I guess am so use to interpreting thw rules tht I do that with ever game I ever played maybe that why I having trouble with xwing is I trying to interpret rules

What is this R5? FAQ you speak of Magnus?

Must be misremebering - i swear at one point R5 took an action to trigger, which was pointless as one of the main persistant criticals was "no actions".

But it seems like Im making that up.

In my experience gaming people can read rules one of two different ways. How they are intended to be played, and how a player wants them to be played, generally making something work in their favour. As has been said, X Wing has official interpretations. A player generally doesn't have to think too hard, but there are always power nerds and rules lawyers in every game.

I guess am so use to interpreting thw rules tht I do that with ever game I ever played maybe that why I having trouble with xwing is I trying to interpret rules

So uh, we've covered that the rules here are to be followed and are pretty comprehensive. Are there specifics you are having questions on? You've posted this a few times so it seems you are having some difficulties. Any game with rules can be difficult at first. Asking questions is key to understanding.

*they're

(Yes, I know I'm a pedant, but grammar is the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse; and helping your uncle jack off a horse.)

Then you'll love, "Panda eats, shoots and leaves".

You mean this?

http://www.booktopia.com.au/eats-shoots-leaves-lynne-truss/prod9781592402038.html?source=pla&gclid=CKjM3d7W69ACFVIGvAodOLoMYg

Indeed I do!

That be the one. Amazing how a tiny comma will change the whole meaning of a sentence.

In my experience gaming people can read rules one of two different ways. How they are intended to be played, and how a player wants them to be played, generally making something work in their favour. As has been said, X Wing has official interpretations. A player generally doesn't have to think too hard, but there are always power nerds and rules lawyers in every game.

While I tend to agree with you, FFG has some odd ways of expressing things. Somewhere I read that Alex Davy said in an interview that they used conversational English. I didn't watch the interview so I'm working on hearsay. With that in mind look at the Backup Shield Generator for Huge ships. That card reads,

"At the end of each round, you may spend 1 energy to recover 1 shield (up to your shield value)."

To me that card, as written, tells me that I can regain 1 shield for 1 energy token. 3 energy tokens = 3 shields. Why do I think it works like this? Simply because of the 5 words in parentheses. I can't recover something that I haven't lost and the rest of the card says it's a 1 to 1 exchange for energy to shields. Had they omitted the 5 words in parentheses there would have been no question.

That how card works to me how what right way

That how card works to me how what right way

1 energy spent gives you 1 shield back. That's it. You can't spend 2 energy to recover 2 shields.

Guess I been playing that wrong even with out last part in parentheses I still would think it worked one energy one shield

Guess I been playing that wrong even with out last part in parentheses I still would think it worked one energy one shield

So did I. But after a long and at times, heated argument, I shot off an rfi to FFG. The response was one energy, one shield. Period. My argument to the contrary held no sway.

There are a couple of cards that have caused some confusion especially with the "do what the card says" mantra that's used a lot. Fortunately those cards are very few and FFG really has done a pretty decent job of keeping things straight.

The reason it probably wouldn't is that the standard rule is "you can only use a rule once at each opportunity".

If you have a card which says "when attacking, you may reroll one attack die", you're not going to reroll your entire pool of dice "one at a time".

Since the end of the round only comes once per turn, the opportunity to use the rule only comes along once per turn.

At the same time, I agree that the parenthesis shouldn't be there. 'Recover' only allows up to your starting shield value anyway; so either the parenthesis shouldn't be there, or you should be allowed to spend "one or more energy tokens" (if that's what was intended).

The reason it probably wouldn't is that the standard rule is "you can only use a rule once at each opportunity".

If you have a card which says "when attacking, you may reroll one attack die", you're not going to reroll your entire pool of dice "one at a time".

Since the end of the round only comes once per turn, the opportunity to use the rule only comes along once per turn.

At the same time, I agree that the parenthesis shouldn't be there. 'Recover' only allows up to your starting shield value anyway; so either the parenthesis shouldn't be there, or you should be allowed to spend "one or more energy tokens" (if that's what was intended).

Regen is one of the things that they REALLY should include in the core rules, so that they don't need to specify on EVERY regen card that you can't go over your starting shield value. If they then intend to make a card that DOES let you, they can specify that.

The reason it probably wouldn't is that the standard rule is "you can only use a rule once at each opportunity".

If you have a card which says "when attacking, you may reroll one attack die", you're not going to reroll your entire pool of dice "one at a time".

Since the end of the round only comes once per turn, the opportunity to use the rule only comes along once per turn.

At the same time, I agree that the parenthesis shouldn't be there. 'Recover' only allows up to your starting shield value anyway; so either the parenthesis shouldn't be there, or you should be allowed to spend "one or more energy tokens" (if that's what was intended).

Regen is one of the things that they REALLY should include in the core rules, so that they don't need to specify on EVERY regen card that you can't go over your starting shield value. If they then intend to make a card that DOES let you, they can specify that.

A ship cannot have more shield tokens than its shield value. If a ship has a number of shield tokens equal to its shield value, it cannot recover shields.

Is in the current Rules Reference. I'm not sure if that was added in at the 'update' with the Force Awakens core set, but it is in the current basic rules.

Humm.

I wonder why they bother to include it on stuff published since then (GONK)? I guess because not everyone has the new rulebook in their core set.

I just going to keep playing that card why I understand it as one energy for one shield

OK another rule I been rule I been doing is you can't do same action twice in a row but my interpretation of it dont mean I can't do say focus barrel roll then focuss again

OK another rule I been rule I been doing is you can't do same action twice in a row but my interpretation of it dont mean I can't do say focus barrel roll then focuss again

THat's not interpreting, that's just not reading right.

