What happens if you elect to use the 3 hard turn for the Segnor's Loop but overlap a ship? It seems by the wording on the rules that you have to do a 3 bank maneuver instead.

RAW it might be a bank maneuver.

RAI it probably is a turn maneuver.

The question belongs into the FAQ.

Nope. You chose to use that template. Once you attempt it, you follow through as though it were on your dial that way.

Nope. You chose to use that template. Once you attempt it, you follow through as though it were on your dial that way.

The potential problem with that interpretation is the last sentence on the reference card:

If a Segnor's Loop Maneuver causes a ship to overlap another ship, instead treat its maneuver as a bank maneuver with the same speed, color and direction revealed on the dial.

Nope. You chose to use that template. Once you attempt it, you follow through as though it were on your dial that way.

It probably will require an FAQ, but Dracon is almost certainly right - once you have chosen your template you have committed to the move - if you overlap you're outa luck

Just checked the FAQ to see what it has to say about Tetran Cowell - as he would presumably be treated in the same way - but there's no entry on him

Tetran wouldn't have an issue, because the base rules for K-turn say to perform a straight at the same speed. So that's fine.

It does seem to be a minor wording oversight, but trying to change the template in the middle of a blocked maneuver strikes me as a recipe for absolute chaos.

Nope. You chose to use that template. Once you attempt it, you follow through as though it were on your dial that way.

The potential problem with that interpretation is the last sentence on the reference card:

If a Segnor's Loop Maneuver causes a ship to overlap another ship, instead treat its maneuver as a bank maneuver with the same speed, color and direction revealed on the dial.

well spotted!

The rules for Segnors loop also change with the template change. The ability to change the type of template you use , changes the corresponding maneuver when you overlap.

Tetran wouldn't have an issue, because the base rules for K-turn say to perform a straight at the same speed. So that's fine.

It does seem to be a minor wording oversight, but trying to change the template in the middle of a blocked maneuver strikes me as a recipe for absolute chaos.

So just so I understand this correctly:

If Tetran revealed a 5k but chose to do a 1k, found that the 1k caused him to overlap, he would not necessarily end his move overlapping that ship, as the move would be treated as a red 5 straight as revealved on his dial - so he may be able to blaze on past (but still takes stress and does not turn through 180)

Tetran wouldn't have an issue, because the base rules for K-turn say to perform a straight at the same speed. So that's fine.

It does seem to be a minor wording oversight, but trying to change the template in the middle of a blocked maneuver strikes me as a recipe for absolute chaos.

So just so I understand this correctly:

If Tetran revealed a 5k but chose to do a 1k, found that the 1k caused him to overlap, he would not necessarily end his move overlapping that ship, as the move would be treated as a red 5 straight as revealved on his dial - so he may be able to blaze on past (but still takes stress and does not turn through 180)

No - Tetran changes the speed. Any time you treat a maneuver as something else, that affects everything that comes after it.

So Tetran reveals a 5K, and uses his ability to change it to a 1K. His 1K overlaps - a "straight maneuver with the same speed and difficulty" is a Red 1 Ahead, so that's what he executes.

The rules for Segnors loop also change with the template change. The ability to change the type of template you use , changes the corresponding maneuver when you overlap.

Except that it doesn't. Segnor's doesn't say to execute it with the same bearing, the way the K-turn rules do. And even if it did, the wording for IG-88D doesn't actually change the bearing - you're technically still executing a Segnor's Left (for example), you're just using a different template for it.

I don't think there's much question how to play it, but let's not invent rules we don't have to.

Tetran wouldn't have an issue, because the base rules for K-turn say to perform a straight at the same speed. So that's fine.

It does seem to be a minor wording oversight, but trying to change the template in the middle of a blocked maneuver strikes me as a recipe for absolute chaos.

