FFG clearly acknowledges that the FAQ can contain errors, and a TO can overrule such errors. Valen Rudor is one such very clear error. We even got evidence via a mail from Frank that is.

But he didn't acknowledge it as an error. From the Frank email in this post:

"The Valen Rudor example is an exception to this by giving an explicit resolution to this timing window."

He's specifically saying that Valen Rudor is an exception to the normal timing window. Why? Who knows.

Otacon:

How did you get that re-direct to another post mechanic in your last post.

Otacon:

How did you get that re-direct to another post mechanic in your last post.

That little number at the top right corner of every post is a hard link to it.

FFG clearly acknowledges that the FAQ can contain errors, and a TO can overrule such errors. Valen Rudor is one such very clear error. We even got evidence via a mail from Frank that is.

But he didn't acknowledge it as an error. From the Frank email in this post:

"The Valen Rudor example is an exception to this by giving an explicit resolution to this timing window."

He's specifically saying that Valen Rudor is an exception to the normal timing window. Why? Who knows.

This particular ruling (via FAQ and Email) still leaves me baffled. It's quite clearly a contradiction, but is it an error? Franks email doesn't elude to the FAQ being wrong, but it does point out the Rudor is an exception. I would love to know the "why" behind this, when the rules covered it clearly to start with.

So why is the Valen Rudor example an exception? Because it is in print and contradicts the timing resolution dictated by the rules. With the next FAQ update, I bet there will no longer be an exception.

Now I only play casually, so I don't have an issue with the FAQ. My opponent and I are capable of resolving the timing according to the rules, without the FAQ.

The question is, will TO's overrule the FAQ or adhere to it? I suggest asking it you attend an organized event.

So why is the Valen Rudor example an exception?

That's the question everyone is asking.

The problem I have is when Frank does give an answer without giving you the "why".

He is not an exception. The faq is wrong. It happens. Will probably be fixed next time it releases

"The FAQ is wrong."

No, it isn't. It's rules text. It is by definition right. If they put that Commander Alozen is instantly destroyed on deployment into the FAQ, Commander Alozen is instantly destroyed on deployment.

They may change it later but until then that is how Valen Rudor works.

Errata are official rules changes. The rest is answers to questions, and can be no means override the rules, only clarify them. If there is a answer that is clearly contradicting the rules, then the rules stand.

From the official tournament regulations.

Conduct

All tournament participants are expected to act in a respectful and professional manner during a

tournament. If players have a dispute during a competition and cannot resolve it themselves, they

must call for a judge to resolve it and provide any rulings that are needed. All card interpretations

during a tournament are a marshal’s responsibility, and he or she may overrule the FAQ when a

mistake or error is discovered.

FFG clearly acknowledges that the FAQ can contain errors, and a TO can overrule such errors. Valen Rudor is one such very clear error. We even got evidence via a mail from Frank that is.

Every card in this game is an exception to the rules. Think about it, they all break the rules in some way. The FAQ entry for Valen is just an explanation how his exception to the rules was intended to work (by bypassing the initiative check).