So I was playing a match yesterday and my opponent and I ran into a conundrum as we had different interpretations of the Zeb Orrelios crew card. He was using Chopper with an autoblaster turret and Zeb Orrelios crew. No torpedo upgrade was being used on Chopper. I was running Palob with an autoblaster turret as well. We had ended the movement phase such that Palob was touching Chopper. The contact was between the front of Palob's base (i.e. within Palob's forward firing arc) and the rear of Chopper's base (i.e. within the auxiliary arc for torpedoes). My opponent believed that Zeb Orrelios allowed him to fire at me with his autoblaster turret while I was unable to fire back since I was not in his primary firing arc. Essentially, I could only fire back if my base was touching on his forward firing arc. My interpretation of the card is essentially if he can shoot at me, I can shoot at him so long as I have a means to fire at him, be it bases touching within my primary firing arc or an equipped turret. Is one of our interpretations correct or are we both wrong or what?

So I was playing a match yesterday and my opponent and I ran into a conundrum as we had different interpretations of the Zeb Orrelios crew card. He was using Chopper with an autoblaster turret and Zeb Orrelios crew. No torpedo upgrade was being used on Chopper. I was running Palob with an autoblaster turret as well. We had ended the movement phase such that Palob was touching Chopper. The contact was between the front of Palob's base (i.e. within Palob's forward firing arc) and the rear of Chopper's base (i.e. within the auxiliary arc for torpedoes). My opponent believed that Zeb Orrelios allowed him to fire at me with his autoblaster turret while I was unable to fire back since I was not in his primary firing arc. Essentially, I could only fire back if my base was touching on his forward firing arc. My interpretation of the card is essentially if he can shoot at me, I can shoot at him so long as I have a means to fire at him, be it bases touching within my primary firing arc or an equipped turret. Is one of our interpretations correct or are we both wrong or what?

Both the front and back arc are "firing arcs," so you can shoot (Zeb's card does not speficy which type of firing arc, so he works will both the special and the primary). In fact, had he not had a turret, you'd have been able to fire but he would not have.

Your interpretation is correct.

So as a further clarification on this card, let's say that the two ships ended up based such that the front of Palob's base (and forward firing arc) was touching the side of Chopper's base (not in primary or auxiliary arcs). Can either of us shoot with our autoblaster turrets?

If you were in base-to-base contact from his side and ZEB was equipped with a turret, then he could attack you while you could not attack him.

If you were in base-to-base contact from his side and ZEB was equipped with a turret, then he could attack you while you could not attack him.

Sorry, this isn't correct. The ghost does not have a "Firing Arc" to the side. Turrets allow you to shoot out of arc, they don't give you a 360 firing arc and Zeb's rule requires the ship be touching your ship in a "firing arc."

So as a further clarification on this card, let's say that the two ships ended up based such that the front of Palob's base (and forward firing arc) was touching the side of Chopper's base (not in primary or auxiliary arcs). Can either of us shoot with our autoblaster turrets?

Nope. See explanation above.

If you were in base-to-base contact from his side and ZEB was equipped with a turret, then he could attack you while you could not attack him.

This honestly makes no sense to me. I'm not in either of his firing arcs as the cards states. So that means he is able to attack me based off of the turret firing arc which, at least to me, means I could retaliate with my own turret.

If you were in base-to-base contact from his side and ZEB was equipped with a turret, then he could attack you while you could not attack him.

Sorry, this isn't correct. The ghost does not have a "Firing Arc" to the side. Turrets allow you to shoot out of arc, they don't give you a 360 firing arc and Zeb's rule requires the ship be touching your ship in a "firing arc."

So as a further clarification on this card, let's say that the two ships ended up based such that the front of Palob's base (and forward firing arc) was touching the side of Chopper's base (not in primary or auxiliary arcs). Can either of us shoot with our autoblaster turrets?

Nope. See explanation above.

Thanks for the clarification!

If you were in base-to-base contact from his side and ZEB was equipped with a turret, then he could attack you while you could not attack him.

This honestly makes no sense to me. I'm not in either of his firing arcs as the cards states. So that means he is able to attack me based off of the turret firing arc which, at least to me, means I could retaliate with my own turret.

Turrets do not have a firing arc. They allow you to fire outside of your ship's firing arc.

However, your opponent would not be able to attack you while touching in the situation you describe. Zeb crew requires that the enemy ship is in his firing arc. If you bumped his side, neither of you can attack the other.

