But it doesn't say you can't either.

Here's how it works:

The game rules specifically state that you cannot boost or barrel roll off of the board or onto asteroids/debris. The rules for TB make a specific exception to that rule and allows you to boost your opponent onto asteroids/debris with TB. That is the only exception to the rule. If they intended you to Tractor Beam your opponent off the board they would have specifically included that language to make it work. They did not include an exception for that therefore you must abide by the rule that says no boosting or barrel rolls off the board.

You are not the first person to ask or argue this point. This interaction has been established for quite some time given the TB was originally spoiled 2-3 months ago. That's why your arguments were likely met with such hostility. Asteroids yes, off the board no. There was no oversight. This is how the designers intended it to work. Hope that helps.

I didn't even know if you could BR or boost someone off the board with TB or not. You gonna gang up on everyone who doesnt know everything, even if it may not have been told to them before?

The pile-on is a bit much, but the OP got the right answer, with citations, and kept arguing anyway. That warrants at least a bit of pushback.

But it doesn't say you can't either.

Are you trolling here or what?

People said it's in the rulebook, you said you know it. So why the trolling?

The problem really is FFG here. Not OP. Not Rule Lawyering (which is supposed to improve FAQs/Errata).

Official FAQ/Errata:

* TB can ignore the "barrel-roll / boost onto obstacles" rule.

* TB can't ignore the "barrel-roll / boost onto other ships" rule.

* TB off the board NOT CURRENTLY ADDRESSED at present.

(As a former editor, and scientist, I found the Errata on TB to be extremely 1/3rd assed.)

If we had to cite every time a card DIDN'T create an exception to a rule, the errata/FAQ would become encyclopedia-long.

Seeing as how the edge of the board is NOT an obstacle, it's not handled by the TB exception. It needs no further clarification.

I suspect they included ship non-exclusion for the benefit of players who aren't sure what an "obstacle" is (due to the literal meaning of obstacle vs. the game state).

If we had to cite every time a card DIDN'T create an exception to a rule, the errata/FAQ would become encyclopedia-long.

Seeing as how the edge of the board is NOT an obstacle, it's not handled by the TB exception. It needs no further clarification.

I suspect they included ship non-exclusion for the benefit of players who aren't sure what an "obstacle" is (due to the literal meaning of obstacle vs. the game state).

This is different than loose exceptions... [Tractor Beaming a ship off the board] would, IMO, be the number 1 selling point for this card. And FFG had two choices:

NERF IT and be clear about it.

or

DODGE the question

...

The Facts:

1. TB is not a Barrel-Roll Action.

2. TB ignores specific Barrel-Roll Rules.

3. TB follows specific Barrel-Roll Rules.

4. FFG ignored addressing Mat's Edge in relation to a TB.

If we had to cite every time a card DIDN'T create an exception to a rule, the errata/FAQ would become encyclopedia-long.

Seeing as how the edge of the board is NOT an obstacle, it's not handled by the TB exception. It needs no further clarification.

I suspect they included ship non-exclusion for the benefit of players who aren't sure what an "obstacle" is (due to the literal meaning of obstacle vs. the game state).

This is different than loose exceptions... [Tractor Beaming a ship off the board] would, IMO, be the number 1 selling point for this card. And FFG had two choices:

NERF IT and be clear about it.

or

DODGE the question

...

The Facts:

1. TB is not a Barrel-Roll Action.

2. TB ignores specific Barrel-Roll Rules.

3. TB follows specific Barrel-Roll Rules.

4. FFG ignored addressing Mat's Edge in relation to a TB.

I don't have the patience for this, so I'm going to be blunt: this is a terrible line of argument. This is an exceptions-based ruleset; specific game elements add to the rules or create exceptions to the rules. If a game element doesn't override or create an exception, then the regular rules apply.

The Rules Reference is really clear, and if you don't believe me feel free to check pages 6 and 7. A ship cannot barrel roll if this would cause the ship to flee the battlefield. A ship cannot boost if this would cause the ship to flee the battlefield. A tractor beam token does not cause the defender to perform a barrel roll or boost action, but it does definitely still cause the defender to perform a barrel roll or boost. None of this is ambiguous in the least.

They didn't dodge the question, because they've already published the answer. It's like asking whether an Ion Cannon Turret goes past your shields: of course it doesn't. There's no reason it should skip that part of the rules, so it doesn't. People are creating an exception because they think it would be cool, without bothering to actually find a justification--because there isn't one.

They didn't dodge the question, because they've already published the answer. It's like asking whether an Ion Cannon Turret goes past your shields: of course it doesn't. There's no reason it should skip that part of the rules, so it doesn't. People are creating an exception because they think it would be cool, without bothering to actually find a justification--because there isn't one.

Ion Cannon does not go past shield?

Sorry could not resists

Vorpal Sword is right in his post

I'm unsure how people that apply some of the line of reasoning showcased in this thread get through any game of anything.

