With • Fenn Rau we have the opportunity to add an additionnal die when the enemy is at Range 1, but does this mean that when he attacks an enemy we have the three attack dice, and we add the bonus range +1 and •`Fenn Rau's additional die, making an attack of 5 dice. And adding to this the elite card Fearlessness, if it meets the conditions it would mean that the attack could be 6 dice. Can all of these additional dice be added together or for example do we have to ignore the range bonus?

Also, with Adv. Proton Torpedoes, can we add to the attack Fearlessness (+1) and • Fenn Rau's ability (+1) ? This would make 7 dice for this torpedo.

With • Fenn Rau we have the opportunity to add an additionnal die when the enemy is at Range 1, but does this mean that when he attacks an enemy we have the three attack dice, and we add the bonus range +1 and •`Fenn Rau's additional die, making an attack of 5 dice. And adding to this the elite card Fearlessness, if it meets the conditions it would mean that the attack could be 6 dice. Can all of these additional dice be added together or for example do we have to ignore the range bonus?

Also, with Adv. Proton Torpedoes, can we add to the attack Fearlessness (+1) and • Fenn Rau's ability (+1) ? This would make 7 dice for this torpedo.

Fearlessness doesn't add a die to your attack. If all the conditions are met, it adds a (Boom) to your dice roll. For Rau's primary weapon attack, you'd have his normal 3 reds + 1 range bonus + 1 for pilot ability. When this was rolled, you would add the (boom) from fearlessness.

The same applies to Adv. Proton Torpedoes except there's no range bonus.

You'll notice in these threads the use of (BOOM) and (KABOOM) to indicate hits and crits, usually for dice rolls. It can get a little confusing trying to differentiate between hits and crits (BOOM) (KABOOM) rolled and hits and crits (Damage) that gets through.

Fenn's ability stacks with everything you mention.

DO what the card says, don't do what it doesn't say. It says nothing about cancelling the range bonus, so don't do that.

Fenn's ability stacks with everything you mention.

DO what the card says, don't do what it doesn't say. It says nothing about cancelling the range bonus, so don't do that.

The "Do what the card says..." mantra doesn't always work. Read the card for Backup Shield Generator (Huge Ship). Had they left off the wording in parentheses, there would've been no doubt as to intent but by adding those 5 words FFG they changed the meaning on the card. Since its release it has been clarified that you can only get back one shield for the expenditure of one energy. Period.

It works in this case, and almost all other cases, but to be completely accurate, it should read 'do what the card says, don't do what the card doesn't say, unless the FAQ says different in which case do that'.

But that's a lot less pithy.

It works in this case, and almost all other cases, but to be completely accurate, it should read 'do what the card says, don't do what the card doesn't say, unless the FAQ says different in which case do that'.

But that's a lot less pithy.

True on both accounts. I think that some, if not most, of the problems with determining card intent comes from having multiple designers writing the cards. I understand the need to allocate resources but if one designer wrote the cards there would be a lot less confusion and far fewer of these threads.

It works in this case, and almost all other cases, but to be completely accurate, it should read 'do what the card says, don't do what the card doesn't say, unless the FAQ says different in which case do that'.

But that's a lot less pithy.

True on both accounts. I think that some, if not most, of the problems with determining card intent comes from having multiple designers writing the cards. I understand the need to allocate resources but if one designer wrote the cards there would be a lot less confusion and far fewer of these threads.

If they had proper templating and keywords, ditto. They ALMOST do, but not quite, and it's frequently frustrating.

It works in this case, and almost all other cases, but to be completely accurate, it should read 'do what the card says, don't do what the card doesn't say, unless the FAQ says different in which case do that'.

But that's a lot less pithy.

True on both accounts. I think that some, if not most, of the problems with determining card intent comes from having multiple designers writing the cards. I understand the need to allocate resources but if one designer wrote the cards there would be a lot less confusion and far fewer of these threads.

If they had proper templating and keywords, ditto. They ALMOST do, but not quite, and it's frequently frustrating.

You're right. ALMOST being the key word.

The problem is, things were quite simple and better written, but it seems lately that someone newer is writing the card texts, because we're getting inconsistencies more than ever before now.