So just so I understand this correctly:

If Tetran revealed a 5k but chose to do a 1k, found that the 1k caused him to overlap, he would not necessarily end his move overlapping that ship, as the move would be treated as a red 5 straight as revealved on his dial - so he may be able to blaze on past (but still takes stress and does not turn through 180)

No - Tetran changes the speed. Any time you treat a maneuver as something else, that affects everything that comes after it.

So Tetran reveals a 5K, and uses his ability to change it to a 1K. His 1K overlaps - a "straight maneuver with the same speed and difficulty" is a Red 1 Ahead, so that's what he executes.

Gotcha - because the specific rule on the card overrules the general rule in the core rules - as per the "Breaking The Rules" rule

So you treat it as a 1 regardless of that the dial says - coz that's what the card says.

Diggy is slightly different though - it says you may use a different template, not treat a 3 turn segnor as a 3 bank segnor.

As written the rule says you would revert to the 3 bank if you overlap - but I doubt that was the intention

As written the rule says you would revert to the 3 bank if you overlap - but I doubt that was the intention

Agreed. It's actually a really ugly interaction to word/explain. The whole thing would honestly be cleaner without trying to change the bearing, and instead just saying "if you overlap another ship, place your ship normally, but do not rotate 180 degrees".

This is something that has already caused a "Because I said so" ruling thanks to Nien Numb. I really don't think you gain anything useful from treating it as a changed bearing.

The rules for Segnors loop also change with the template change. The ability to change the type of template you use , changes the corresponding maneuver when you overlap.

Except that it doesn't. Segnor's doesn't say to execute it with the same bearing, the way the K-turn rules do. And even if it did, the wording for IG-88D doesn't actually change the bearing - you're technically still executing a Segnor's Left (for example), you're just using a different template for it.

I don't think there's much question how to play it, but let's not invent rules we don't have to.

Actually it does. It states that it uses the corresponding bank maneuver template. The only difference is that you rotate the ship 180 degrees after. So you replace every reference to bank with turn (because that it what the ability does) and it says you execute a 3 turn with the same direction and dificulty

It states that it uses the corresponding bank maneuver template. The only difference is that you rotate the ship 180 degrees after. So you replace every reference to bank with turn (because that it what the ability does)...

No, that's not what the ability does. The ability says "You may execute the [segnor left 3] or [segnor right 3] maneuver using the corresponding [3-turn left] or [3-turn right] template," and it doesn't say anything else.

Your version is a logical extension of the pilot ability for IG-88D, but all the pilot ability does is change the template you reach for.

Diggy

Along with Aiggy, Biggy and Ciggy. I like your nymations

Actually it does. It states that it uses the corresponding bank maneuver template. The only difference is that you rotate the ship 180 degrees after. So you replace every reference to bank with turn (because that it what the ability does) and it says you execute a 3 turn with the same direction and dificulty

As Vorpal Sword pointed out, that's not what it does. It doesn't replace every reference to bank with turn. Not even close, actually. I'm honestly not sure where you're getting that it does.

But even if it did do that, it wouldn't work like you want it to. IG-88D's ability changes the template you use for a Segnor's Loop. Segnor's Loop is a bearing. But if you overlap while attempting it, the rules change the bearing to a Bank - you're no longer executing a Segnor's Loop, so IG-88D's ability no longer triggers. It's no different than if you use Stay on Target to change the maneuver to a different bearing.

Diggy

Along with Aiggy, Biggy and Ciggy. I like your nymations

Actually it's Biggy, Ciggy, Diggy and Clyde

No wait, that's Pacman

So how do you perform a Segnors Loop with a 3 Turn template without changing the bearing? The reference card is quite clear you perform a bank maneuver the turn he model 180, and if you overlap you just perform the bank. You can't change the template in the 1st sentence and then not in the 2nd.

So how do you perform a Segnors Loop with a 3 Turn template without changing the bearing? The reference card is quite clear you perform a bank maneuver the turn he model 180, and if you overlap you just perform the bank. You can't change the template in the 1st sentence and then not in the 2nd.

