From Alex Davey at FFG:

"Yes, it’s a misprint. The Scum Firespray has the auxiliary arc printed on its ship token. "

This matter is settled gentle-people. I know you are all shocked by the outcome.

I'm pretty sure the whole point of this thread was to point out that this was an oversight by FFG. I haven't seen anyone actually say in this thread they would try to use this oversight to claim that Scum Firesprays can't shoot out the back.

Kind of wondering why Alex doesn't just post his response as himself here in the forums, anyone can post bold text and claim it's a quote from Alex Davey.

For those of you (as this threat discussed) that are worried about a rule nazi actually trying this in a tournament, send me a PM with an e-mail address and I will forward your the email sent to me by FFG.

Even the old oversized promo card was missing the icons:It's not really a big deal.

I had forgotten about that. Haven't looked at mine in awhile. Thanks for reminding me to get my oversize cards out and look at them again.

The devil is in the detail. It's not a big deal but the little things add up. Someone should have proofed this prior to release. Things like this are what expand the size of the FAQ. Reminds me of Wiz Kids and their poor quality control. Hopefully errors like this won't continue.

If I was the TO, I would not only allow the Firespray to shoot with his Rear-Arc as it is obviously intended, but I would also warn the player bringing this topic for unsportmanship: Don't be a *****.

Please let me know what area you TO so I can be sure to avoid it completely. I understand following the letter of the rules, but this is just insane. You clearly state you understand the intent, yet you still rule against it. As stated in another post, make it know ahead of time if you really foresee issues. Personally, I would walk out of your tournament the minute that ruling was made, never return, and be sure to spread the word that it is NOT a fly casual environment.

It is honestly sad that people are even claiming the firespray cannot fire out of the rear-arc. I have always said the x-wing community is one of the greatest and most friendly group I have met, but these discussions make me think otherwise.

And RedCastle, I am not attacking you personally, just disappointed you would make that ruling and disappointed this is even disputed

Please reread what I wrote.

I said that:

1- I would allow the player with the Firespray to shoot with his rear-arc.

2- I would go as far as give a warning for unsportmanship to the player trying to abuse from the misprint because this is not the kind of behavior I would like to encourage.

As far as I know, I think this would be the way to go to KEEP a Fly Casual environment: give a message to those trying to exploit a misprint that they are not welcome in your tournament.

I have edited my original statement and apologize again for not reading closely. Please let me know what area you are in so I can come play in an awesome tournament by a great TO Gotta slow down and read things when at work or I get caught looking the fool!

If someone pulls extreme Rules as Written slam them with the Turrets Don't Work RAW, then if they're flying a Falcon DQ them.

Turret primary weapons work. Only secondary turrets don't.

Simple solution - FFG needs to give us all giant versions of the Scum Firespray pilot cards! (I'm annoyed cos I'm never likely to use my giant Imperial Bob+Han card again)

The devil is in the detail. It's not a big deal but the little things add up. Someone should have proofed this prior to release. Things like this are what expand the size of the FAQ. Reminds me of Wiz Kids and their poor quality control. Hopefully errors like this won't continue.

Except that Attack Wing suffers from these problems (not to mention some hilarious balance issues) a lot more regularly. Borg Ocatahderon (octahedron), anyone?

The devil is in the detail. It's not a big deal but the little things add up. Someone should have proofed this prior to release. Things like this are what expand the size of the FAQ. Reminds me of Wiz Kids and their poor quality control. Hopefully errors like this won't continue.

Evidence for the assumption that they weren't proofed? It's a pretty trivial error, after all--and as we've discussed on the thread, very few people are likely to claim that it's evidence that Scum Firesprays can't use their auxiliary arc.

Do the scum base-templates come with the auxillary arc? Yes? Then it has an auxillary arc.

Thank you.

Just for clarification: Hot Shot Blaster (or any secondary weapon) should not work with Kaths ability.

An auxiliary firearc is NOT the same than "you may attack a ship even outside your fire arc".

Just like the Falcon doesn't have an auxiliary firearc, it can just shoot outside its primary fire arc. Not the same. Especially important for cards like "Tactician". Both arcs work for Firespray, but only fire arc for the falcon / decimator.

Actually, the Hot Shot Blaster fired in her auxiliary arc is still an attack made in her auxiliary arc, and therefore, would be eligible to receive the bonus damage.

Now why someone would put a Hot Shot Blaster on Kath is another story...

The devil is in the detail. It's not a big deal but the little things add up. Someone should have proofed this prior to release. Things like this are what expand the size of the FAQ. Reminds me of Wiz Kids and their poor quality control. Hopefully errors like this won't continue.

Evidence for the assumption that they weren't proofed? It's a pretty trivial error, after all--and as we've discussed on the thread, very few people are likely to claim that it's evidence that Scum Firesprays can't use their auxiliary arc.

