I have nothing new to add as it's hit that circular argument phase of a long thread that has no resolution without official intervention. I just wanted to be involved in the post.

14 hours ago, keltheos said:

I have nothing new to add as it's hit that circular argument phase of a long thread that has no resolution without official intervention. I just wanted to be involved in the post.

Lol

Where is the FAQ???!!!

I'm firmly in the camp that Kari's ability doesn't require LoS because it is an effect linked to a melee attack and it doesn't specify that it needs LoS.

For those that are arguing that using a range ruler makes it a ranged effect and thus requires LoS, does Ardus need LoS to units that he is borrowing surge abilities from? If not, why not? You need to use a range ruler for that.

On 4/19/2017 at 4:52 PM, Budgernaut said:

I hate to say it, but at this point I don't want a FAQ so much as I want a revised Rules Reference.

From my experience with X-Wing, I really hope that FFG frequently updates the RRG and not just the FAQ.

The X-Wing RRG is starting to get out of sync with changes from the FAQ and doesn't include anything that has been introduced via rule cards or in the large ship pamphlets. A lot of the specifics regarding undocking are only found in the pamphlets (which aren't available online) and the combat timing chart has altered enough about the combat sequence that the RRG doesn't correctly represent it any longer. There are more examples, but those are two of my biggest complaints about the lack of updates to the X-Wing RRG.

I agree we have a few interpretation (and perhaps language parsing) disagreements that FFG needs to resolve here. I as well would argue we need at least an FAQ to clarify (and preferably a whole news article explaining how Kari's ability works with RAW). I would prefer a RRG 1.1 be released fixing this and a few other clarifications of RAW (like what 'ignored' means, and does threat affect attacks on enemies in your back arc, etc). What follows is my attempt to summarize what the majority seem to agree on from RAW, and what we need clarified to understand this rule, as intended in the original design.

What we know:

• Kari's ability is triggered after she uses a melee attack action. She does not need to actually cause damage, just roll enough surges to activate this surge ability.
• Her ability is a triggered game effect, and must must target a unit other than the target of her melee attack action
• She can spend multiple surges to increase the damage caused by the effect
• Her ability causes damage directly, rather than assigning hits, so it is not increased by threat

What we don't know:

• What is a 'ranged effect'? Is it any effect triggered by a Ranged Attack ability, an ability requires a choice of a target using the range finder, or just an ability using the range finder to determine all the targets affected?
• If the ability uses LOS, can LOS be traced from the corner out while Kari and others are engaged with her front arc (if as a unit upgrade), or can she use a 45 degree wedge to the side to target this ability?
• Can Kari target a unit she is engaged with if it is not an the target of her melee attack action with this effect?

Sorry if the list is a bit short, trying to keep it simple and brief

3 hours ago, drkpnthr said:

She can spend multiple surges to increase the damage caused by the effect

She can also activate the ability multiple times to hit different targets.

If she rolled 4 surges she could do any of the following:

- Hit 4 different units for two damage each.
- Hit one unit for 8 damage.
- Hit 2 units for 4 damage each.
- Hit one unit for 6 damage, and another unit for 2.
- Hit one unit for 4 damage, and two other units for 2 each.

11 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

She can also activate the ability multiple times to hit different targets.

If she rolled 4 surges she could do any of the following:

- Hit 4 different units for one damage each.
- Hit one unit for 4 damage.
- Hit 2 units for 2 damage each.
- Hit one unit for 3 damage, and another unit for 1.
- Hit one unit for 2 damage, and two other unit for 1 each.

Each surge deals 2 damage, so your list is more or less correct, except you need to double the damage dealt for each option.

2 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

Each surge deals 2 damage, so your list is more or less correct, except you need to double the damage dealt for each option.

I don't know what you are trying to do by misquoting me. I just checked my original post and it looks right. =)

6 hours ago, WWHSD said:

I'm firmly in the camp that Kari's ability doesn't require LoS because it is an effect linked to a melee attack and it doesn't specify that it needs LoS.

For those that are arguing that using a range ruler makes it a ranged effect and thus requires LoS, does Ardus need LoS to units that he is borrowing surge abilities from? If not, why not? You need to use a range ruler for that.

Ok all the relevant rules have been posted and in total I agree that Kari does not need line of sight however I disagree with your reasons listed.

Kari's ability targets a unit at range that makes it a ranger effect. Ardus' ability does not target a unit at range. He checks range to pull an ability to himself so the target is himself. The geomancer also does not target units it just happens to all units in range including itself.

Now my thoughts on this are mostly based on tons of gaming experience and not on rules. I could be wrong (wouldn't be he first time) but until an official ruling comes out this is how I will rule.

I have to back track on how OP I thought ther special is. In my first 3 games her ability won 2 of the games single handily. That was basic skirmishes. Since then it has hardly been a factor. Terrain, knowledge of her ability, larger armies, etc.

On 4/20/2017 at 2:12 PM, rowdyoctopus said:

when a rule says "game effects" you can substitute "abilities" there.

So when it says "ranged effects" I could substitute "ranged abilities." Cool. Glad we agree.

