Does Instigator prevent you from shooting at that smarmy son of a ***** Valen? I think it might, but I'm not sure...

Imagine that, another horribly convoluted interaction involving Instigator.

Well, we can use the Original one as a Template for Precedence, right?


"If you cannot shoot at any squadrons" (because they either don't exist, or have a rule that says you can't shoot at them......)

... Bomb the crap out of Instigator...

( I wilfully admit, the precedent set by the other Instigator questions made me consider this a non-issue from the start...)

Right, you can obviously still shoot Instigator if you can't shoot Valen . That's not the question.

The question is, does Instigator protect Valen ?

I think you would have to shoot Valen because Instigator's affect is as if engaged, no actual engagement

Otherwise you can't shoot Valen or Instigator because attacking squadron would be engaged with Valen so unable to shoot Instigator and 2 virtual squadrons would prevent you shooting Valen

Best thing, target Instigator with every gun and tell to stop its shenanigans

I think you would have to shoot Valen because Instigator's affect is as if engaged, no actual engagement

Otherwise you can't shoot Valen or Instigator because attacking squadron would be engaged with Valen so unable to shoot Instigator and 2 virtual squadrons would prevent you shooting Valen

Best thing, target Instigator with every gun and tell to stop its shenanigans

We're left with two possibilities. Either you try to attack Valen, Instigator's notional engagement prevents it, and you're thus freed to attack Instigator per RRG 6 "Engagement" because it is not possible to attack the engaged squadron (Valen); OR you try to attack Valen, Instigator's notional squadrons do not prevent the attack, and you are not able to attack Instigator because it IS possible to attack the engaged squadron, (Valen).

One way or the other, you are restrained from attacking either Valen or Instigator, and it hinges on whether the Instigator's "treated as if" applies to Valen's ability or not. I think it does, but because we have precedence for instances in which it does not apply, the interaction is unclear.

Oh, THAT part .

I'm a Rebel Player.

I simply assumed the worst , in that it would protect him.

Done.

i would tend to say you can shoot Valen Rudor.. the main purpose of the Instigator is the phantom 2 squads are used to lock you down from moving you can still shoot at the Instigator. SO, i would say since they are phantom squads , card says "as if they were engaged...." then the only real squadron you are engaged with is Valen Rudor... so you would have to shoot Valen not Instigator.

I think you would have to shoot Valen because Instigator's affect is as if engaged, no actual engagement

Otherwise you can't shoot Valen or Instigator because attacking squadron would be engaged with Valen so unable to shoot Instigator and 2 virtual squadrons would prevent you shooting Valen

Best thing, target Instigator with every gun and tell to stop its shenanigans

We know that Instigator's effect doesn't prevent you from attacking ships, so that piece is right out.

We're left with two possibilities. Either you try to attack Valen, Instigator's notional engagement prevents it, and you're thus freed to attack Instigator per RRG 6 "Engagement" because it is not possible to attack the engaged squadron (Valen); OR you try to attack Valen, Instigator's notional squadrons do not prevent the attack, and you are not able to attack Instigator because it IS possible to attack the engaged squadron, (Valen).

One way or the other, you are restrained from attacking either Valen or Instigator, and it hinges on whether the Instigator's "treated as if" applies to Valen's ability or not. I think it does, but because we have precedence for instances in which it does not apply, the interaction is unclear.

I hate Instigator already yet I've never played against it. If I see this combo, I'll keep my squadrons away and shoot with my big guns till it dies, then shoot some more to make sure and tell it "You've been a very naughty boy".

I think you would have to shoot Valen because Instigator's affect is as if engaged, no actual engagement

Otherwise you can't shoot Valen or Instigator because attacking squadron would be engaged with Valen so unable to shoot Instigator and 2 virtual squadrons would prevent you shooting Valen

Best thing, target Instigator with every gun and tell to stop its shenanigans

We know that Instigator's effect doesn't prevent you from attacking ships, so that piece is right out.

We're left with two possibilities. Either you try to attack Valen, Instigator's notional engagement prevents it, and you're thus freed to attack Instigator per RRG 6 "Engagement" because it is not possible to attack the engaged squadron (Valen); OR you try to attack Valen, Instigator's notional squadrons do not prevent the attack, and you are not able to attack Instigator because it IS possible to attack the engaged squadron, (Valen).

One way or the other, you are restrained from attacking either Valen or Instigator, and it hinges on whether the Instigator's "treated as if" applies to Valen's ability or not. I think it does, but because we have precedence for instances in which it does not apply, the interaction is unclear.