Where does it say you can't? If you can put ships on rocks and debris the you should also be allowed to put them off the board.

You can not boost or roll of the board, that is an illegal move. The tractor beam rules make an exception only for obstacles, which means boosting or barrel rolling off the board is still an illegal move. And I called it first, this should have been in the FAQ for the tractor beam as well

If we had to cite every time a card DIDN'T create an exception to a rule, the errata/FAQ would become encyclopedia-long.

Seeing as how the edge of the board is NOT an obstacle, it's not handled by the TB exception. It needs no further clarification.

I suspect they included ship non-exclusion for the benefit of players who aren't sure what an "obstacle" is (due to the literal meaning of obstacle vs. the game state).

This is different than loose exceptions... [Tractor Beaming a ship off the board] would, IMO, be the number 1 selling point for this card. And FFG had two choices:

NERF IT and be clear about it.

or

DODGE the question

...

The Facts:

1. TB is not a Barrel-Roll Action.

2. TB ignores specific Barrel-Roll Rules.

3. TB follows specific Barrel-Roll Rules.

4. FFG ignored addressing Mat's Edge in relation to a TB.

I don't have the patience for this, so I'm going to be blunt: this is a terrible line of argument. This is an exceptions-based ruleset; specific game elements add to the rules or create exceptions to the rules. If a game element doesn't override or create an exception, then the regular rules apply.

The Rules Reference is really clear, and if you don't believe me feel free to check pages 6 and 7. A ship cannot barrel roll if this would cause the ship to flee the battlefield. A ship cannot boost if this would cause the ship to flee the battlefield. A tractor beam token does not cause the defender to perform a barrel roll or boost action, but it does definitely still cause the defender to perform a barrel roll or boost. None of this is ambiguous in the least.

They didn't dodge the question, because they've already published the answer. It's like asking whether an Ion Cannon Turret goes past your shields: of course it doesn't. There's no reason it should skip that part of the rules, so it doesn't. People are creating an exception because they think it would be cool, without bothering to actually find a justification--because there isn't one.

From a rules point you are absolutely correct.

From a point about writing an easy to handle reference book / FAQ / manual you are not. Adding a single extra sentence to clarify this in the TB FAQ would have been the proper way to write it.

Which is by no means the fault of the designers, because correcting/clarifying this kind of stuff is the job of the editor. And editing of ffg products sucks, which is a minor thing for X-Wing, but annoys me a lot more on their RPGs. They seem to sell well enough, maybe they should hire someone additional for the job.

Still that is not surprisingly at all, FFG could not write a good manual to save their lives. They are kind of legendary for that

If we had to cite every time a card DIDN'T create an exception to a rule, the errata/FAQ would become encyclopedia-long.

Seeing as how the edge of the board is NOT an obstacle, it's not handled by the TB exception. It needs no further clarification.

I suspect they included ship non-exclusion for the benefit of players who aren't sure what an "obstacle" is (due to the literal meaning of obstacle vs. the game state).

This is different than loose exceptions... [Tractor Beaming a ship off the board] would, IMO, be the number 1 selling point for this card. And FFG had two choices:

NERF IT and be clear about it.

or

DODGE the question

...

The Facts:

1. TB is not a Barrel-Roll Action.

2. TB ignores specific Barrel-Roll Rules.

3. TB follows specific Barrel-Roll Rules.

4. FFG ignored addressing Mat's Edge in relation to a TB.

I don't have the patience for this, so I'm going to be blunt: this is a terrible line of argument. This is an exceptions-based ruleset; specific game elements add to the rules or create exceptions to the rules. If a game element doesn't override or create an exception, then the regular rules apply.

The Rules Reference is really clear, and if you don't believe me feel free to check pages 6 and 7. A ship cannot barrel roll if this would cause the ship to flee the battlefield. A ship cannot boost if this would cause the ship to flee the battlefield. A tractor beam token does not cause the defender to perform a barrel roll or boost action, but it does definitely still cause the defender to perform a barrel roll or boost. None of this is ambiguous in the least.

They didn't dodge the question, because they've already published the answer. It's like asking whether an Ion Cannon Turret goes past your shields: of course it doesn't. There's no reason it should skip that part of the rules, so it doesn't. People are creating an exception because they think it would be cool, without bothering to actually find a justification--because there isn't one.

You're out of your mind. There were endless threads, pre-FAQ, about [TB'ing off the Mat's Edge] For/Against. FFG had to know this--to assume otherwise it to abandon all faith in their brand.

The FAQ is dropped and FFG avoided the question. Even added clarity on [Overlapping Ships during TB] while avoiding the bigger question.

So now, if I want to put this to bed at my FLGS or while teaching new players, my ONLY reference is "Internet Said So." I have no official clarification since Pages 6 and 7 of the Rulebook ONLY pertain to the Activation(Action)Phase and NOT the Combat Phase.

