25 minutes ago, brettpkelly said:

Brutality, "perform two attacks, each attack must have a different target". Do you have to declare your targets before you do the attacks? Because you obviously can do that just like you can do two rerolls at the same time. If you must simply because you can consider the following scenarios:

• Rancor declares "Brutality" triggering the ability. The rancor declares both of his targets (because you can do that at the same time). The rancor does his first attack and cleaves to kill his second target. The Rancor can now no longer perform his second attack against a third target because that would be triggering the brutality ability again (by your definition).
• Vinto declares "Rapid Fire" and says he wants to attack the same figure twice (because you can declare attacks simultaneously). Vinto kills his target in the first attack and therefore cannot use his second attack.

OK, so that seems wrong. Obviously, you'd want to see the results of your first attack before you determine even the target of the second attack. Lets say that you don't have to declare your targets at the same time, but you DO have to declare that you are doing two attacks for brutality and rapid fire. That means you can't do one attack and then decide not to use your second attack. Consider the following scenarios:

• There are 2 hostile figures and 1 door that are valid targets of an attack. The rancor declares "brutality" and therefore must complete 2 attack actions if possible. The rancor kills the 2 hostile figures in his first attack with "cleave". The rancor now must attack the door, even if he doesn't want to.
• There is 1 hostile figure and a door that are valid targets of an attack. Vinto uses "rapid fire" which states "perform 2 attacks". Vinto kills the hostile figure in his first attack. Vinto now must target the door, even if he doesn't want to.

This also seems wrong to me. Just because you CAN declare 2 attacks at the same time and just because the abilities say "perform 2 attacks", doesn't mean you MUST declare them both at the same time, nor do you have to complete the second one (or reroll the second die in our comparable dice roll). Just because you can reroll them both at the same time doesn't mean you must. Also, it wouldn't be "impossible" to do two attacks at the same time, just unwieldy. Simultaneous attacks happen all the time in "Descent" which IA is based on.

Those special actions (Brutality ex) does not state you declare the targets of your attacks- but to perform 2 attacks on different figures. Declaring who the attacks when you trigger the ability is not relevant and does not support your argument.

Elite sniping straight up says may reroll up to 2 dice.

" Just because you can reroll them both at the same time doesn't mean you must."

That is a discrete trigger that is resolved immediately. Imagine if you spoke all steps to resolve the trigger- " I am using elite sniping to reroll 1 dice". How would you say it? "I am going to use elite sniping to see what the results of the first reroll is but I may decide to reroll the second die..."?

So if Vinto finishes off his first target, he's just so overjoyed he can't help but shooting at the door next to him? That doesn't seem like the intent of the ability, but I'll accept it. So the rule is now just "If you can do two things simultaneously you must do them simultaneously" which isn't written anywhere, but you all seem convinced so I guess I'll go along with it until there is an official ruling. I still think if that was the rule then your attacks would occur simultaneously, as clunky as that would be.

10 minutes ago, Amraam01 said:

Those special actions (Brutality ex) does not state you declare the targets of your attacks- but to perform 2 attacks on different figures. Declaring who the attacks when you trigger the ability is not relevant and does not support your argument.

Elite sniping straight up says may reroll up to 2 dice.

" Just because you can reroll them both at the same time doesn't mean you must."

That is a discrete trigger that is resolved immediately. Imagine if you spoke all steps to resolve the trigger- " I am using elite sniping to reroll 1 dice". How would you say it? "I am going to use elite sniping to see what the results of the first reroll is but I may decide to reroll the second die..."?

I'd say "I'm triggering elite sniper to reroll up to two dice" and then I'd continue rerolling until up to two dice were rerolled.

3 minutes ago, brettpkelly said:

I'd say "I'm triggering elite sniper to reroll up to two dice" and then I'd continue rerolling until up to two dice were rerolled.

I am sorry your examples are not making much sense to me and I have a hard time following what you mean and how your examples are relevant. Adding in words like declare to abilities like brutality, when they are not there is just going to lead you to incorrect conclusions. Remember talk it out as you play- "I am using elite snipping to reroll this 1 dice" is a clear statement your opponent will understand and the events that follow. In your world you may maybe be totally silent and just pick up dice and reroll 1 or 2 dice then say I used elite sniping to reroll these 2 dice. In general we "trigger" our following actions, in this case rolling dice, not the opposite way roll dice then say I used elite snipping to reroll these 2 dice.