And just to throw this out there again. Zeb only applies during a ship's "normal" attack activation. He does not trigger during the extra attack provided by a docked Phantom or a potential return fire from Dengar.

And just to throw this out there again. Zeb only applies during a ship's "normal" attack activation. He does not trigger during the extra attack provided by a docked Phantom or a potential return fire from Dengar.

Which I still think was a bad ruling and hope it gets called the other way in an FAQ

And just to throw this out there again. Zeb only applies during a ship's "normal" attack activation. He does not trigger during the extra attack provided by a docked Phantom or a potential return fire from Dengar.

Which I still think was a bad ruling and hope it gets called the other way in an FAQ

It would need an errata to the card, not a FAQ clarification. Zeb's card specifically calls out the attacking ship's combat phase activation for its timing. The rules are clear that you only get a single activation per round.

And just to throw this out there again. Zeb only applies during a ship's "normal" attack activation. He does not trigger during the extra attack provided by a docked Phantom or a potential return fire from Dengar.

Which I still think was a bad ruling and hope it gets called the other way in an FAQ

It would need an errata to the card, not a FAQ clarification. Zeb's card specifically calls out the attacking ship's combat phase activation for it's timing. The rules are clear that you only get a single activation per round.

It doesn't need an errata, just an FAQ entry specifying whether extra attacks in the combat phase are additional activation. The rules say you only get a single ativation per round like you said, but they also specify that cards override the rules. The rules don't say anything either way about extra attacks. All they have to do is say that extra attacks in the combat phase (like the phantom title and dengar) are considered extra activations (which is what the debate for zeb is over anyway).

And just to throw this out there again. Zeb only applies during a ship's "normal" attack activation. He does not trigger during the extra attack provided by a docked Phantom or a potential return fire from Dengar.

Which I still think was a bad ruling and hope it gets called the other way in an FAQ

It would need an errata to the card, not a FAQ clarification. Zeb's card specifically calls out the attacking ship's combat phase activation for it's timing. The rules are clear that you only get a single activation per round.

It doesn't need an errata, just an FAQ entry specifying whether extra attacks in the combat phase are additional activation. The rules say you only get a single ativation per round like you said, but they also specify that cards override the rules. The rules don't say anything either way about extra attacks. All they have to do is say that extra attacks in the combat phase (like the phantom title and dengar) are considered extra activations (which is what the debate for zeb is over anyway).

That's still not a clarification for a specific card. That's a general rule change.

The cards you are talking about don't say "You may become the active ships more than once in the combat phase". Something like that would override the written rule. The cards you mention grant attacks, not activations.

It doesn't need an errata, just an FAQ entry specifying whether extra attacks in the combat phase are additional activation. The rules say you only get a single ativation per round like you said, but they also specify that cards override the rules. The rules don't say anything either way about extra attacks. All they have to do is say that extra attacks in the combat phase (like the phantom title and dengar) are considered extra activations (which is what the debate for zeb is over anyway).

If FFG hadn't wanted it to work only during the activation during the attack phase, why would they have written when either you or they activate ?

It doesn't need an errata, just an FAQ entry specifying whether extra attacks in the combat phase are additional activation. The rules say you only get a single ativation per round like you said, but they also specify that cards override the rules. The rules don't say anything either way about extra attacks. All they have to do is say that extra attacks in the combat phase (like the phantom title and dengar) are considered extra activations (which is what the debate for zeb is over anyway).

If FFG hadn't wanted it to work only during the activation during the attack phase, why would they have written when either you or they activate ?

I think it's pretty clear that it's working as FFG intended for a couple of reasons:

- Zeb has that wording about activations that doesn't show up anywhere else.

- The expansion that Zeb comes with comes with a ship that can have have out of activation attacks.

I think that FFG wanted to keep Zeb+Autothrusters+Accuracy Corrector from being too powerful a combo.

And just to throw this out there again. Zeb only applies during a ship's "normal" attack activation. He does not trigger during the extra attack provided by a docked Phantom or a potential return fire from Dengar.

Which I still think was a bad ruling and hope it gets called the other way in an FAQ

It would need an errata to the card, not a FAQ clarification. Zeb's card specifically calls out the attacking ship's combat phase activation for it's timing. The rules are clear that you only get a single activation per round.

