Not how it works

This is getting just silly. On the very front cover of the rules reference you are told if a card effect uses the word " cannot , " that effect is absolute. Therefore the X-17 trump the AP. It really is that simple. All the AP can do when the X-17 resolves is move the one dame to a hull zone that is not adjacent, the rest of the damage must be taken in the hull that was attacked.

XI7 says "While attacking, if the defender spends a [Defense] token, it cannot suffer more than 1 damage on hull zones other than the defending hull zone."

So, if I suffer 1 damage to each hull zone other than the defending hull zone, how am I violating XI7's cannot? DUDES. Regardless of how you feel, or how you might read this, it's ambiguous. It is absolutely ambiguous.

If XI7 said something more clear like "While attacking, if the defender spends a defense token, it cannot suffer more than 1 damage on any hull zone other than the defending hull zone" there'd be no question.

As it is written, it's unclear.

FOR THE RECORD: I believe the interpretation is that XI7 "trumps" AP (except that AP would still allow you to redirect to non-adjacent). However, I am entertaining the idea that the wording on XI7 is ambiguous in regards to AP.

"While you're hungry, if you come across my bushel of apples, you cannot take more than 1 bite of apples other than the one on the top".

Is that more than 1 bite period? Or is it 1 bite from each apple? Same thing. English doesn't always work as intended!

XI7 says "While attacking, if the defender spends a [Defense] token, it cannot suffer more than 1 damage on hull zones other than the defending hull zone."

So, if I suffer 1 damage to each hull zone other than the defending hull zone, how am I violating XI7's cannot? DUDES. Regardless of how you feel, or how you might read this, it's ambiguous. It is absolutely ambiguous.

If XI7 said something more clear like "While attacking, if the defender spends a defense token, it cannot suffer more than 1 damage on any hull zone other than the defending hull zone" there'd be no question.

As it is written, it's unclear.

FOR THE RECORD: I believe the interpretation is that XI7 "trumps" AP (except that AP would still allow you to redirect to non-adjacent). However, I am entertaining the idea that the wording on XI7 is ambiguous in regards to AP.

I don't know how they could be more clear. There is nothing ambiguous or unclear about it. X-17 says cannot, That trumps AP right from the cover of the Rules reference. So that should be enough. But they also go on to say in the card text: "1 damage on Hull zone" S " other then the defending hull zone." They even went on to use hull zones plural to make it perfectly clear that you can only redirect one damage total to other hull zones . Plural.

So, if I suffer 1 damage to each hull zone other than the defending hull zone, how am I violating XI7's cannot?

Because you suffered 3 damage on hull zones other than the defending hull zone.

Seriously, anyone who doesn't get that doesn't need clarification from FFG, they need clarification from a high school English teacher.

There's no reason to get nasty. If you think that sentence reads like crystal, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Again, I DO think your interpretation is the correct one.

This is pretty simple to me. It says ". . . Hull zones " which means more than 1 so you can't suffer more than 1 damage on your non defending hull zones. That is 1 damage total.

Firstly...stop being douchey to each other.

Secondly, regardless of my English comprehension (my first and second languages are English), I believe FFGs intent for XI7 was to mitigate the Redirect Defense token for 6pts. I don't think it was also meant to completely thwart a similarly point costed upgrade as well...in this case, Advanced Projectors @ 6pts.

But if FFG does elaborate and it goes against what I felt they meant, I'd shrug and play it that way, no biggie. Personally I'd like to see some jowls filled with crow...ya know, so I know what end to speak to in the future. /wink

If I wasn't clear enough above, my money is with no more than one damage to each Hull zone. I'm not afraid of some crow eatin' either.

***Editted/Deleted for double post***

Ugh, sorry for the double post

Got my answer on the question I posed to FFG regarding this issue. The Question and answer appear below.

In response to your question:

Rules Question:
If a ship with the Advanced Projectors upgrade is hit by a ship with the XI7 Turbolasers upgrade, can that ship use a Redirect defense token to shift 1 point of damage to EACH adjacent hull zone, or can it only redirect 1 total point of the damage?

The defender can suffer 1 damage on each hull zone that it redirected to. For example, if the defender’s front hull zone was attacked and the damage total is 5, it can suffer 1 damage on the left zone, 1 damage on the rear zone, 1 damage on the right zone, and the remaining 2 damage must go to the front zone.

Thanks for playing!

James Kniffen

Game Designer

Fantasy Flight Games

Not the answer I was expecting, but I am glad to have this cleared up.

Not as clear as people thought then, I suppose I suddenly feel less like I need remedial English. Well, I still need to speak gooder English... but that's beside the point!

Alright, that's it then! Move along. Move along.

I got the same reply. Unexpected, but welcome. Too bad the AF is the only ship that can really profit from the projectors. I really hope the ISD will accept defensive retrofits.

Thanks to all involved who dug for a response and those who didn't tell me how silly I was for asking!

Thanks to all involved who dug for a response and those who didn't tell me how silly I was for asking!

I am surprised that was there response. It says right in the from of the rules reference the word cannot is absolute

Yes but the question does not include the "cannot" part. It includes what they mean by "Hull Zone s "

Yes but the question does not include the "cannot" part. It includes what they mean by "Hull Zone s "

I "cannot" like this hard enough.

Hey dudes, it has nothing to do with the word 'cannot'. It's still completely enforced here and not overridden in any shape or form.

It has everything to do with the way damage is assigned in Armada.

It's quicker/easier/faster/whatever to say "I fired at your Assault Frigate and did 3 points of damage," which can then be redirected yadda yadda yadda. But specifically, you're doing damage only to Hull Zones on that ship.

XI7 says you "...cannot suffer more than 1 damage on hull zones other than the defending hull zone." When I calculate how much damage I do to a ship, I never calculate an "aggregate damage". You can never take the Hull Zone out of the way damage is assigned.

So when I use Advanced Projectors to redirect those 3 points of damage initially assigned to my front hull zone and spread them 1 left, 1 right, 1 rear; never do I reach a point where I say "I have received 3 points of damage", because Armada never recognizes this aggregate damage. Instead, I received 1 point of damage to Assault Frigate, Left Hull Zone; 1 point of damage to Assault Frigate, Right Hull Zone; and 1 point of damage to Assault Frigate, Rear Hull Zone.

Therefore I completely satisfy the XI7 condition that I do not "suffer more than 1 damage on hull zones other than the defending hull zone."

Yes but the question does not include the "cannot" part. It includes what they mean by "Hull Zone s "

I "cannot" like this hard enough.

Well this was certainly unexpected. Should see more adv projectors now floating around as a decent counter to the ever popular xi7s.

Well this was certainly unexpected. Should see more adv projectors now floating around as a decent counter to the ever popular xi7s.

Maybe. Adv projectors are only relevant for Whales, so I don't expect to see too many.

Yes but the question does not include the "cannot" part. It includes what they mean by "Hull Zone s "

Yes, this is the correct point that was being made all along. I love when people who do not understand what is being asked act like the person asking is the one who does not understand English.

When I read this card I interpreted as 1 damage to each hull zone because hull zones was clearly plural.

Well said Rhymer Nation. Now I understand more fully why the RR says to deal each damage singly instead of as a group. So much depth to the game. Love it.