Hi everyone,

I'm new to this forum, but a constant reader. And the first post is right away a rules question.

So this happened recently at a store championship I was attending. The situation:

A player was piloting Dash Rendar in his YT 2400. He miscalculated his move (it was too long) and would overlap the enemy Chewbacca. So according to rules he set the model back along the template which resulted in overlapping an asteroid and touching Chewbacca. Since he was standing on an asteroid, Dash would fire no shots - neither at Chewie nor on any other ships. So the Player moved on to move his next ship.

At this point the judge of the tournament interrupted the match. He said, the enemy ship (Chewbacca) counts as an obstacle, therefore Dash could ignore the bump (because of his pilot ability) and barrel roll off the asteroid. I was astound and asked the judge if he was sure after the match - I don't interrupt other matches nor do i criticize a judge ruling in front of an ongoing match.

To me, the point "Overlapping other ships" in the Core Rules applied to the situation described above:

If a ship executes a maneuver that would cause the final position of its base to physically overlap another ship’s base (even partially), follow these steps:

1. From the opposite end of the template, move the active ship backward along the top of the template until it no longer overlaps another ship. While moving the ship, adjust it so that the template remains centered between both sets of guides on the ship’s base. Place the ship so that the bases of both ships are touching.

2. Skip this ship’s “Perform Action” step.

I further added - if other ships would count as an "obstacle" for the rules, they would obstruct enemy attacks and other ships crossing their paths with the templates would lose their respective action.

He replied, that there is no specific wording in the rules, that ships wouldn't count as obstacles - and he is right.

So... what's the deal: Can Dash barrel roll off an asteroid after bumping or does his pilot ability also apply to bumped ships? What would you say?

He said, the enemy ship (Chewbacca) counts as an obstacle

Ships never count as obstacles, that TO needs to read the rules. A large ship with Tactical Jammers can obstruct an attack, but that still doesn't make the ships an obstacle.

He replied, that there is no specific wording in the rules, that ships wouldn't count as obstacles - and he is right.

Any time you start with "the rules don't say" odds are you're wrong. The rules don't say that I can't use a blowtorch to melt the any ships I kill into slag... But would anyone think this is ok?

The rules state quite clearly what an obstacle is, and so there is no need to state what they are not.

I believe not. Obstacles are defined as asteroids and debris clouds. A ship is a ship.

However, I don't think there's a definite ruling so it was indeed up to the TO. Granted, he shouldn't have interrupted the game to inform a player of a missed opportunity...

However, I don't think there's a definite ruling so it was indeed up to the TO.

Yes there is, the rule book clearly defines what are obstacles, and as such there is no need for further rulings on it.

Besides, if ships count as obstacles, what's the point of Tactical Jammer even existing?

The TO was wrong (except how things say the TO is never wrong.)

Let's ask it a different way: Where is it said that Dash gets to ignore the rules for OVERLAPPING other ships?

Landing on an asteroid isn't what should have kept Dash from BR away but rather avoiding the other ship is what would have cost Dash his action which would leave him stuck on the rock. Ships and Obstructions are NOT the same thing.

Besides, if ships count as obstacles, what's the point of Tactical Jammer even existing?

Plus that, if this was true you would lose all attacks if you overlapped another ship. Plus you should be losing your action and rolling a red die if your template overlaps another ship.

Both of which we know is not true.

Thanks for the quick answers. I thought so. But you never know all the FAQ etc, etc.

But you never know all the FAQ etc, etc.

If you're going to be a TO, you really need to know them all.

What was th Judge doing, interrupting the game in the first place? If neither player thought there was nothing wrong he had no business interrupting the game. Especially when he clearly dies not know the rules.

But you never know all the FAQ etc, etc.

If you're going to be a TO, you really need to know them all.

Nevermind that this isn't even an FAQ issue, the definition of an Obstacle is addressed clearly in the base rulebook.

Something to bear in mind though, Asteroids are a type of Obstacle, as are Debris tokens. There are general rules for Obstacles(i.e. obstruction for shooting), but also some additional rules that are specific to each obstacle type, so try not to generalize about them.