It doesn't need an errata, just an FAQ entry specifying whether extra attacks in the combat phase are additional activation. The rules say you only get a single ativation per round like you said, but they also specify that cards override the rules. The rules don't say anything either way about extra attacks. All they have to do is say that extra attacks in the combat phase (like the phantom title and dengar) are considered extra activations (which is what the debate for zeb is over anyway).

That's still not a clarification for a specific card. That's a general rule change.

The cards you are talking about don't say "You may become the active ships more than once in the combat phase". Something like that would override the written rule. The cards you mention grant attacks, not activations.

Sure, it's a general change. that affects what, 2 ships? Dengar and the Ghost with title? It's not even a big change, it's just saying that you're the active ship if you're attacking. According tot he rules:

ACTIVE SHIP The ship that is currently resolving the Activation or Combat phase is the active ship.

So is there just NO active ship when the ghost is taking it's extra attack or Dengar uses his revenge shot?

Going strictly by the rules (FAQ in this case), the ghost or dengar "can't attack" if they don't become the active ship.

Players may only measure range and/or use the range ruler to determine whether a ship is inside or outside of a firing arc at the following times:

• When a ship becomes the active ship during the combat phase, the active player can measure range from the active ship to any enemy ships before declaring one as its target.

• When a player declares a ship’s ability that requires another ship (or ships) to be at a certain range, the player trying to resolve the ability can measure range from their ship to any valid ships before resolving the ability.

• After declaring the intended target of a target lock action, the active player may measure range to the intended target, and only to the intended target.

You aren't the active ship, you aren't declaring an ability that requires a ship to be at a certian range (attacking does, but neither dengar nor the ghost say "perform an attack against a ship at range X" or anything, and you aren't declaring a target lock action. Therefore going strictly by whta the rules say, if you aren't activating you can't measure range, which is the first step in attacking.

It doesn't need an errata, just an FAQ entry specifying whether extra attacks in the combat phase are additional activation. The rules say you only get a single ativation per round like you said, but they also specify that cards override the rules. The rules don't say anything either way about extra attacks. All they have to do is say that extra attacks in the combat phase (like the phantom title and dengar) are considered extra activations (which is what the debate for zeb is over anyway).

If FFG hadn't wanted it to work only during the activation during the attack phase, why would they have written when either you or they activate ?

I think it's pretty clear that it's working as FFG intended for a couple of reasons:

- Zeb has that wording about activations that doesn't show up anywhere else.

- The expansion that Zeb comes with comes with a ship that can have have out of activation attacks.

I think that FFG wanted to keep Zeb+Autothrusters+Accuracy Corrector from being too powerful a combo.

I would argue it's NOT too powerful to be able to double tap with it. Sure, it's 4 damage. You can do more than that against a lot of targets with a single shot from your primary at range 1. It mostly only kills imperial aces, which...I don't have a lot of sympathy for since they're everywehre. maybe we need more counters to them. And everyone tries to tell me it's not that good against aces anyway because they can just arc-dodge and stay out of range 1 (never mind that my own experience PLAYING the AC/ABT says otherwise, but whatever).

With it NOT activating for the second shot, I'll probably never use zeb. It's too risky for not enough reward.

It doesn't need an errata, just an FAQ entry specifying whether extra attacks in the combat phase are additional activation. The rules say you only get a single ativation per round like you said, but they also specify that cards override the rules. The rules don't say anything either way about extra attacks. All they have to do is say that extra attacks in the combat phase (like the phantom title and dengar) are considered extra activations (which is what the debate for zeb is over anyway).

If FFG hadn't wanted it to work only during the activation during the attack phase, why would they have written when either you or they activate ?

I think it's pretty clear that it's working as FFG intended for a couple of reasons:

- Zeb has that wording about activations that doesn't show up anywhere else.

- The expansion that Zeb comes with comes with a ship that can have have out of activation attacks.

I think that FFG wanted to keep Zeb+Autothrusters+Accuracy Corrector from being too powerful a combo.

I would argue it's NOT too powerful to be able to double tap with it. Sure, it's 4 damage. You can do more than that against a lot of targets with a single shot from your primary at range 1. It mostly only kills imperial aces, which...I don't have a lot of sympathy for since they're everywehre. maybe we need more counters to them. And everyone tries to tell me it's not that good against aces anyway because they can just arc-dodge and stay out of range 1 (never mind that my own experience PLAYING the AC/ABT says otherwise, but whatever).

With it NOT activating for the second shot, I'll probably never use zeb. It's too risky for not enough reward.