Just want to second this. I work in digital printing. Catching everything is hard. The other day I noticed a misprint that, according to coworkers, was 12 years old. No one saw it, not the customer, not the recipients, not the designers..no props to me. I missed it on the initial proof and had an approved run queued up when one more look paid off.

Just for clarification: Hot Shot Blaster (or any secondary weapon) should not work with Kaths ability.

Hotshot blaster can attack outside a firing arc. If that attack happens to be inside the auxiliary arc, her pilot ability grants one extra attack die. If that attack also happens to be at range two, tactician delivers stress.

Missiles/Torpedoes can only use the primary firing arc.

Personally if i go to my local game store and play my scum Firespray and someone brings up that the said icon is not on the card im probably going to puch that person in the nose. I hate! hate! hate! rule mongers especially one that would dare bring this up in a game when the **** card on the base of the ship has a rear firing arc. Everyone knows that the Firespray can shoot out from its rear fire arc

Do the scum base-templates come with the auxillary arc? Yes? Then it has an auxillary arc.

Thank you.

Just for clarification: Hot Shot Blaster (or any secondary weapon) should not work with Kaths ability.

Hotshot blaster can attack outside a firing arc. If that attack happens to be inside the auxiliary arc, her pilot ability grants one extra attack die. If that attack also happens to be at range two, tactician delivers stress.

Missiles/Torpedoes can only use the primary firing arc.

Argh, forgot to write "if you play Kath without her auxiliary arc". Then her ability is completely useless, even with hot shot.

Just for clarification: Hot Shot Blaster (or any secondary weapon) should not work with Kaths ability.

Hotshot blaster can attack outside a firing arc. If that attack happens to be inside the auxiliary arc, her pilot ability grants one extra attack die. If that attack also happens to be at range two, tactician delivers stress.

Missiles/Torpedoes can only use the primary firing arc.

Argh, forgot to write "if you play Kath without her auxiliary arc". Then her ability is completely useless, even with hot shot.

Correct. However, there was never any doubt that the auxiliary arc exists. The only "question" was if the primary attack may use that arc.

I'm still annoyed that Lambda shuttles don't have an "auxillary fire arc" for their rear defense!

The devil is in the detail. It's not a big deal but the little things add up. Someone should have proofed this prior to release. Things like this are what expand the size of the FAQ. Reminds me of Wiz Kids and their poor quality control. Hopefully errors like this won't continue.

Except that Attack Wing suffers from these problems (not to mention some hilarious balance issues) a lot more regularly. Borg Ocatahderon (octahedron), anyone?

Don't forget about the Octahderon as well.

The fact that you feel it is a trivial error is your opinion. I wouldn't label it as such. While I feel it is not a large error, it is certainly something that quality control should have addressed prior to mass production.

The example of all the errors in Attack Wing proves my point. WK has a lot of errors in their products and I hope that FFG does a better job in the future.

WK has a lot of errors in their products and I hope that FFG does a better job in the future.

FFG has done a very good job so far, and will continue to do so.

A single mistake and a fairly minor and easy to miss one, does not a pattern make.

The rules for any game provide a way to play more complicated than "Bang! Your ship is dead!", "Is not!", "Is so!"

So yes, while I think this is pretty self-evidently a card mistake, there's a good reason to put it on the FAQ and correct future printings. To make it clear, set a precedent, and allow people to know that the rules are dependable.

Future expansions might include a card that does something with the Firespray's arcs, similar to the Outrider title, and FFG will want the rules clear on how that works.

So all the FAQ are just modifications to already printed cards to clarify meaning then? When I see an upgrade card that is put into production and distributed and then the company that makes the card isssues a correction to clarify the original meaning, I take that as an error. Maybe that's just me though but I find it frustrating at times to have to check the FAQ to see if an upgrade card has been changed from the original text. I realize this example is not necessarily the same example as the Firespray misprint. Makes me want to check for other mistakes as it's hard to believe only one misprint exists.

I'm going to defend FFG on this one and say it's a very minor mistake. The Firespray is the only ship in the game with an auxiliary arc and it was designed almost 3 years ago, before any of the current designers were even working on the game. I'll bet at least half of Firespray players didn't even realize there was a special icon on the Pilot card for rear arcs, and I'm confident that a vast majority of players didn't realize that the icon was actually vital to the rules as anything other than a reminder.

This doesn't even require any additions to the FAQ, they just need to remove the 2nd sentence in the OP's quote, and change "this icon" to "an auxiliary firing arc" and the problem is fixed.

I also love how many people are venting their hatred and threatening physical violence against the imaginary, non-existent players that would try to argue this in a tournament. I guess even adults need a bogeyman to hate.

I've never noticed that icon on the firespray cards, and I've used them a lot. I knew about the secondary arc and the cardboard base clearly indicates it.

The fact that so many players never saw the icon makes it less surprising that it was missed in production. Sloppy, but some of them may not know of the icon either lol.