15 hours ago, skotothalamos said:

So when it says "ranged effects" I could substitute "ranged abilities." Cool. Glad we agree.

No. Ranged effects are a specific type of game effect. Abilities are also a specific type of game effect. "Game effect" is the broadest, most general term a game can have. You can't just change adjectives and call it a day. How is this so hard to understand?

On 4/24/2017 at 4:42 AM, rowdyoctopus said:

No. Ranged effects are a specific type of game effect. Abilities are also a specific type of game effect. "Game effect" is the broadest, most general term a game can have. You can't just change adjectives and call it a day. How is this so hard to understand?

okay, I did a search of the rulebook for "effects" and "game effects." adjectives are an integral part of what kind of effect something is. fine. I'll accept that.

We have, referenced in the rulebook:

• "effects"
• "game effects"
• "ranged effects" (mentioned once, never defined)
• "Surge effects" (83.5 "Surge (?) effects are effects that can be resolved during the “Spend Surge” step of an attack.")

So what makes anyone think that Kari's surge effect is a ranged effect? It's clearly defined as a surge effect in rule 83.5, and "ranged effect" is never defined anywhere.

1 hour ago, skotothalamos said:

okay, I did a search of the rulebook for "effects" and "game effects." adjectives are an integral part of what kind of effect something is. fine. I'll accept that.

We have, referenced in the rulebook:

• "effects"
• "game effects"
• "ranged effects" (mentioned once, never defined)
• "Surge effects" (83.5 "Surge (?) effects are effects that can be resolved during the “Spend Surge” step of an attack.")

So what makes anyone think that Kari's surge effect is a ranged effect? It's clearly defined as a surge effect in rule 83.5, and "ranged effect" is never defined anywhere.

It can be both. It is everything on that list. But ranged effects and surge effects are subcategories of game effects, so trying to interchange terms doesn't work.

Her ability is a melee ability. It is also a ranged effect. It doesn't need line of sight.

2 hours ago, rowdyoctopus said:

It can be both. It is everything on that list. But ranged effects and surge effects are subcategories of game effects, so trying to interchange terms doesn't work.

Her ability is a melee ability. It is also a ranged effect. It doesn't need line of sight.

i really just wish FFG would resolve this already lol

6 hours ago, rowdyoctopus said:

Her ability is a melee ability. It is also a ranged effect. It doesn't need line of sight.

Very possible, and indeed this is how I would rule it, but we don't have enough information to state this as fact at the moment.

The melee icon is there to signify that you can use the surge ability(which happens to be a ranged effect) during a melee attack. It does not inherently denote any further properties, and I would love to see the area in the RRG that suggests this.
It is most definitely a ranged effect. It is literally selecting a target at ranged.
The problem is the ambiguous wording on the line of sight rule which can leave the interpretation of having line of sight as an implicit requirement for ranged effects that have a target.
My entire argument was on the basis that the wording of the line of sight rule is not congruent with the rest of the game.

On 4/21/2017 at 1:32 PM, drkpnthr said:

What we know:

Her ability is a triggered game effect, and must must target a unit other than the target of her melee attack action

Do we know this? Someone in our gaming group insists that Kari's ability CAN target the unit she is engaged with, and the wording is just how FFG words things to keep people from trying to use an ability on themselves.

Personally, I disagree with this view and think the "another enemy unit" is pretty clear, but could you guys clear it up for us?

It says 'another' enemy, its clear for me any enemy but the one she is attacking.

33 minutes ago, Wispur said:

Do we know this? Someone in our gaming group insists that Kari's ability CAN target the unit she is engaged with, and the wording is just how FFG words things to keep people from trying to use an ability on themselves.

Personally, I disagree with this view and think the "another enemy unit" is pretty clear, but could you guys clear it up for us?

FFG has been pretty consistent in their other games with the current target not being a valid target for effects that target "another enemy". In X-Wing, for example, an effect that would allow you to chose any enemy ship would be written "an enemy ship" while one that must choose a different target would be worded "another enemy ship".

On 5/3/2017 at 4:41 PM, Wispur said:

T Do we know this? Someone in our gaming group insists that Kari's ability CAN target the unit she is engaged with, and the wording is just how FFG words things to keep people from trying to use an ability on themselves.

Personally, I disagree with this view and think the "another enemy unit" is pretty clear, but could you guys clear it up for us?

Yes, we know this.

Interpreting "another enemy unit" as "any enemy unit including the one currently being targeted" is borderline insane. If ppl are seriously misunderstanding that then it will be impossible to play any game with them ever.

On 4/20/2017 at 2:17 PM, keltheos said:

I have nothing new to add as it's hit that circular argument phase of a long thread that has no resolution without official intervention. I just wanted to be involved in the post.

The trenches are dug and nothing will change until the FAQ Artillery is brought to bear.

If it does ignore LOS (which is what we've been going with at our store), does it still require the target to be in the front arc?

why or why not?

15 minutes ago, Wispur said:

If it does ignore LOS (which is what we've been going with at our store), does it still require the target to be in the front arc?

why or why not?