Being able to dodge the 4 points of unavoidable damage by staying out of range one is what I think FFG sees as the balance for the Autoblaster+AC VCX-100. Zeb throws a wrench into that balance check by allowing the VCX-100 to force a block and still be able to deal 4 unavoidable points of damage.

Players should be able to setup blocks to gain an advantage. A single block automatically destroying a significant number of different small based ships is too much of an advantage in my opinion.

And just to throw this out there again. Zeb only applies during a ship's "normal" attack activation. He does not trigger during the extra attack provided by a docked Phantom or a potential return fire from Dengar.

Which I still think was a bad ruling and hope it gets called the other way in an FAQ

It would need an errata to the card, not a FAQ clarification. Zeb's card specifically calls out the attacking ship's combat phase activation for it's timing. The rules are clear that you only get a single activation per round.

It doesn't need an errata, just an FAQ entry specifying whether extra attacks in the combat phase are additional activation. The rules say you only get a single ativation per round like you said, but they also specify that cards override the rules. The rules don't say anything either way about extra attacks. All they have to do is say that extra attacks in the combat phase (like the phantom title and dengar) are considered extra activations (which is what the debate for zeb is over anyway).

That's still not a clarification for a specific card. That's a general rule change.

The cards you are talking about don't say "You may become the active ships more than once in the combat phase". Something like that would override the written rule. The cards you mention grant attacks, not activations.

Sure, it's a general change. that affects what, 2 ships? Dengar and the Ghost with title? It's not even a big change, it's just saying that you're the active ship if you're attacking. According tot he rules:

ACTIVE SHIP The ship that is currently resolving the Activation or Combat phase is the active ship.

So is there just NO active ship when the ghost is taking it's extra attack or Dengar uses his revenge shot?

Going strictly by the rules (FAQ in this case), the ghost or dengar "can't attack" if they don't become the active ship.

Players may only measure range and/or use the range ruler to determine whether a ship is inside or outside of a firing arc at the following times:

• When a ship becomes the active ship during the combat phase, the active player can measure range from the active ship to any enemy ships before declaring one as its target.

• When a player declares a ship’s ability that requires another ship (or ships) to be at a certain range, the player trying to resolve the ability can measure range from their ship to any valid ships before resolving the ability.

• After declaring the intended target of a target lock action, the active player may measure range to the intended target, and only to the intended target.

You aren't the active ship, you aren't declaring an ability that requires a ship to be at a certian range (attacking does, but neither dengar nor the ghost say "perform an attack against a ship at range X" or anything, and you aren't declaring a target lock action. Therefore going strictly by whta the rules say, if you aren't activating you can't measure range, which is the first step in attacking.

None of that says that attacks must happen during activations. It say that the activation provides and attack.

Going strictly by the rules, the only attack a ship gets is granted by it's activation. The cards you mention grant attacks that are indepent of the ship activating.

Dengar's counter-attack happens during his target's activation. The second attacks from the Phantom title and Corran Horn happen outside of everyone's activation.

Why change one of the core rules of the game to accommodate a situation created by a single crew card that only effects a few other upgrades (Phantom Title, Dengar, Corran Horn). I don't believe that Zeb's wording is an accident and I expect that we will see it on other upgrades to limit the power of the cards when taken by a ship what gets out of activation attacks.

To me, it's very simple (and already mentioned). If they wanted Zeb to be able to "work" twice in a round they easily could have left out the word "activation" or reworded it some other way. They didn't, so I don't see why people assume it's a mistake.

And just to throw this out there again. Zeb only applies during a ship's "normal" attack activation. He does not trigger during the extra attack provided by a docked Phantom or a potential return fire from Dengar.

Which I still think was a bad ruling and hope it gets called the other way in an FAQ

It would need an errata to the card, not a FAQ clarification. Zeb's card specifically calls out the attacking ship's combat phase activation for it's timing. The rules are clear that you only get a single activation per round.

It doesn't need an errata, just an FAQ entry specifying whether extra attacks in the combat phase are additional activation. The rules say you only get a single ativation per round like you said, but they also specify that cards override the rules. The rules don't say anything either way about extra attacks. All they have to do is say that extra attacks in the combat phase (like the phantom title and dengar) are considered extra activations (which is what the debate for zeb is over anyway).

That's still not a clarification for a specific card. That's a general rule change.

The cards you are talking about don't say "You may become the active ships more than once in the combat phase". Something like that would override the written rule. The cards you mention grant attacks, not activations.