It creates a Circle of Protection:Squadrons and you can never shoot either with your squads till you blow either one up.

If you don't know old school MTG you won't get the reference...at least I think it's funny.

What does Valen say?

If engaged with another squid CANNOT be attacked.

Instigator says treated as being engaged by two squids.

That's subtly different from the Instigator bombing loop.

This makes for a very interesting conundrum.

Maybe the Instigator squids were intended to only block movement, but that's not how is written.

Golden rule and everything.

This makes for a very interesting conundrum.

Maybe the Instigator squids were intended to only block movement, but that's not how is written.

Golden rule and everything.

Yep. I kicked it open in such a way as to not leave a game state hanging.

IF you assume that the protection "works" (ie, the Engagement Counts), then Rudor is Untouchable. As are the Squads. If you don't apply the previous instigator bomber loop ruling mentality, then you can Declare an attack - And then stop . As nothing is attackable.

"You are engaged with Valen Rudor? Are you engaged with anyone else?"

"I am counted as being Engaged by 2 more squadrons...."

Once upon a time, someone tried to convince me that Counted as 'X' did not mean 'is X'...

That (in their example) Counted as being Obstructed was not the same as being Obstructed...

Intel doesn't work on the phantom squadrons.

Without linking anything and this being the internet i will now forward my assertion that because this card ability doesn't work with Instigator then Valens card ability does not either.

But if Valen can't be attacked, nor any other nearby squids, then Instigator becomes a valid target, no?

But if Valen can't be attacked, nor any other nearby squids, then Instigator becomes a valid target, no?

Normally I think we'd all assume this but the Instigator FAQ wording reads that "A squadron can attack Instigator if they are not engaged by an actual enemy squadron without Heavy in the play area".

In this case, those squadron(s) are engaged by Valen. So you can interpret it as Instigator protects Valens, and Valens protects Instigator in turn.

It just poorly worded and needs to be FAQ to let either the squadron attack Instigator or state that Instigator doesn't protect Valens.

This looks pretty simple to me:

- Valen wording states "while an enemy squadron is engaged with another squadron"

- Instigator wording states "enemy squadrons [...] are treated as if they are engaged"

Being "treated as if" clearly translates in "is", so Valen should be protected from the instigator bubble.

What I think is more controversial is, what happens in a no intel scenario? Enemy bombers are engaged with Valen, but can't shoot him: does this mean that you can't shoot instigator nor Valen (= no shooting), or does the old FAQ in this regard answer this question?

Indeed.

Now look at the second bullet point of Engagement.

Which is the reasoning behind the pervious Instigator clarification.

Indeed.

Now look at the second bullet point of Engagement.

Which is the reasoning behind the pervious Instigator clarification.

Sorry, I'm not following. Care to explain?

Must attack a squadron IF POSSIBLE.

But it's not. So it follows Instigator is a legal target, no?

Must attack a squadron IF POSSIBLE.

But it's not. So it follows Instigator is a legal target, no?

Oh I see. Yeah, makes sense.

Must attack a squadron IF POSSIBLE.

But it's not. So it follows Instigator is a legal target, no?

This is my understanding as well.

In any case, by the time an email/FAQ comes out, one of the two will be a valid target. I can't imagine they would allow a loop that disallows squadron attacks altogether in this manner.

My prediction is that Rudor gets the protection.

all in all FFG didn't mean to break the game where you cannot attack valen OR instigator, that is just plain stupid. so it has to be FAQ'ed until then i going to play it as i can attack Valen if it is the only squad around and engaged with me and we are both right next to instigator for instigator's ability. i think instigator's ability trumps valen's in this instance.

all in all FFG didn't mean to break the game where you cannot attack valen OR instigator, that is just plain stupid. so it has to be FAQ'ed until then i going to play it as i can attack Valen if it is the only squad around and engaged with me and we are both right next to instigator for instigator's ability. i think instigator's ability trumps valen's in this instance.

So, you'd rather create a whole new rule, rather than use a rule that already exists, and just happen to apply to a very similar situation ?

jusy saying this one is tricky, i going to see a lot of dice roll off's to end arguments at my local game shop.

jusy saying this one is tricky, i going to see a lot of dice roll off's to end arguments at my local game shop.

Well, that's silly.

Even if you aren't going to believe Forum Arguments (Which is totally your prerogative)...

You should do it once , then write down the answer, and stick it on the Wall so everyone knows from that point on.