What was th Judge doing, interrupting the game in the first place? If neither player thought there was nothing wrong he had no business interrupting the game. Especially when he clearly dies not know the rules.

Your stance essentially makes it impossible for a TO to prevent a player they see cheating from cheating, because unless the opponent sees or is aware of what's going on, in your view a TO has no ability to intercede.

When I TO, I will point out mandatory things that are missed only. I will point out optional things missed later to help players learn, but not during the game.

That said, even if this TO was right (and he was about as wrong as possible), I don't think pointing out that Dash could take an action that had been missed fits that situation any more than I'd point out that someone forgot to take an action from a ship that didn't overlap anything.

What was th Judge doing, interrupting the game in the first place? If neither player thought there was nothing wrong he had no business interrupting the game. Especially when he clearly dies not know the rules.

Him not knowing the rules is the issue, but a TO/Judge should be interrupting games if they see rules being misplayed.

Your stance essentially makes it impossible for a TO to prevent a player they see cheating from cheating, because unless the opponent sees or is aware of what's going on, in your view a TO has no ability to intercede.

Yes but no one was cheating here. A player moved his ship and skipped his perform action. Not doing something can never be cheating. At best a missed opportunity.

Yes but no one was cheating here. A player moved his ship and skipped his perform action. Not doing something can never be cheating. At best a missed opportunity.

So not taking a Stress token when you're the first one shooting at someone with a Rebel Captive is not cheating? You didn't do something so you aren't cheating just because your opponent failed to remind you of a mandatory event.

I guess this is going off topic to something that has been beat to death several times but there is a difference then it comes to "missed opportunities." There are many things in this game where the game should STOP until an answer to some trigger is given and accidentally skipping them should not happen. The opportunity rule is really there to help put a limit on how much effort should be made to correct those issues. There are also poor plays which having nothing to do with triggers although they sometimes cause them.

However, I don't think there's a definite ruling so it was indeed up to the TO.

Yes there is, the rule book clearly defines what are obstacles, and as such there is no need for further rulings on it.

Agreed. I didn't have a book to check the overlapping thing at the time, but it doesn't matter.

What bugs me is that a TO alerted a player to an option he had and missed. Even if he could have BR'd, the TO had no right to tell him that.

Yes but no one was cheating here. A player moved his ship and skipped his perform action. Not doing something can never be cheating. At best a missed opportunity.

So not taking a Stress token when you're the first one shooting at someone with a Rebel Captive is not cheating? You didn't do something so you aren't cheating just because your opponent failed to remind you of a mandatory event.

I guess this is going off topic to something that has been beat to death several times but there is a difference then it comes to "missed opportunities." There are many things in this game where the game should STOP until an answer to some trigger is given and accidentally skipping them should not happen. The opportunity rule is really there to help put a limit on how much effort should be made to correct those issues. There are also poor plays which having nothing to do with triggers although they sometimes cause them.

When a card says "you may [do something" and an opponent forgets to remind you that the ability should kick in, that's his loss. But if something says "whenever [something happens, do this]" you don't have a choice. The ability must resolve.

Your statement in no way confined itself only to the current situation. I addressed your general viewpoint that a TO has no right to interfere in a games unless asked to by one of the players.

In regards to this general situation if players are making plays specifically predicated on an incorrect understanding of the rules then yes a TO should be intervening to ensure the players are aware of the correct rules.

So for instance if a player is not taking an action because they incorrectly believe they have lost thier action for some reason, and the TO is aware of this, then yes a TO should remedy the incorrect assumption. That is not to say that a TO should be prompting players to use thier optional abilities, only ensuring players are both operating with a correct understanding of the rules.

So if Dash just landed on a rock and a TO observing the game hears a player mention something like "Dash loses his action due to the obstacle", then the TO should correct the player.

