then you check the range within that fire arc, since you are measuring for tactician, not for your regular attack.

NO. This is absolutely wrong. This is what the FAQ is explaining, you determine range for tactician normally, which means closest point to closest point ignoring the primary arc line in the case of turret ships.

That is if you choose to execute both tactician and the attack at the same time, which is wrong. You determine range for your regular attack, and then you determine range for your ability. One, since it is a turret uses the FAQ, the other, since it is within your fire arc, does not.

So basically what the FAQ is saying is that even though I can fire at a ship that may be half in and half out of my forward firing arc (even though turrets let me fire inside and outside of my forward firing arc) but the half that is in my forward firing arc is at range 1 or 3, I cannot trigger Tactician? I do find it fishy that turret ships have another criteria to meet in order to activate Tactician.

That is if you choose to execute both tactician and the attack at the same time, which is wrong. You determine range for your regular attack, and then you determine range for your ability. One, since it is a turret uses the FAQ, the other, since it is within your fire arc, does not.

You do realize that the FAQ we're talking about is for tactician, right? Not turret weapons in general? It very clearly states that tactician on a turret ship (at least when using its primary weapon) measures range from closest point to closest point without considering the primary arc lines.

So basically what the FAQ is saying is that even though I can fire at a ship that may be half in and half out of my forward firing arc (even though turrets let me fire inside and outside of my forward firing arc) but the half that is in my forward firing arc is at range 1 or 3, I cannot trigger Tactician? I do find it fishy that turret ships have another criteria to meet in order to activate Tactician.

No, that's not it at all. In fact the exact opposite is true, the part in your arc could be at range 3 and as long as some other part is at range 2 you can use your tactician. Tactician has you check two things: range and arc. They are checked completely independently. Sometimes this favors turret ships, sometimes it hurts them.

Note that you measure range to the closest point of the defender that is within the attacker's firing arc, not just the closest point.

Note that you measure range to the closest point of the defender that is within the attacker's firing arc, not just the closest point.

Only when using "conventional" attacks. We're talking about turret ships here, and the FAQ clearly states that you measure range between the closest points without considering the firing arc line. If the closest point to closest point line is outside the primary arc you still use that distance.

That is if you choose to execute both tactician and the attack at the same time, which is wrong. You determine range for your regular attack, and then you determine range for your ability. One, since it is a turret uses the FAQ, the other, since it is within your fire arc, does not.

Range is measured once only, closest point to closest point as per the rules and the FAQ. That's the range. Tactician's ability relies on the range and arc of the attack. It doesn't have it's own set of requirements outside of the attack. If the closest point is at Range 2, and inside your arc, Tactician can be used.

Hold on, I'll be back...

I thought that e-mail looked familiar. I was the one who initially asked it.

Hello Sergovan,

In response to your question:

Rule Question:

A YT-1300 with Tactician has a target, in its front arc at range 2 but out of arc at range 1, so the attack is done at range 1.

Would Tactician work on the target in question and give it a stress token?

No. Although part of the defender is inside of the firing arc at Range 2, since the closest point of the defender is outside of the YT-1300’s firing arc, the attack is considered “performing an attack against a ship outside of the attackers firing arc". Therefore Tactician does not trigger to assign the defender 1 stress token.

Thanks for asking,

Frank Brooks

Associate Creative Content Developer

Fantasy Flight Games

Frank's e-mail points out how Tactician needs to be "in arc" to trigger with that range 2 shot, not "a range 2 shot outside of arc".

I think the point of the FAQ's ruling is to clarify that turreted ships using these sorts of abilities work exactly like ships without turrets, so you don't get a wonky inconsistency.

When this game refers to "closest point to closest point" I believe it is referring to the core rules' use of that term, which specifies the closest point within arc. I don't believe the FAQ intends to change that. In context, knowing as we do that turrets do not change a ship's firing arc, I can't see why the FAQ would make an exception here that makes things less intuitive and less logical.

If the closest point is at Range 2, and inside your arc, Tactician can be used.

Wrong. If the closest point is at range 2 and the SHIP is inside your arc tactician can be used. Where the closest point is located is entirely irrelevant.

If the closest point is at Range 2, and inside your arc, Tactician can be used.

Wrong. If the closest point is at range 2 and the SHIP is inside your arc tactician can be used. Where the closest point is located is entirely irrelevant.

Parravon is correct here. If the closest point meets the range requirement, but if it is out of arc then the shot is taken out of arc and doesn't fulfill Tacticians triggering condition. That's what Frank's e-mail provided us from the rule thread, that the attack has to occur in arc. Before this, there never was a distinction of if a shot was coming from in arc or not. That's why it is a good piece of information to have to understand how Tactician works.

