firing arc to avoid the obstacle.

I'm frequently accused of excessively literal readings of the rules, and even I think that's overdoing it.

Backstabber's ability matters when he's attacking, not when he's the target. If a ship with a turret is attacking something outside its arc, you literally can't draw a line to it in the arc.

It's really not that tricky. If a ship with a turret is attacking, you use the shortest line. If a ship without a turret is attacking, you use the shortest line that is within the arc. I'm really not sure where the confusion is at this point.

Buhalin is absolutely correct. In the case of turret weapons you have to go closest point to closest point, period.

You're firing outside your arc, which means you ignore that part of the text and obey the remainder: closest to closest.

Corner case: If a ship with a turret is attacking and the situation is as the situation in the first post. I'm pretty sure the intention is that the obstacle would come into play in that situation, but a strict reading of the rules would suggest that since you could draw a shortest line within the firing arc (and the turret abilities say you may attack outside of the firing arc), you could choose to ignore the turret ability and trace the line within the firing arc to avoid the obstacle.

On a side note, in this example, you may be right, dbmeboy. I meant as a general rule of thumb.

The new FAQ says, on turret primary weapons, "a ship may target an enemy ship inside or outside its firing arc."

So in this specific example I would say yes: if you can draw a legal line, inside your firing arc, which doesn't touch the obstacle, you should be able to take that shot. You simply declare that you're firing inside your arc.

If the target in the picture above was shifted down and to the left a ways, peeking out from behind the rock but with its closest edge obstructed, and no part of it inside your firing arc, I think you would have to draw the shortest line, period, and take the obstructed shot.

But yeah in this example I don't see why you can't just announce you're attacking inside your arc.

You're firing outside your arc, which means you ignore that part of the text and obey the remainder: closest to closest.

I agree...

But strictly from a RAW point of view, you really can't ignore part of the rules unless told to do do by some effect. If I were a TO, and felt like I needed to play it strictly RAW, I'd have to say that as long as the rock wasn't in the arc, then it's not an obstructed shot, because the rules are fairly clear about what is or isn't a obstructed shot. It simply doesn't mention anything one way or the other about firing outside the arc.

Completely off topic... Crookie Wookie, I think you need to change your Avatar off, it completely through me off guard!

You're firing outside your arc, which means you ignore that part of the text and obey the remainder: closest to closest.

I agree...

But strictly from a RAW point of view, you really can't ignore part of the rules unless told to do do by some effect. If I were a TO, and felt like I needed to play it strictly RAW, I'd have to say that as long as the rock wasn't in the arc, then it's not an obstructed shot, because the rules are fairly clear about what is or isn't a obstructed shot. It simply doesn't mention anything one way or the other about firing outside the arc.

I'd be careful going down this path.

Turrets are an odd case with a lot of rules that may not necessarily work. As an example, the rules for measuring range specify inside the arc, just like the new obstruction wording. If you can only measure for obstruction in the arc, then you can likewise only measure for range inside the arc. How many dice does Han roll at range NaN, and can he reroll them?

I think it's an interesting question on whether you are forced to use the turret or not, or can just ignore it and take the shot through your standard arc like any other ship. But getting picky on forcing certain lines to be in the arc when the target isn't is going to be a very bad place to go.

I just got this official response from FFG, which will clear things up significantly:

"We will address this in the next FAQ by including explicit language to say that when a ship that has a turret primary weapon performs a primary weapon attack, it must always measure closest point to closest point. This way no matter the facing of a ship equipped with a turret primary weapon it always measures its attacks from closet point to closest point."

I'd be careful going down this path.

I get what you're saying, I think sometimes that RAW just doesn't work for FFG...

I just got this official response from FFG, which will clear things up significantly:

Great I mean most anyone could figure out how to do this. But it is something that should be addressed in a FAQ somewhere.

Although based on what they send you... It goes back to my above point about FFG and RAW not working.

Because based on the wording above, Ion and Blaster turrets wouldn't be covered by what they said if you look at it from a purely RAW point of view. Since neither of those are primary weapons.

By RAW, turret upgrades don't work at all, so I'll cut them a little slack on which line to use.

As a side note, I recently started playing the Star Wars LCG, and the rules there are remarkably tight - keywords, obvious structure, strongly defined timing, and an FAQ half the size of X-wing's despite having 4-5 times more cards. I know FFG is a big company, but I'm constantly amazed that X-wing came out with such horrifically bad rules compared to so many of FFG's other games.

By RAW, turret upgrades don't work at all, so I'll cut them a little slack on which line to use.

As a side note, I recently started playing the Star Wars LCG, and the rules there are remarkably tight - keywords, obvious structure, strongly defined timing, and an FAQ half the size of X-wing's despite having 4-5 times more cards. I know FFG is a big company, but I'm constantly amazed that X-wing came out with such horrifically bad rules compared to so many of FFG's other games.

Welcome to the SWLCG world! It's a great game, glad to have you.

I'd be careful going down this path.

I get what you're saying, I think sometimes that RAW just doesn't work for FFG...

I just got this official response from FFG, which will clear things up significantly:

Great I mean most anyone could figure out how to do this. But it is something that should be addressed in a FAQ somewhere.

Although based on what they send you... It goes back to my above point about FFG and RAW not working.

Because based on the wording above, Ion and Blaster turrets wouldn't be covered by what they said if you look at it from a purely RAW point of view. Since neither of those are primary weapons.

Well, that depends. They may have meant "this rule will only apply to turret primary weapons," or they may have meant "this rule will apply to turrets, which will include ships with turret primary weapons, when making a primary weapon attack."

In other words, it's the difference between 'this will only be a rule if your primary gun is a turret,' or 'this will be a rule for all turrets, including those which are primary weapons.' Meaning a turret primary weapon has to operate like a turret in all situations and can't choose to declare a shot inside the firing arc (as shown above) if that's not the shortest point to point.

Completely off topic... Crookie Wookie, I think you need to change your Avatar off, it completely through me off guard!

Bwahahaha. Well if they'd add some post wave-2 avatars, I'd love to. I keep tweaking mine, and I finally found this creepy and off-putting little critter from Cosmic and decided to run with it for a while.

It says "I'm adorable. But I'm also thinking seriously about eating your face."

...Meaning a turret primary weapon has to operate like a turret in all situations and can't choose to declare a shot inside the firing arc (as shown above) if that's not the shortest point to point.

Here is some further clarification directly from FFG:

"The ruling from the FAQ will be that you cannot choose to measure inside of firing arc (to avoid this odd situation), you will indeed always measure from closest point to closest point when you perform a primary attack with a turret primary weapon."

They still referred to the turret as a "primary weapon", but I think we can all agree that it just makes sense that it also applies to turret upgrades. Thus, a ship with a turret upgrade would always measure closet point to closest point, unless firing with the primary weapon; then the firing arc would have to be part of the obstruction check. (This being the only way to have a "choice" of whether or not to measure inside the firing arc.)