I know what words mean better than the FFG rules team.

I am deeply sorry that your students have a teacher who does not think before he talks. Unless, of course, you have reviewed the educational background of of the employees who make up the FFG rules team, actually followed up with each employee personally, and then reached the educated conclusion that you do actually "know what words mean better" than those employees. If that is the case, then I apologize for suggesting that you are just stamping your feet and throwing out unsupported conclusions because you are unintelligent - so, please let me know.

I know what words mean better than the FFG rules team.

I am deeply sorry that your students have a teacher who does not think before he talks. Unless, of course, you have reviewed the educational background of of the employees who make up the FFG rules team and actually, followed up with each employee personally, and then reached the educated conclusion that you do actually "know what words mean better" than those employees. If that is the case, then I apologize for suggesting that you are just stamping your feet and throwing out unsupported conclusions because you are unintelligent - so, please let me know.

Sometimes the pilot & upgrade cards are not 100% clear because of oversight. Other times it simply is because if they covered every base and attempted to blot out every and any interpretation but the one they intended, the words would not fit on the cards even if they left out all that beautiful artwork.

The idea of the official FAQ is to have an official ruling on how all of the cards work together as a combined system of many, many releases and addendums over the course of (going on) four years now. Some of the FAQ is clarifications and (like it or not) some of it is errata.

If one is upset that a game meant for enjoyment and fun competition needs errata... Then I hope you never need CPR and have to rely on two people that can not agree on which years version to use. Because the changes to what is officially accepted and the proper way to administer CPR has evolved a lot over the years.

Fly casual, my friend.

I don't think you'll find anyone that would disagree with the statement "the rules aren't perfect". It's not easy trying to write a set of rules for a game that eliminates all the grey areas. And I know, as I've written three different sets of rules for table top wargames, and two sets of role-playing game rules. What makes perfect sense to me, no matter how many times I've read it, can be taken entirely differently by the players. Being a rules author is a hard job. I've no doubt about that. It involves a process of constantly tweaking certain areas, until there is no doubt that the written rule matches the intended rule.

And what the crew at FFG have come up with is a good set of rules. Are they perfect? Of course not! But no set of rules ever is. If they were perfect, Frank's Rules Questions in-box would be permanently empty. I guarantee it isn't. They have tried to create a set of rules that must cover future evolution in the form of their expansions and upgrade cards, and keep those expansions interesting. With some they have succeeded with and some they haven't. Some have required slight fixes, others have required an explanation via the FAQ. Which is entirely expected given the scope of their task. All the games I've written have included a base set of rules and a campaign option and that's it. I haven't tried to factor in future expansions or whatever that change the mechanics, because that's not what I wanted. But it's exactly what FFG want from X-wing - evolution of the game.

Kudos to FFG for coming up with new ships and pilots and upgrades as often as they do. Which incidentally, isn't all that often. X-Wing was released in 2012, and we've had seven waves of expansions and still waiting on the eighth. Roughly six months apart is plenty of time for players to digest the expansions and the options they present, as well as the questions that arise. And for players that are unaware of the FAQ, their only source of answers is likely to be other players. It's easy to read these rules or upgrades and come to a conclusion on how you think it should work. Another player could come to a different conclusion. That serves to indicate the rule or upgrade may not be 100% clear. Fortunately there's not too many that fall into that category, and an email to the developers is always an option. I've played many, many games over the last 35 years, and most of those didn't have the option of contacting the authors for any kind of clarification. That's what sets this game apart from the rest - the level of player support from the developers is awesome.

They may have developed a game that poses more than a few questions, but they are more than willing to answer those questions and they support the game and they listen to their players. Unlike some other game companies I can think of.

Republish cards with corrections where important.

Nothing about an HLC's capability to achieve crits on rerolls is clear on the card to anyone I have ever met in the game, no matter their level of experience (emphasis added; we all learned about this last week). Same with Farlander (not changing grievance, just providing another example).

Publish a glossary of terms such that it is clear that a reroll is not a roll. How many terms do you need. 10? 'A reroll is a modification with the difference that once a die is re-rolled it cannot be re-rolled again for any reason. Any immediate effects that trigger after a roll do not trigger on any re-rolled dice.'