The rule is that you (and bear in mind, 'you' always refers to the ship, not the player) can't perform the same action more than once *in a given turn*. Also, it would be very rare for a single ship to be able to take three actions in a round anyway.

You'll understand the rules better and be more able to get them right if you actually read them properly.

Indeed. The actual wording is:

A ship cannot perform the same action more than once during a single round, even if one or more of the actions are free actions.

However:

Once again, note the wording.
"perform the same action"

OK another rule I been rule I been doing is you can't do same action twice in a row but my interpretation of it dont mean I can't do say focus barrel roll then focuss again

I'm going to assume you're talking about Soontir Fel here - you mentioned that you use him.
Soontir is still bound by the same rules - he cannot perform the same action (in this case focus) twice, even if he has free actions for some reason.

But:

If you use Push The Limit to focus, then barrel roll, you receive a stress token and then Soontir's ability gives you a free focus token. The wording on this one is:

When you receive a stress token, you may assign 1 focus token to your ship.

So it's not an "action" - so Soontir using Push The Limit to end up with two focus tokens and a stress token (plus an evade, boost or barrel roll) is perfectly legal. You can be assigned as many focus tokens as you want in a turn, provided only one of them is generated by a focus action by that ship .

The rules are generally well written. The key is to do what the rules TELL you to do, nothing more, nothing less. Anything that isn't clear is usually part of an FAQ. In fact, the only time i've ever had to check rules during a game is using Sensor Jammer. Anyways the attack timing chart cleared that up.

FAQ ? And attack timeing chart?

FAQ ? And attack timeing chart?

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/products/x-wing/

Scroll to the bottom of the page and under the 'Support' heading there is a link to the latest FAQ document. You might find it settles some of the questions you have. If it raises more questions feel free to post them in the rules questions sub-forum.

The reason I thought Backup Shield Generator worked for recovering more than one shield, besides the wording, was how the Recover Action is worded. The Recover Action allows you to spend ALL your energy to recover shield value. Have 4 energy but only lost 3 shields? Tough, you use all the energy to recover those 3 shields. Have 4 energy but lost 6 shields? You only get 4 shields back. I thought it was a simple "reward" for lasting to the end of the round with some energy.

The reason I thought Backup Shield Generator worked for recovering more than one shield, besides the wording, was how the Recover Action is worded. The Recover Action allows you to spend ALL your energy to recover shield value. Have 4 energy but only lost 3 shields? Tough, you use all the energy to recover those 3 shields. Have 4 energy but lost 6 shields? You only get 4 shields back. I thought it was a simple "reward" for lasting to the end of the round with some energy.

The trigger is the end of each round. The triggered effect is "you may spend 1 energy to recover 1 shield (up to your shield value)." You only get the choice to spend 1 energy to recover 1 shield once. I'm not a native speaker and read more "game rules English" (and "computer science English", which is about as exact) than "regular English", so I guess this one is easier to understand for me than it is for you

I just going to keep playing that card why I understand it as one energy for one shield

That's a house rule though.

• House rules are absolutely fine if everybody who plays the game is aware that it's a house rule and agrees with it
• If anybody doesn't know it's a house rule, the game isn't really played fairly
• If anybody doesn't agree, the house rule shouldn't be used
• If it's a tournament or another kind of FFG sanctioned event, house rules are out

It's primarily because of the last point that personally, I don't play with house rules. I want to be able to compete at tournaments, so why should I gimp my playing by intentionally playing by different rules from everybody else? I play bad enough as it is

The reason I thought Backup Shield Generator worked for recovering more than one shield, besides the wording, was how the Recover Action is worded. The Recover Action allows you to spend ALL your energy to recover shield value. Have 4 energy but only lost 3 shields? Tough, you use all the energy to recover those 3 shields. Have 4 energy but lost 6 shields? You only get 4 shields back. I thought it was a simple "reward" for lasting to the end of the round with some energy.

The trigger is the end of each round. The triggered effect is "you may spend 1 energy to recover 1 shield (up to your shield value)." You only get the choice to spend 1 energy to recover 1 shield once. I'm not a native speaker and read more "game rules English" (and "computer science English", which is about as exact) than "regular English", so I guess this one is easier to understand for me than it is for you

I just going to keep playing that card why I understand it as one energy for one shield

That's a house rule though.

• House rules are absolutely fine if everybody who plays the game is aware that it's a house rule and agrees with it
• If anybody doesn't know it's a house rule, the game isn't really played fairly
• If anybody doesn't agree, the house rule shouldn't be used
• If it's a tournament or another kind of FFG sanctioned event, house rules are out

It's primarily because of the last point that personally, I don't play with house rules. I want to be able to compete at tournaments, so why should I gimp my playing by intentionally playing by different rules from everybody else? I play bad enough as it is

The problem I had (have) with the wording on the card is that it implies you can spend more than one energy to recover more than one shield. This being different than the Recover Action on the ship's action bar. Had they omitted the wording in parentheses there would not be any question. You can't recover something that hasn't been lost or you never had to begin with so you can't end up with more shields than you started the game with. This, taken with the comment by Alex Davy that they use conversational English, is what is caused me to question the card.

"At the end of each round, you may spend 1 energy to recover 1 shield (up to your shield value)."

To be honest, if it was intended to work differently I would have expected the following wording (based on similar FFG wordings elsewere):

"At the end of each round, you may spend any number of enery. For each energy spent this way recover 1 shield (up to your shield value)".

And though they sometimes slip up and though interaction between different unique abilities often need to be FAQ'd, I would not have expected them to use an inferior (as in less clear) wording for an effect where another more clear format of wording such an ability already exists (if it indeed was meant to allow recovering several shields). Since that is not the case, it is reasonable to expect that not to be the case.