If two players simultaneously play the "First Strike" action card, action cards are resolved in turn order, but what does that mean for this card. If player A has a lower initiative strategy card does that mean that his card is played first and player B, playing the card second would then have a lower iniitative and get to take the first action? Are both players tied for the same initiative number at 0, and the speaker decides turn order?

First Strike doesn't give you Initiative Zero, it just lets you take your first turn, first. This means your Initiative Number is skipped during the first round, and you play normally in the second round.
Further, if 2 players played First Strike at the same time, the person with the Lower Initiative would move first as his Action Card was resolved first.

To clarify, your Initiative Number stays the same and you take the rest of your turns in that phase in Initiative Order (after the first round).

FunkyBunch said:

This doesn't seem unreasonable, but is there some rules support for this? Taking this side, I would say that although they are played during Strategy, they don't Resolve until players begin their turns, which means the lower initiative would indeed go first. If we see them as Resolving (establishing turn order) at the time they are played, however, then it would seem the person going second gets the advantage: the lower initiative allows their card to take effect, and then the next player resolves theirs, usurping the #1 spot. I'm honestly 50/50. It's not the only time in the game where having priority screws you (happens all the time!), just in case someone would make the argument that a lower initiative is intended to be favored and therefore nudges the ruling in that direction.

The only precedent I see for letting the Speaker decide is at the top of p.6 of the FAQ:

Q: If someone copies the Special Ability of the Naalu relating
to initiative “0,” who goes first in the order of play?
A: In the case of a tied initiative, the Speaker determines the
order of play between the tying parties at the first point the tie
occurs.

As FunkyBunch said, no one's initiative drops to 0 in this case, but if you can't find consensus on precisely when the card Resolves, which sounds like the crux of the issue, then that may be your only bet.

In this situation, I let the speaker decide. I don't think order of card play is relevant here - both players have the special ability to let them go before everyone else, and thus each other. Thus, let the speaker decide.

Where are you getting the part about skipping your first turn in the first round?

blarknob said:

I'm pretty sure a discussion about this came up on the old forums, and if I recall, Corey did confirm that.

Basically, your first action is going "out of sequence" for the round (by going before everyone else), and then after everyone has gone, the normal order resumes.

Otherwise, if you had the #1 Strategy and played this, it would be somewhat unfair to be allowed to make two consecutive actions.

However, I think this comes up every so often. I'll ask Corey again just to make sure; perhaps it can go in the next FAQ?

Post the answer when you get it. My goup has always played first strike without skipping your normal turn, and yes it is powerful with leadership.

blarknob said:

Will do. It's entirely possible I'm misremembering, too; I've done that before.

I got a response back from Corey: Corey's is in bold, mine is in italics. I hate this forum's lack of a decent copy/paste mechanism so I'm just going to leave it ugly like this:

This card REPLACES the player's first action. It does not provide an additional action.

Your first order is correct (C,A,B,D,A,B,C,D).

I hope this answers your question!
-Corey Konieczka
Fantasy Flight Games
Game Design and Development

> Message from:
> Scott Lewis
>
>
>
> Rule Question:
> If a player plays the "First Strike" action card, does it mean that their first action happens first INSTEAD of their regular action, or does it happen, and then they still go in their regular slot during the turn?
>
> IE, if you have 4 players (A, B, C, D) who pick cards such that A=1, B=2, C=3, D=4, and C plays First Strike, which one of these turn orders is correct:
>
> C,A,B,D,A,B,C,D...
> or
> C,A,B,C,D,A,B,C,D...
>
> (One implication of the latter would be that if A played First Strike, they would go twice in a row!)
>
>
> For reference, First Strike says:
> "You may take your first action of the Action Phase before the player with the lowest initiative number. Then resume order of play as normal."
>
>
> (I think in the past you ruled the first way was the correct one, but I'm not 100% sure).

Okay, I understand what Corey says about turn order, but is the consensus that the player with the lowest initiative goes first, or the speaker decides?

I don't think there is a consensus. As long as you stick to one particular way, I don't think it makes a difference.

I agree that there will probably be disagreement without Corey's ruling (I should have asked that as well), but in general, if two game effects take place simultaneously that don't directly involve Initiative, the Speaker decides. While in this case, players do have initiative, I would say that it's a case of "simultaneous" that initiative doesn't apply to, and thus the Speaker would decide.

However, I can see three reasonable ways to rule on this:

1) Speaker Decides

2) Initiative order of the two players involved

3) Action Card precedent; in this case, whoever plays their card SECOND would go FIRST, because the later card would be more recent and "go before" all other players.

I still think #1 is the way to go, but that's me.

Also, it's not like it matters that much - the chances of 2 players playing the only 2 First Strikes in the deck at the same time and neither of them being sabotaged is, well, low.

possumman said:

It happened in a game recently. I played First Strike and then my opponent played First Strike. We ruled that Speaker decided and unfortunately he had the Speaker.

I am not sure I will ever see this happen again though,