My argument in its simplest form is "You may reroll up to two attack die" and "you may perform up to two attacks" are worded the same and should be interpreted the same way, but the consensus is that you'd interpret them differently.

6 minutes ago, brettpkelly said:

My argument in its simplest form is "You may reroll up to two attack die" and "you may perform up to two attacks" are worded the same and should be interpreted the same way, but the consensus is that you'd interpret them differently.

We interpret them differently because they are literally different things in the context of this ruleset. One occurs within Step 3 of an Attack, the other ability grants you two completely separate Attacks.

In the example of Elite Sniper, when you say "I will re-roll this one die," you have now used that ability and decided to only re-roll one die (out of 0, 1, or 2). By deciding, after your timing instance, to trigger Elite Sniper again, you are now using the ability more than once and no where in the rules is that permitted within the same attack. The logic "it doesn't say I can't do that" doesn't apply when no where in the rules does it say you can use an ability multiple times.

4 minutes ago, brettpkelly said:

My argument in its simplest form is "You may reroll up to two attack die" and "you may perform up to two attacks" are worded the same and should be interpreted the same way, but the consensus is that you'd interpret them differently.

Performing 2 separate attacks and re rolling 2 die are not a good comparison.

So, if rerolling 1 or 2 die is not trivial- and there is a significant information advantage when you roll 1 at a time vs 2 die and reacting to the results does have explicit strategic advantages - in addition to prolonging a step. I think we all agree that re-rolling separately is the better strategic option as you can tailor your reactions accordingly. The more conservative answer is you need explicit permission to split the results due to the additional information available.

I'm trying to think of a better comparable example and this is the best I could come up with. In Fenn's campaign mission "Brushfire" heroes can place explosives that do damage to an AT-ST. Lets say that the explosives give you victory points if you keep them instead of placing them so you have a strategic advantage for placing 1 at a time. If the rules stated "you may place up to two explosives" as one ability I think I'd agree with you guys that you'd have to choose how many before you placed them and then place them simultaneously. So I think you guys finally convinced me, I guess I was biased towards the eRangers. I think this should wrap up this conversation sorry for the stubbornness.

10 minutes ago, brettpkelly said:

I'm trying to think of a better comparable example and this is the best I could come up with. In Fenn's campaign mission "Brushfire" heroes can place explosives that do damage to an AT-ST. Lets say that the explosives give you victory points if you keep them instead of placing them so you have a strategic advantage for placing 1 at a time. If the rules stated "you may place up to two explosives" as one ability I think I'd agree with you guys that you'd have to choose how many before you placed them and then place them simultaneously. So I think you guys finally convinced me, I guess I was biased towards the eRangers. I think this should wrap up this conversation sorry for the stubbornness.

This game is easy to pick up but super hard to master the intricacies of the rules for sure- I am by no means an expert at all and I am unsure about a lot of situations- I even played a campaign misreading pierce as attack dice damage that cant be cancelled rather then cancelling the defense blocks.

On 1/26/2017 at 3:13 AM, a1bert said:

It has been debated. My take is that because it is one ability, you need to decide how many dice to roll and then roll them. (Otherwise the ability would probably say "may reroll 1 die. This ability may be used upto twice per attack.".)

There is a chance that the use of the term 'upto' may imply something we have not come across in other abilities, but the above argument should crush that chance pretty well.

Up to is shorthand for "choosing how many" at that one timing instance. It has been used in different ways on some other things. Force surge is an example (granted not exactly the same context) saying the force user can move up to 1 space. Then it does the damage. This gives the player the option to stay put before doing the damage. Though they could have achieved the same effect with it being worded as "you may move 1 space" since it's either 0 or 1 and not some value in between like the dice on the rangers.

6 hours ago, brettpkelly said:

My argument in its simplest form is "You may reroll up to two attack die" and "you may perform up to two attacks" are worded the same and should be interpreted the same way, but the consensus is that you'd interpret them differently.

It seems a bit strange but yes, since each attack has a whole process to walk through. While the wording is similar (and could probably be better) it is being used as "choose a value" in the case of the reroll or other similar effects (such as choose how many spaces for Onar etc.) , and as "perform this many attack actions that don't cost you any additional actions" for vinto and brutality etc.