I think the point of the FAQ's ruling is to clarify that turreted ships using these sorts of abilities work exactly like ships without turrets, so you don't get a wonky inconsistency.

No, the purpose of the FAQ is to avoid absurd situations like having the closest point within arc be at range 2 but the closest point overall be at range 1. In this situation you'd get the bonus attack die for being at range 1 AND the tactician stress for being at range 2. The FAQ clarifies that range is range, and you always determine it the same way. The range a ship is at for the actual shot is also the range it is at for tactician.

Well there you go.

Back to 6 Tacticians... yeah, I'd say that's a lot and that I would use some other crew instead. 1-2 in a list is plenty.

If the closest point is at Range 2, and inside your arc, Tactician can be used.

Wrong. If the closest point is at range 2 and the SHIP is inside your arc tactician can be used. Where the closest point is located is entirely irrelevant.

See Sergovan's email response from Frank. I recall Aminar brought up this hypothetical situation a few months back and the same argument ensued, until Sergovan emailed the question.

@Sergovan: thanks for finding that. I was looking for that as well, because I knew we had hashed this out before.

If the closest point meets the range requirement, but if it is out of arc then the shot is taken out of arc and doesn't fulfill Tacticians triggering condition.

And this is completely wrong. A ship is still within arc even if the closest point is outside of its arc. Read page 10, where being within arc is defined by ANY part of the ship's base being within the arc area. You are only taking an out-of-arc shot if no part of the ship's base is within the arc region.

If the closest point is at Range 2, and inside your arc, Tactician can be used.

Wrong. If the closest point is at range 2 and the SHIP is inside your arc tactician can be used. Where the closest point is located is entirely irrelevant.

Thanks for clarifying me about the FAQ, since i didn't realize it was for tactician itself. In regards to this post, you are basically saying the same. Your closest point needs to be inside your firing arc and range 2, if not, you are not triggering tactician, and that's all he said.

See Sergovan's email response from Frank.

The email response, if it is in fact legitimate, directly contradicts the rules for determining whether or not a ship is in arc (page 10). Therefore it should be ignored, and we should assume that the person who wrote it simply made a mistake. Until FFG makes an official change to the rules (through a FAQ entry/new edition of the rules/etc) it has no value.

Have you read the email response to the question yet? Seems pretty clear how it works.

Now they just need update the FAQ so that it is even clearer for those that it still confuses as is.

iPeregrine, you're being a bit strident. I think it might be a good idea to doubt your infallibility just a little. It seems a bit far-fetched to me that Sergovan is fabricating his communication with Frank Brooks.

Have you read the email response to the question yet? Seems pretty clear how it works.

Yes, I read it, and it is obviously incorrect. Page 10 explicitly states that a ship is in arc if ANY part of its base is within the arc region. The email claims that you can take an out-of-arc shot against a ship that is within arc, and I think that it should be pretty obvious why this is absurd.

iPeregrine, you're being a bit strident. I think it might be a good idea to doubt your infallibility just a little. It seems a bit far-fetched to me that Sergovan is fabricating his communication with Frank Brooks.

Play 40k long enough and you'll understand why you have to consider that possibility. 50% of all supposed emails answering rule questions are fake, and the other 50% are written by random customer service people who have never played the game they're answering questions for.

See Sergovan's email response from Frank.

The email response, if it is in fact legitimate, directly contradicts the rules for determining whether or not a ship is in arc (page 10). Therefore it should be ignored, and we should assume that the person who wrote it simply made a mistake. Until FFG makes an official change to the rules (through a FAQ entry/new edition of the rules/etc) it has no value.

Honestly? Legitimate email? You're going down that road? There is a FAQ entry for Tactician, and it's pretty clear.

Okay, I see why Frank answered that way. Makes sense. Sort of.

iPeregrine, you're being a bit strident. I think it might be a good idea to doubt your infallibility just a little. It seems a bit far-fetched to me that Sergovan is fabricating his communication with Frank Brooks.

Play 40k long enough and you'll understand why you have to consider that possibility. 50% of all supposed emails answering rule questions are fake, and the other 50% are written by random customer service people who have never played the game they're answering questions for.

Okay, so it's a possibility. But you're not doing your case any favors with the tone.

And I don't think this is 40K.

iPeregrine, you're being a bit strident. I think it might be a good idea to doubt your infallibility just a little. It seems a bit far-fetched to me that Sergovan is fabricating his communication with Frank Brooks.

Play 40k long enough and you'll understand why you have to consider that possibility. 50% of all supposed emails answering rule questions are fake, and the other 50% are written by random customer service people who have never played the game they're answering questions for.

A game developer is not the same as a regular GW's red shirt to be honest.