In defense of the TO: The wrong decision wasn't a gamebreaking moment. And the rest of the tournament went quite smoothly. The Chewie player won in the end due to better flying. But I understand that there is a difference between pointing out a misinterpretation of the rules and actively influencing the outcome of a match with unnecessary judging. But in the end, we are all humans and we make mistakes, as players or as TOs. By the time I've played enough matches and know most of the rules, yet there are some card/pilot-interactions which can put nearly every player into trouble. And the more expansions come, the more complicated it gets. That's what I learned from playing Magic: The Gathering, and Xwing is no exception in my opinion.

So... what's the deal: Can Dash barrel roll off an asteroid after bumping or does his pilot ability also apply to bumped ships? What would you say?

Everyone has stated the TO was wrong, but no one has actually answered your question directly. Yes, he was wrong and we all agree on that.

When piloting Dash, obstacles are meaningless to him during the Activation phase. If you overlap a ship that happens to be on an obstacle, then it's just like overlapping a ship in open space. Same rules apply. You'd still skip your perform action step (from the ship overlap, not the obstacle), so you wouldn't be able to barrel roll off the obstacle (with a Perform Action step Barrel Roll). There's no roll for possible damage as that happens in the Activation phase when maneuvering.

But when you get to the Combat phase, the obstacle comes into play (depending on what it is). If he was on an asteroid, he can't attack at all. If he's on a debris cloud, he can attack, just not the ship he's overlapped.

I guess it is a question of how "direct" an answer you think one needed to give Parravon. I had previously made the observation that it isn't the asteroid stopping Dash but rather the overlap rules regarding ships.

True, but I've seen similar confusion regarding Dash and his ignoring of obstacles. There's been numerous questions about the obstacles, the ability, the timing, whether or not it applies to the Combat phase as well. It still surprises me that it seems so hard to understand it, but clearly the TO in this case took yet another spin on it.

So... what's the deal: Can Dash barrel roll off an asteroid after bumping or does his pilot ability also apply to bumped ships? What would you say?

Everyone has stated the TO was wrong, but no one has actually answered your question directly. Yes, he was wrong and we all agree on that.

When piloting Dash, obstacles are meaningless to him during the Activation phase. If you overlap a ship that happens to be on an obstacle, then it's just like overlapping a ship in open space. Same rules apply. You'd still skip your perform action step (from the ship overlap, not the obstacle), so you wouldn't be able to barrel roll off the obstacle (with a Perform Action step Barrel Roll). There's no roll for possible damage as that happens in the Activation phase when maneuvering.

But when you get to the Combat phase, the obstacle comes into play (depending on what it is). If he was on an asteroid, he can't attack at all. If he's on a debris cloud, he can attack, just not the ship he's overlapped.

Thanks, that's how I would have handeled it in the first place instead of the TO ruling. Dash bumps --> is set back on an obstacle (in this case asteroid) --> can ignore it because of his ability in the activation phase, so no damage rolled, but losing his action because of the bump --> during combat he sits on the asteroid and can't shoot anything.

If neither player thought there was nothing wrong he had no business interrupting the game.

The judge has both the right and the duty to interrupt a game if he or she see's someone doing something that is breaking the rules. They have to have that ability or else they can't address someone cheating.

If you honestly think this, please never ever be a TO, because the event you run will be a nightmare for everyone involved.

Especially when he clearly dies not know the rules.

The fact that he doesn't know the rules means he shouldn't be a TO in the first place, but it does not mean he shouldn't get involved in general.

Not doing something can never be cheating. At best a missed opportunity.

As was pointed out, you're wrong again. Here's more examples of not doing something that is cheating...

Not taking a stress token when performing a Red Maneuver.

Not removing shield tokens when you suffer damage.

Not drawing damage cards when you suffer damage.

Not flipping over a damage card when you suffer critical damage.

Not taking a stress when performing an upgrade that instructs you to.

Those 5 I can think of off the top of my head I think is proof enough of just how wrong you are.

Not removing focus or evade tokens during the end phase, too.

The rules don't say that I can't use a blowtorch to melt the any ships I kill into slag... But would anyone think this is ok?

Oh that's good