© heliodorus04 2016

The rules currently leave a guy who wants an honest game getting yelled at for not understanding English. I stand by my vocational experience. Explain how a reroll is not a roll in the current format of the rules and FAQ (HLC obviously has a uniquely worded errata).

Nothing about an HLC's capability to achieve crits on rerolls is clear on the card to anyone I have ever met in the game, no matter their level of experience (emphasis added; we all learned about this last week). Same with Farlander (not changing grievance, just providing another example).

Not true. I've been playing awhile but I'm pretty sure that I understood that an HLC could end up with crits after modifications. It sounds like you are dealing with a small sample size and in what seems like a closed community. In environments like that, if one person misinterprets and they are teaching the game to others, everyone will end up playing more or less the same way.

Publish a glossary of terms such that it is clear that a reroll is not a roll. How many terms do you need. 10? 'A reroll is a modification with the difference that once a die is re-rolled it cannot be re-rolled again for any reason. Any immediate effects that trigger after a roll do not trigger on any re-rolled dice.'

© heliodorus04 2016

The current rules reference guide does this fairly well. Under the attack section they break down an attack into it's different steps with notes on each step. One of the 7 steps of an attack is "Roll Attack Dice". The very next step is "Modify Attack Dice". At the end of the 7 steps there is a list of "Related Topics". One of the items on this list is "Modifying Dice"

From the 'Modifying Dice' section of the RRG, page 13:

• Reroll: To reroll a die result, pick up the die and roll it again.

Was the HLC card clear from the start? No it wasn't. Which is what prompted it's entry into FAQ 1.2 early in 2013. It has been clarified in every FAQ since 1.2, but the wording on the card has not received an errata.

Was the Farlander clear from the start? Again, no it wasn't. FAQ entry clarification time for him too, but not a card errata.

It seems FFG are content with the wording on those cards that they don't consider changes to be required, just clarification on the intent for their use. Which is fine for most folks.

Do we need a complete glossary of game terms? Well, it surely wouldn't hurt. There are many terms that are used that cause confusion. Touching is a prime example, but let's not go down that road here please.

Does English as we know it map perfectly to the game terms and the way they are used? Not every time, but mostly. There are always going to be interpretation issues based on one's own reading, and I'm not talking about other languages here - just English. It's extremely hard to write a rule with a complex intent in a way that leaves absolutely no doubt as to how it works. I've been trying for over 20 years!

Can we define reroll versus roll under the current format of the rules? Yes, to a limited degree. A reroll is a modification, and is clearly defined as such on page 12 of the original Rulebook and page 13 of the newer Rules Reference. But is it considered another 'roll'? Admittedly, that's not entirely clear. But the majority of players accept that you roll the dice once and once only. After that the dice are modified, and that includes a reroll.

The original FAQ entry for HLC simply asked if you could modify the initial HLC roll to get a crit result, and the answer was yes. And it didn't rule out rerolls as an option, nor did it require that they also be subject to the HLC card text. Clearly, this may have still left some doubts, because in FAQ 2.0.1 (April 2014), they clarified further that rerolls were not changed from crits to hits, and that entry is still the current one.

If you're still getting yelled at for not understanding the game, then I can only assume, the yelling isn't confined to one side of the table or argument. And if you think this might be the ramblings of a competitive player, I can assure you I'm not. I don't have a local store that can run tournaments, and the player base where I live is limited to the extent I'm lucky if I get a friendly game in once every few months. I play because I enjoy it, and I follow these forums so I can play to the best of my ability and teach others how to enjoy a game I really enjoy. It's as simple as that. It's not worth getting steamed up about and chucking your toys out of the cot in disgust.

When the developers say this is the way it works, and most of the players agree this is the way it works, then that should be good enough. If you have to resort to looking for rules or definitions that aren't there, then you must ask yourself "Am I still enjoying this game?"

The rules currently leave a guy who wants an honest game getting yelled at for not understanding English.

I can understand being yelled at is no fun. But I do belive that says more about the people doing the yelling then it does the rules of this game.

Now I reject FAQ. Because they are just making stuff up to suit them.

How is it that the RULES in the brand new FA set are incomplete? Tell that to Jonny 12-year old and his mom.