7 hours ago, Amraam01 said:

Those special actions (Brutality ex) does not state you declare the targets of your attacks- but to perform 2 attacks on different figures. Declaring who the attacks when you trigger the ability is not relevant and does not support your argument.

Elite sniping straight up says may reroll up to 2 dice.

" Just because you can reroll them both at the same time doesn't mean you must."

That is a discrete trigger that is resolved immediately. Imagine if you spoke all steps to resolve the trigger- " I am using elite sniping to reroll 1 dice". How would you say it? "I am going to use elite sniping to see what the results of the first reroll is but I may decide to reroll the second die..."?

With vinto and brutality, you actually DON'T declare the two targets simultaneously. There is no structure to even have that option the way the rules are written. You declare one and go through the whole process as you normally would with any attack, then just do it all over again (and in the case of brutality, the previous target is not a legal choice for this attack). The second group of situations there may seem wrong (having to attack a door that may not be tactically sound), but it is the way things are written the way those abilites are.

All that being said though, I will agree that it is all a bit sloppy and could use a touch up. I could even see it being ruled the other way. But issues like these pale in comparison to the jabba/gaining favor ruling that is something that will happen many times at any big tournament and FFG still hasn't responded to that.

30 minutes ago, bobbywhiskey said:

With vinto and brutality, you actually DON'T declare the two targets simultaneously. There is no structure to even have that option the way the rules are written. You declare one and go through the whole process as you normally would with any attack, then just do it all over again (and in the case of brutality, the previous target is not a legal choice for this attack). The second group of situations there may seem wrong (having to attack a door that may not be tactically sound), but it is the way things are written the way those abilites are.

All that being said though, I will agree that it is all a bit sloppy and could use a touch up. I could even see it being ruled the other way. But issues like these pale in comparison to the jabba/gaining favor ruling that is something that will happen many times at any big tournament and FFG still hasn't responded to that.

So for Onar "Move up to 4 spaces then you may push an adjacent figure 1 space" You have to declare "I am moving 2 spaces" before you resolve the move. And if the figure you wanted to push plays slippery target when you enter his adjacent space then you're out of luck and you can't move 2 more and push a different figure

6 minutes ago, brettpkelly said:

So for Onar "Move up to 4 spaces then you may push an adjacent figure 1 space" You have to declare "I am moving 2 spaces" before you resolve the move. And if the figure you wanted to push plays slippery target when you enter his adjacent space then you're out of luck and you can't move 2 more and push a different figure

Yeah, good point. We both know that's not right. It's a messy issue to be sure. Maybe the rangers can reroll one at a time, but it still seems a little strange since there just hasn't really been anything like that before from one card (but that doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong).

It's also worth noting that occasionally when they make a ruling, it seems arbitrary within the context of their own rules. For example, the ruling for jundland terror + opportunistic (essentially) that a massive figure can end its movement on other figures only once during the end of round. Before that, there was only the similar rule during the massive figure's activation of course. And this also doesn't address doing it during start of round with close the gap + opportunistic, or during another figure's activation with any number of effects.

Finally someone somewhat agrees with something I said lol

4 minutes ago, brettpkelly said:

Finally someone somewhat agrees with something I said lol

I think it shows just how tricky some of these things can be that two sides of an argument seemed to have psuedo-convinced each other. The bottom line is the FAQ hasn't changed in 6 months, and two whole waves of product have come out, along with map rotations, scoring change, etc. It could use some attention. There are still occasional debates over random things related to greedo. They also need to probably add a section for card specific rulings similar to the xwing faq to help with the layout of it.

Quote

Hi James,

Elite Sniper is a single ability, and both rerolls need to be taken at the same time. (The other ability would likely be written “reroll up to 1 die, then reroll up to 1 die.”)

Hope that helps!

Todd Michlitsch

Game Developer

Fantasy Flight Games

[email protected]

Well that settles that!

So what about the Onar thing then....

On ‎1‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 9:18 AM, brettpkelly said:

Well that settles that!

So what about the Onar thing then....

I think that Onar vs Slippery Target is pretty clear.

You declare you are using Onar's ability.

You move one space at a time, giving your opponent opportunity to play Slippery Target (or other relevant cards) for each space you enter when relevant.

If you enter a space and your opponent does play slippery target you can still continue moving spaces until the maximum of 4 has been reached (or you are adjacent to a target and want to use the push).

If you're unlucky enough to no longer have a small figure within range to push, then the use of Slippery Target has done it's job.