2 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

What if the FAQ has the Jamming Field errata when the box is closed but disappears when the box is open?

Schrodinger's FAQ........

3 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

What if the FAQ has the Jamming Field errata when the box is closed but disappears when the box is open?

What if the box is just a metaphor for Armada and it is both dead and alive at the same time?

Just now, jamie nasmyth said:

Schrodinger's FAQ........

It's just like Jamming Field. It's off when it's my turn, but on when it's your turn...

Jamming fields is both on and off at any particular moment, with the TO having to take the FAQ out the box before the players can observe the effect of the card on the game and determine if the Tie figher is infact dead or alive.

All TOs will in future need to be experts in the new discipline of quantum games theory.

On 6/25/2017 at 9:41 AM, Drasnighta said:

From the FAQ:


SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN THIS VERSION

• Errata, Page 2–3 • Card Clarifications, Pages 10, 12, 14 TM TM

All changes and additions made to this document since the previous version are marked in red.

ALL CHANGES

No Change is Marked in Red for Jamming Field. It is not a Change to the Document since the Previous Version. Ergo, the Previous Version Stands.

A big chunk of the discussion here hasn't been on the removal from the FAQ. Its been on rehashing the Argument itself. So the "3 pages" doesn't really account - it is less than that.

I would now ask though, that if you continue to disagree with my assertion above - I believe I have found the "definite proof" you requested, so I will request the same as the onus is on you to dispute: Show me definite proof that a removal would not be classed as a change .

Fine, I'll play this stupid game of semantics.

There is NO reference to Jamming Fields in the CURRENT Fantasy Flight Games Star Wars Armada Tournament FAQ, dated 6/26/2017.

The Fundamental Event Document for Armada includes the following:

Game Rules

5 minutes ago, emsgoof said:

Fine, I'll play this stupid game of semantics.

There is NO reference to Jamming Fields in the CURRENT Fantasy Flight Games Star Wars Armada Tournament FAQ, dated 6/26/2017.

The Fundamental Event Document for Armada includes the following:

Game Rules

The game rules for a particular game include all FFG materials that assist in gameplay. The game rules include all of the following, if they exist or are applicable for the game:

• The rules from the game
• A published rules reference
• Rules published in expansions • A variant rules document
• The game’s FAQ document

Nowhere in this list does it say "Bring along outdated rules or documents". Since the CURRENT FAQ contains no reference to Jamming Field, there can be no reference to any change inside the document. Since the card is not subject to an official FFG FAQ ruling, the instructions on the card are the current valid rule for that card.

And yet they add old rulings to every new FAQ, they only and I mean only change them in RED so we know it has been changed. AKA Advanced Projectors, vrs X-17 Turbolasers.

Jamming field was errated/FAQ, we saw that because it was in RED text, this latest FAQ/Errata has no posted documented changes to Jamming field in RED text, ergo it is an error.

Not even sure what you mean by game of semantics, Dras is 100% correct to state what he did state, no semantics are being danced around.

I'm a brand new player, and just started playing today. Please show me where this mysterious ruling on Jamming Fields is, using the current official published documents.

Just now, emsgoof said:

I'm a brand new player, and just started playing today. Please show me where this mysterious ruling on Jamming Fields is, using the current official published documents.

You raised the, and I quote, "Stupid game of Semantics" - I can play it, too, if you're not going to be reasonable

My answer to this Hypothetical:

"I'm not your Marshal. If you're going to a tournament, ask your Marshal what his decision is on the subject is, as it is his responsibility and his decision is final ."

There. Answered.

Just now, emsgoof said:

I'm a brand new player, and just started playing today. Please show me where this mysterious ruling on Jamming Fields is, using the current official published documents.

It is true... if you are new and the only thing you have to go in is the rules and the new FAQ you would not know the old FAQ.

Until... you show up at an official gathering where they show it to you and explain it is an ERROR.

Just relax, it will be corrected... pretty soon most likely.

3 minutes ago, emsgoof said:

I'm a brand new player, and just started playing today. Please show me where this mysterious ruling on Jamming Fields is, using the current official published documents.

FFG caused this mess, it is not up to us to resolve it for "new" players.

FFG state categorically any and all changes to rules and cards are in RED text. Meaning each iteration of the FAQ/Errata has new additions added to the old additions, again new additions are in RED text, just incase you missed it.

So if they accidentally forget something, that does not mean it has been reverted. REVERSION means RED text.

I would be under no obligation to accept a "word of mouth" decision outside the official FAQ, and am entirely within my right to insist the TO and all players follow the current published document.

Just now, TheEasternKing said:

FFG caused this mess, it is not up to us to resolve it for "new" players.

FFG state categorically any and all changes to rules and cards are in RED text. Meaning each iteration of the FAQ/Errata has new additions added to the old additions, again new additions are in RED text, just incase you missed it.

So if they accidentally forget something, that does not mean it has been reverted. REVERSION means RED text.

No, it certainly doesn't. It's what YOU THINK it means, but nowhere has FFG ever said that.

Just now, emsgoof said:

I would be under no obligation to accept a "word of mouth" decision outside the official FAQ, and am entirely within my right to insist the TO and all players follow the current published document.

Good luck....

7 minutes ago, emsgoof said:

No, it certainly doesn't. It's what YOU THINK it means, but nowhere has FFG ever said that.

You need to learn to read.

On the very first page of the FAQ it states :

All changes and additions made to this document since the previous version are marked in red.

1 minute ago, emsgoof said:

No, it certainly doesn't. It's what YOU THINK it means, but nowhere has FFG ever said that.

Quote

All changes and additions made to this document since the previous version are marked in red.

