The Obcenes have a special ability(ferocity) which allows them to counter before they are forced to retreat conversely the Riverwatch Riders have a special ability(vigilant) which states that enemy units can not counter the Riverwatch. In an instance where the Riverwatch force an Obscene unit to retreat can the Obscene attack or is that ability overruled by the Vigilant special ability.

I have read a post on here where it was stated that the Vigilant ability took precedence over Ferocity. My friend is not satisfied with that answer because it came from a members post and not from an agent of FFG. I was hoping to receive an official answer from an FFG representative however I am curious how other players resolved this and I am looking forward to hearing from players. Also, if anyone had can point me to a rules page that would resolve this that would be greatly appreciated as well. thanks in advance for your comment s and help.

I'm not from FFG, but the Riverwatch Riders definitely prevent the Obscenes from countering.

It's not a question of what has precedence, it's a question of analyzing correctly the sequence in which you resolve the actions. Let's look deeper at the details:

- Ferocity allows a unit to counter in a condition where that unit would not be allowed to counter

- Vigilant grants Riverwatch Riders immunity to counter

so, Ferocity makes possible a counter in conditions where a counter would not be usually possible. This is something enhancing the unit that is to counter. But then you have to check whether that counter can be resolved. Riverwatch Riders' attacks are not counterable, period.

To sum this up: Ferocity simply widens the options for countering, but then you always have to check whether the counter can be resolved

I can agree with the above, and I know this question has been answered by FFG before (even if not in an official FAQ yet): Riverwatch Riders cannot be countered against by any means.

I think there may even be something somewhere (I'd have to look), and I know it's a general "golden rule" for most FFG games, is that if something says "you can" and something says "you cannot", the cannot almost always trumps. In fact, I've seen some things in games (especially recently) that are worded specifically so that it's telling you you can't do something without using "can't" so that it can be overridden by a "can". (IE, something like "you only blah when you bling", with another thing that says "You can blah when you bloop").

Especilly the "bloop", agreed

(but I'm pretty sure I had a rulebook in my hands stating "cannot is absolute")

How interesting. I just searched both rule books for "cannot" and didn't find that clause that says "cannot is absolute". I know it is included in Star Wars: The Card Game and Star Wars: Imperial Assault. I wonder if that clause will be introduced in the FAQ.

Yeah, I was not referring to any of the actually existing Battlelore rule books when I said "cannot is absolute". But both Imperial Assault and Star Wars. The Card Game feature this among the golden rules, and there are other rulebooks for sure. I was just commenting on Scott's words.

Yeah, it may not be in BL's book, but it's pretty much universal for FFG games, either explicitly stated in rulebooks or coming from rulings. There may be exceptions here and there, but the "cannot trumps can" is pretty normal for FFG games.