From this point on you deserve no more than a laugh.

Sorry mate, that's the wrong attitude.

I disagree with you.

There is no FAQ nor any information on the card or in the rules that indicates a re-roll does not trigger the same immediate effects as a roll.

Except there is. Page 12 of the latest FAQ

"After and attack is perfromed using Heavy Laser Cannon and all the 'crit' results are changed to 'hit' results, the attack dice can be modified as normal. Any attack dice rerolled are not changed from 'crit' results to 'hit' results"

Oh would you look at that

There it is black and white

To the OP, stop

Your not going to convince anyone otherwise.

Nobody is forcing you to play, so if you don't like the way it's design, I'm sure Johnny and his mom would like your pieces

There is no need to errata the text for HLC or Farlander (I'm assuming it's the question of spending a token to change zero dice). Because the RAW do in fact work, even if they're not 100% clear. That's why the RAW vs RAI debate had been waged since the beginning.

The whole point of the FAQ is really for the Developers to explain the RAI, then we have an official source by which we can interpret RAW when they aren't as clear as we'd like.

They also are useful as precedence for other rules. Such as in the case of Farlander, since we know that a focus or TL can be used to modify zero dice then it's fairly safe to say Farlander can do the same thing with a stress token.

Republish cards with corrections where important.

How would that really help, though? You'd end up with multiple versions of the same card, with no clear indication which one is the most recent or most correct.

(Of course, you could publish some kind of free online guide that clarified the rule...)

Republish cards with corrections where important.

How would that really help, though? You'd end up with multiple versions of the same card, with no clear indication which one is the most recent or most correct.(Of course, you could publish some kind of free online guide that clarified the rule...)

Republishing cards is also extremely expensive. Would they give them away for free? How would they distribute them to all of the various players who have differing amounts of each.

FFG has made Xwing one of the least expensive table top miniatures games around. I hsve zero issue with the current FAQ used to clear confusion and ensure cohesion with old to new waves.

To be fair, after today, there are going to be a lot of people not even saying "look in the FAQ", but "look at this email someone in the forums said they got from the designers"

To be fair, after today

To make things worse... These emails aren't always final. We've had a few cases where Frank or Alex said it works one way via an email, but have the FAQ come out and reverse that ruling.

Myself I treat these emails as soft FAQ's... I'll consider them official until they're contradicted by a higher source, such as a more recent FAQ.

To be fair, after today

To make things worse... These emails aren't always final. We've had a few cases where Frank or Alex said it works one way via an email, but have the FAQ come out and reverse that ruling.

Myself I treat these emails as soft FAQ's... I'll consider them official until they're contradicted by a higher source, such as a more recent FAQ.

That's funny, that is exactly how I treat the actual FAQ as well

To be fair, after today

To make things worse... These emails aren't always final. We've had a few cases where Frank or Alex said it works one way via an email, but have the FAQ come out and reverse that ruling.

Myself I treat these emails as soft FAQ's... I'll consider them official until they're contradicted by a higher source, such as a more recent FAQ.

I'm just excited that all of the emails I've seen today seem to have some explanation of what bit of rules they used to make the judgement and seem to set reasonable precedents.

As per the card itself "Immediately after rolling your attack dice..." Then let us break this down Barney style since OP is clearly too educated to understand how x-wing works.

Roll attack dice

change crits to hits "immediately after rolling your attack dice..."

perform dice modification (to include rerolls due to target lock)

This is basic semantics and borderline troll. The ruling is clear enough even without an FAQ (which, for OP's sake, FAQ stands for "frequently asked questions", usually posed by those that play the game on at least a semi-regular basis, and allows the creators of the game to apply the clarification based on how the rules were originally intended, or based on circumstances not encountered during test play) re-roll from target lock is a modification to an existing roll. The roll is already complete, move on and stop trying to make yourself a champion of the english language.

Also, to play a fantasy/science fiction game is to suspend belief in the first place. Getting all bent out of shape due to the rules handed forth by the games creator shows that you are unable to suspend your belief and should probably start playing canasta or bridge.

My final point, for being a self proclaimed grammar nut, you sure do have a lot of misspellings and improper grammar usage in your post. Those who live in glass houses, should not throw stones.