Is your high-horse comfortable?

Where does it say you can't? If you can put ships on rocks and debris the you should also be allowed to put them off the board.

Where does it sat you can? If it doesn't say you can break the rules, you can't break the rules.

So now, if I want to put this to bed at my FLGS or while teaching new players, my ONLY reference is "Internet Said So." I have no official clarification since Pages 6 and 7 of the Rulebook ONLY pertain to the Activation(Action)Phase and NOT the Combat Phase.

Is your high-horse comfortable?

Thats bull and you seem to know it.

Ships with the icon in their action bar may perform the barrel roll action to move laterally and adjust their position. To perform a barrel roll with a small ship, follow these steps:

…

A ship cannot barrel roll if it would overlap another ship

…

• A ship cannot barrel roll if this would cause the ship to flee the battlefield

At no point the first sentence is related to the activation phase at all. And the second sentence is clearly not limited to to even just actions as well, but just to the barrel roll move itself, no matter the source.

But it doesn't say you can't either.

I'm in the camp of it seems obvious that you cannot boost/barrel roll off the table. Let me fix your list for you:

The Facts:

1. TB is not a Barrel-Roll Action, but it is a Barrel Roll and as such all the normal BR rules apply - barring clearly stated exceptions.

2. TB ignores specific Barrel-Roll Rules.

3. TB follows specific Barrel-Roll Rules.

4. FFG ignored addressing Mat's Edge in relation to a TB FFG didn't need to address Mat's Edge in relation to a Tractor Beam since that part is stated clearly in the rulebook in the Barrel Roll section.

This is very linear - TB allow for a forced BR/Boost, though not 'actions' nor 'maneuvers' it is still a BR/Boost, and as such follows all the normal rules -- unless there is a specific exception. There is a clear and specific exception for the allowance of placement on obstacles. There is not a clear and specific exception for forcing an opponent off the table. If that was the intent FFG would have said so, but since they didn't say so then the normal rule must apply

Can you late comers please stop quoting something that has already been done a dozen times just to bash my question again and again. Thank you.

to bad you cant use tractor beam to increase torp/missile accuracy when attacking or decrease Torp/missile accuracy when defending!

to bad you cant use tractor beam to increase torp/missile accuracy when attacking or decrease Torp/missile accuracy when defending!

Well, according to some users opinion in this thread, since the TB card does not expliticly say you can't do that, you actually can.

Sorry, could not help.

But it kinda does increase accuracy by virtue of lowering the target's agility. TB must be placed on higher PS pilots (or those nearby one with Swarm Tactics) in order to get the most out of this part of it though.

You're out of your mind.

And I've been diagnosed accordingly, but not in ways that particularly pertain to X-wing.

There were endless threads, pre-FAQ, about [TB'ing off the Mat's Edge] For/Against.

Yes, and they were all equally silly.

The FAQ is dropped and FFG avoided the question. Even added clarity on [Overlapping Ships during TB] while avoiding the bigger question.

Except there is no bigger question.

So now, if I want to put this to bed at my FLGS or while teaching new players, my ONLY reference is "Internet Said So." I have no official clarification since Pages 6 and 7 of the Rulebook ONLY pertain to the Activation(Action)Phase and NOT the Combat Phase.

Please explain to me where the game's phase is mentioned in the following direct quotes from the Rules Reference:

• "A ship cannot barrel roll if this would cause the ship to flee the battlefield."
• "A ship cannot boost if this would cause the ship to flee the battlefield."

I'm quoting those statements in their entirety. They're bullet points, which means they stand alone; there's no additional context to adduce. The words "phase" and "action" do not appear. They're perfectly straightforward blanket restrictions: a ship cannot.

So it's not the Internet telling you you can't do this, it's the rulebook. If you want to break those rules, you need specific text from a game element that overrides them--and it doesn't exist.

@ Vorpal Sword: Preach it, brother!

I guess I don't understand how people still can't see the forest for the trees. Why should FFG put out a 'clarification' just because some can't see what is clearly stated in the rules? I mean, really?

The rules don't specifically say that I cannot take two turns in a row if I want to, right? As in the rules don't anywhere say that 'Dave cannot take a second consecutive turn if he so desires', unless I've missed it somewhere, so that means I can go twice in a row. Right?

Can you late comers please stop quoting something that has already been done a dozen times just to bash my question again and again. Thank you.

Editing your original post to reflect that the question has been answered may do the trick. Even then, if you don't expect some measure of snark in some responses, you have come to the wrong internet .

to bad you cant use tractor beam to increase torp/missile accuracy when attacking or decrease Torp/missile accuracy when defending!

Well, according to some users opinion in this thread, since the TB card does not expliticly say you can't do that, you actually can.

Sorry, could not help.

Now I want to tractor beam bombs into people...

There's another, friendlier internet? Can I get a link to that one please?