Sure, it's a general change. that affects what, 2 ships? Dengar and the Ghost with title? It's not even a big change, it's just saying that you're the active ship if you're attacking. According tot he rules:

ACTIVE SHIP The ship that is currently resolving the Activation or Combat phase is the active ship.

So is there just NO active ship when the ghost is taking it's extra attack or Dengar uses his revenge shot?

Going strictly by the rules (FAQ in this case), the ghost or dengar "can't attack" if they don't become the active ship.

Players may only measure range and/or use the range ruler to determine whether a ship is inside or outside of a firing arc at the following times:

• When a ship becomes the active ship during the combat phase, the active player can measure range from the active ship to any enemy ships before declaring one as its target.

• When a player declares a ship’s ability that requires another ship (or ships) to be at a certain range, the player trying to resolve the ability can measure range from their ship to any valid ships before resolving the ability.

• After declaring the intended target of a target lock action, the active player may measure range to the intended target, and only to the intended target.

You aren't the active ship, you aren't declaring an ability that requires a ship to be at a certian range (attacking does, but neither dengar nor the ghost say "perform an attack against a ship at range X" or anything, and you aren't declaring a target lock action. Therefore going strictly by whta the rules say, if you aren't activating you can't measure range, which is the first step in attacking.

None of that says that attacks must happen during activations. It say that the activation provides and attack.

Going strictly by the rules, the only attack a ship gets is granted by it's activation. The cards you mention grant attacks that are indepent of the ship activating.

Dengar's counter-attack happens during his target's activation. The second attacks from the Phantom title and Corran Horn happen outside of everyone's activation.

Why change one of the core rules of the game to accommodate a situation created by a single crew card that only effects a few other upgrades (Phantom Title, Dengar, Corran Horn). I don't believe that Zeb's wording is an accident and I expect that we will see it on other upgrades to limit the power of the cards when taken by a ship what gets out of activation attacks.

A core rule of the game? Really? No one would even notice the difference outside of the ghost and dengar. It's a minor change (if not just a clarification). And none of what you said affects the rules on measuring range, which you can't do according to the rules if you aren't the active ship.

A core rule of the game? Really? No one would even notice the difference outside of the ghost and dengar. It's a minor change (if not just a clarification). And none of what you said affects the rules on measuring range, which you can't do according to the rules if you aren't the active ship.

Ok, but if it's such a minor rule, why bother mentioning it on Zeb's card? They could have written Zeb's card as "....when attacking or being attacked" or "During Combat when declaring an attack..."etc....

Ok, so here's how I understand this. Please correct me if you see any fault in my logic.

Zeb says: "Enemy ships inside your firing arc that you are touching are not considered to be touching you when either you or they activate during the Combat phase".

An excerpt from Phantom card: "at the end of the Combat phase, it (Ghost) may perform an additional attack with an equipped Turret".

The key piece here is the "end of the Combat phase" part, because it translates to "outside regular PS-order Combat phase activation of this ship".

Meaning that unless some rule would be saying "the ship is considered active when it performs additional attacks, even if those occur at the end of combat phase", Zeb can't be used for the Ghost/Phantom second turret attack .
FFG can be very specific about small things to prevent wrong interpretation (guess they wouldn't like to repeat the K-wing slam-bomb incident from their own article).

So if they've explicitly included the limitation to Zeb's timing and made a different time-window for the extra shot - one can safely assume it was their intention to prevent 2nd shot from happening off Zeb's ability. What I don't understand is why were they shooting themselves in the foot with that ruling, because you'd expect this interaction to be a good selling point for keeping the lil' one docked, and the whole expansion theme. Instead, with Zeb you're more enticed to take Gunner as the second crewman, so that you can get double primary shot in case the first one misses a well blocked Ace. Weird design choice.

A core rule of the game? Really? No one would even notice the difference outside of the ghost and dengar. It's a minor change (if not just a clarification). And none of what you said affects the rules on measuring range, which you can't do according to the rules if you aren't the active ship.

It's a rule from the Rules Reference Guide that is part of the the flow of the combat phase, that's what makes it a core rule.

The rules absolutely permit you to measure as part of an attack.

RRG, pg. 4:

That first paragraph doesn't say to only perform the following steps during your activation. It says two things:

1. Each ship can perform one attack when it becomes the active ship.

2. When you attack, follow these steps.

The steps of the attack itself permit measuring and checking for arcs.