Say so right in the FAQ... if the change is not mentioned it has to be a mistake which it is (no matter the ruling of the card really is)... so just relax and wait until it is fixed.

If you play with friends then you can pick and choose or change any rules you want.

14 minutes ago, emsgoof said:

I would be under no obligation to accept a "word of mouth" decision outside the official FAQ, and am entirely within my right to insist the TO and all players follow the current published document.

TOs routinely ignore actual rules sometimes so why are you expecting them to be favourable to you.

8 hours ago, emsgoof said:

I would be under no obligation to accept a "word of mouth" decision outside the official FAQ, and am entirely within my right to insist the TO and all players follow the current published document.

Actually the TOs ruling/interpretation is final, you would expect from your TO,: a reasoned decision, consistency and (from a good one) advanced information on some sticky cards. But as a player you are not expected to put undue pressure ( saying what you think and why is fine) on a TO or sway his judgement to your favour, that's bad sportsmanship and pushing it to far will get you a warning and potentially removal if you get to "insistent"

my advice if you know there is a question around a card and the TO has not already pre advised players around an issue ask for a pre game judgement, then you know what to expect.

11 hours ago, TheEasternKing said:

And yet they add old rulings to every new FAQ, they only and I mean only change them in RED so we know it has been changed. AKA Advanced Projectors, vrs X-17 Turbolasers.

Jamming field was errated/FAQ, we saw that because it was in RED text, this latest FAQ/Errata has no posted documented changes to Jamming field in RED text, ergo it is an error.

Not even sure what you mean by game of semantics, Dras is 100% correct to state what he did state, no semantics are being danced around.

Or they removed that ruling and forgot to put in changes section for it (I do so enjoy playing devil's advocate when people conclude without sufficient data to actually conclude).

39 minutes ago, Darthain said:

Or they removed that ruling and forgot to put in changes section for it (I do so enjoy playing devil's advocate when people conclude without sufficient data to actually conclude).

Yep we actually don't know, so it will be for individual TOs to decide, some will decide to follow the old FAQ others will follow the new, there are valid reasons for both ( both are right )so ask the TO before you finish your list or play a game with this up grade in it, open the box early so you know of the cat is alive or dead before it matters to you.

As an aside, although I agree it was probably a mistake, as a TO I will follow the new FAQ, mainly because there is a clear rule around following the latest FAQ, but no rule around what to do if something disappeared between one FAQ and the next, without reference to a change, also remember the highlighting of changes is not a rule, it's a publishing style............

16 hours ago, jamie nasmyth said:

Schrodinger's FAQ........

And what if Jamming Field is only optional when you look at it? But when you look away or blink, it is a must effect?

i really have to stop to mess up the series....

13 hours ago, emsgoof said:

I would be under no obligation to accept a "word of mouth" decision outside the official FAQ, and am entirely within my right to insist the TO and all players follow the current published document.

You also need to read the Tournament Regs.

Marshal
An event may have any number of marshals, including none. A marshal is an expert on the game’s rules and regulations and the final authority on their application during a tournament. A marshal also determines if unsporting conduct has occurred and what the appropriate remedy is, referring any recommendations for disqualification to the organizer. When a marshal is not actively performing his or her duties, he or she is a spectator and should communicate this change in status clearly.

Judge
An event may have any number of judges, including none. A judge is well versed in the game’s rules and regulations. A judge’s responsibilities include assisting players to resolve disputes and answering questions regarding the game’s rules. When a judge is not actively performing judge duties, he or she is a spectator and should communicate this change in status clearly. When a judge is observing a game or an issue is brought to his or her attention, the judge should inform players when they are not following the game rules. Players have an initial opportunity to resolve any situation among themselves, but any player may alternatively ask the judge to make a ruling . At a player’s request, a marshal can review a judge ruling and provide a final determination.

Conduct
All tournament participants are expected to act in a respectful manner during a tournament. If players have a dispute during a competition and cannot resolve it themselves, they must call for a judge to resolve it and provide any rulings that are needed. All card interpretations during a tournament are a marshal’s responsibility, and he or she may overrule the FAQ when a mistake or error is discovered.

Basically, if you or your opponent has a question on how to use Jamming Field, the TO or Marshall should already know the previous FAQ and know Jamming Field was errata'd. They will make a choice, could follow the same FAQ or they might change it, but that is their decision. If you do not follow their ruling, you can be DQ.

Every player going to a tournament is expected to know the RRG, FAQ, and Tourny Regs. You don't need to know them by heart, but at least have read them.

My question is why hasn't it just been corrected? Its a change that takes all of 30 seconds to copy paste back in. Especially before the FAQ took effect. It does create confusion for folks getting into the game, or for folks who don't follow the FAQ closely.

53 minutes ago, draco193 said:

My question is why hasn't it just been corrected? Its a change that takes all of 30 seconds to copy paste back in. Especially before the FAQ took effect. It does create confusion for folks getting into the game, or for folks who don't follow the FAQ closely.

Because the FAQ editors operate on the same boat that their products ship on, Driftwood Barge Inc.

2 hours ago, draco193 said:

My question is why hasn't it just been corrected? Its a change that takes all of 30 seconds to copy paste back in. Especially before the FAQ took effect. It does create confusion for folks getting into the game, or for folks who don't follow the FAQ closely.

Because they are all to busy sitting around the office drinking tea and laughing at people getting their knickers in a twist on the forum

11 minutes ago, Jondavies72 said:

Because they are all to busy sitting around the office drinking tea and laughing at people getting their knickers in a twist on the forum

The tea discussion again! Not in my America! We threw that tea into the harbor and we only drink coffee here! USA! USA!