Simple. It's like performing a Bank with the turn template. You're not actually turning, you're Banking with a different template.

Ugh, another RAW vs RAI discussion.

Does it make sense that if you bumped with a hard-turn segnor loop that it would magically warp the ship over to the side and become a bank?

no?

Then that's not how it will work. I don't really care what the exact words are in the rules, if it violates every other precedent and doesn't make sense, it won't work that way once it is FAQd. Obviously you would treat the hard-turn segnor like any other k-turn bump. you back off like any other overlap, don't turn around 180, and take your stress.

The RAW people just argue about this stuff, get all "rules-lawyer"-ey, and then FFG FAQs it so it makes sense and follows with the RAI.

Ugh, another RAW vs RAI discussion.

Does it make sense that if you bumped with a hard-turn segnor loop that it would magically warp the ship over to the side and become a bank?

no?

Then that's not how it will work. I don't really care what the exact words are in the rules, if it violates every other precedent and doesn't make sense, it won't work that way once it is FAQd. Obviously you would treat the hard-turn segnor like any other k-turn bump. you back off like any other overlap, don't turn around 180, and take your stress.

The RAW people just argue about this stuff, get all "rules-lawyer"-ey, and then FFG FAQs it so it makes sense and follows with the RAI.

No one is arguing that you should really resolve a bump as a bank instead of a turn... at least, I'm not, and I'm pretty sure Buhallin isn't. I'm responding to StephenEsven's claim that the RAW says you handle it as a turn.

(It's like Daredevil, really. I never ran it in a game as if it didn't cause stress, but I was one of the people raising a fuss about the fact that as written it shouldn't cause stress.)

To echo Vorpal again, I don't believe anyone is actually claiming that it should work that way, and I don't think anyone's planning to rules-lawyer it. I believe I pointed out that if you try and change it in the middle, you get all sorts of weird interactions that are undefined. What happens if the bank doesn't overlap? Do you then not lose your action? Or do you still count as overlapping? The resulting interaction will be heavily undefined, and I'm not sure what you could even try to rules-lawyer your way into.

But it's also important to understand what the rules actually say, and not invent new ones because you don't like what they say. That's what StephenEsven is doing - he's basically inventing an entirely new ability. I'd much rather have an environment where everyone knows what it actually does, and then can consciously decide to change that by applying a bit of RAI, than one where people feel the need to invent rules to support their RAI claim by calling it RAW.

Does it make sense that if you bumped with a hard-turn segnor loop that it would magically warp the ship over to the side and become a bank?

no?

Then that's not how it will work.

Does it make sense that R2-D2 has different timing when you hit an obstacle vs. a proximity mine? Does it make sense that a ship can't barrel roll itself over an asteroid, but can do it right off the board? Does it make sense that the line of attack with a turret counts for range, and obstruction, but not firing arc? Does it make sense that Daredevil and Intertial Dampeners don't generate stress checks when you execute their maneuvers?

There are any number of places where rules don't make sense. "Does it make sense that..." is a weak point to make regardless, but it's been pretty much actively disproven in X-wing.

(It's like Daredevil, really. I never ran it in a game as if it didn't cause stress, but I was one of the people raising a fuss about the fact that as written it shouldn't cause stress.)

Out of curiosity... What? The errata'd wording of the card seems pretty clear...

Are you referring to Daredevil pre-FAQ, and that the old card indicated to "execute a red maneuver", which means the "check pilot stress" step never happens?

(It's like Daredevil, really. I never ran it in a game as if it didn't cause stress, but I was one of the people raising a fuss about the fact that as written it shouldn't cause stress.)

Out of curiosity... What? The errata'd wording of the card seems pretty clear...

Are you referring to Daredevil pre-FAQ, and that the old card indicated to "execute a red maneuver", which means the "check pilot stress" step never happens?

Yes.