It seems like the 7th fleet title was made for the Interdictor, yet conventional wisdom would tell you this isn't legal as the "Interdictor" is not a Star Destroyer. Perhaps this isn't true. We need to do a little digging into the history of this ship to clarify this.

In the old canon of Star Wars, the "Interdictor" was known as the "Immobilizer 418 Cruiser," which was built by Sienar Fleet Systems rather than Kuat (the Star Destroyer manufacturer,) and was its own weapons platform separate from any line of "Star Destroyers."

However, the new "Disney canon" version of the Interdictor as seen in Star Wars Rebels is not that same ship. As well, the version of the Interdictor that we have in Armada is the Rebels Interdictor, due to the visible differences and being paired with Admiral Konstantine, a Rebels character who was commanding an Interdictor on the show.

The show Rebels does not explicitly state what kind of ship this is, so we can't use dialogue for clarification. However, allegedly, a Disney endorsed Star Wars fact book, released October 3, 2017 as part of the Journey to Star Wars: The Last Jedi book series, called Star Wars: Absolutely Everything You Need to Know, Updated and Expanded , refers to the ship used in Rebels as an "Interdictor-class Star Destroyer ." If this is true, then the Interdictor can equip the 7th Fleet Star Destroyer title.

To summarize, we know:

1: The Interdictor in Armada is the Rebels version of the Interdictor, rather than the old canon "Immobilizer 418."

2: The Interdictor in Rebels played a prominent role in the 7th Fleet

3: The Interdictor in Rebels has recently been classified as an "Interdictor-Class Star Destroyer " according to a Disney endorsed fact book made as promotional material for The Last Jedi .

With all that being said, I believe the Interdictor in Armada should be able to use this title, from a legalistic standpoint. From a gameplay standpoint, the interdictor is crying for upgrades to make it more relevant, and any little thing will help, especially with extra damage mitigation tech that synergizes so well with it.

From a legalistic standpoint, neither version of the ship card is titled "Interdictor Star Destroyer" and therefore neither version qualifies for the title.

It's as simple as that.

For tournament play , the 7th fleet title can only be equipped to ships with "Star Destroyer" in their name. Which does not include the Interdictor.

For your local games, by all means do whatever you feel like doing!

Yeah, sorry dude, the title would be awesome on the Interdictor but really wanting it doesn't make it so. Olaph is right.

Yep house rule it, or write a Scenario where it is a special rule and play it with your friends.

You can't expect us to believe that the FFG Armada designer who wrote the 7th fleet card expects all players of this game to have total knowledge of every utterance in the expanded universe comics/novels/background books. And then expect us all to understand that one of those elements written maybe 15 years before this game existed justifies using this title on your favourite ship.

Fairly hostile responses and vehement defenses towards what was supposed to be a fun suggestion. Some have you have gone so far as to assume this is my favorite ship, and act like it's your job to keep it down, strangely. Are many people here this hostile to every suggestion?

Given the fragility of the new Disney canon and the precedent set by the book I've mentioned, the option to classify the interdictor as a "Star Destroyer" for use of this title is definitely there. After all, the title card for the 7th fleet reads "Star Destroyer only," it does not explicitly state that the name of the card requires "Star Destroyer" to be on it, only that it is a Star Destroyer. It's small nuances in wording that cause people on these forums to argue for multiple pages on whether or not cards like "strategic adviser" allow you to pass your turn on any ship in your fleet rather than just the ship the card is equipped to.

However, the rules insert inside the pack that explains the title states that “the name must contain”.

9 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

However, the rules insert inside the pack that explains the title states that “the name must contain”.

Yes, let's quote it

Quote

Some (title) upgrade cards in this expansion have an icon in the lower-left corner that does not match a specific ship icon. A ship can equip this upgrade card if that ship matches the card's faction affiliation and the ship's name matches the upgrade card's name restriction trait.

Notice how it doesn't say that "the ship's name printed on the card matches the upgrade," but rather just "the ship's name." Interdictor is more of a title than a name of a ship (and it is a title even ), and canonically the name of the ship itself is now "Interdictor-class Star Destroyer " (regardless of suppression or combat refits). So if we really want to stretch things based on syntax and phrasing, yes, this title still fits.

Unfortunately it's not a Star Destroyer in Armada (it's missing from the name), so the Dictor can't take the 7th Fleet title.

1 minute ago, DerFurst said:

Interdictor is more of a title than a name of a ship, and canonically the name of the ship itself is now "Interdictor-class Star Destroyer ".

I'm having difficulty telling if you're just trolling us...

15 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

However, the rules insert inside the pack that explains the title states that “the name must contain”.

This is all I meant, I'm not trying to be hostile, just clear. You posted in the rules questions subforum, leading me to believe you were unclear whether or not this title could legally be equipped. From the perspective "answer a rules question," the answer is simple.

From the perspective "I want to fly a fun friendly game in the expanded cannon setting" there are lots of people very enthusiastic about that around here, but you'll render people (myself included) more receptive to that context by posting in the main forum.

3 minutes ago, DerFurst said:

Yes, let's quote it

Notice how it doesn't say that "the ship's name printed on the card matches the upgrade," but rather just "the ship's name." Interdictor is more of a title than a name of a ship (and it is a title even ), and canonically the name of the ship itself is now "Interdictor-class Star Destroyer " (regardless of suppression or combat refits). So if we really want to stretch things based on syntax and phrasing, yes, this title still fits.

Really, it boils down to:

Within the confines of official printed material for Star Wars Armada - can you prove that the Interdictor satisfies the statement of being a Star Destroyer?

Since, when it comes to tournament play, you can’t bring any outside notes or information. Only official printed Star Wars Armada Rules and Supplements.

Outside notes are expressly and explicitly forbidden.

38 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Really, it boils down to:

Within the confines of official printed material for Star Wars Armada - can you prove that the Interdictor satisfies the statement of being a Star Destroyer?

Since, when it comes to tournament play, you can’t bring any outside notes or information. Only official printed Star Wars Armada Rules and Supplements.

Outside notes are expressly and explicitly forbidden.

You're gold dras

First off, I apologize if you felt attacked or like the responses here were hostile. We tend to be pretty blunt in the Rules Forum, because it's populated mostly by engineering- or military-minded people who are used to interpreting arcane systems of documentation and just cut directly to the chase. Don't take it too personally--if you raise a question here, we treat it like a math problem, not an opinion poll.

44 minutes ago, DerFurst said:

Notice how it doesn't say that "the ship's name printed on the card matches the upgrade," but rather just "the ship's name." Interdictor is more of a title than a name of a ship (and it is a title even ), and canonically the name of the ship itself is now "Interdictor-class Star Destroyer " (regardless of suppression or combat refits). So if we really want to stretch things based on syntax and phrasing, yes, this title still fits.

The ship's name--in the terms of the game --is the name printed on the card and the token.

RRG pg 10 SHIP:

Quote

A ship consists of a ship base, a ship model, a ship token, and a ship card. All components must match the ship’s type, and the name on the ship card must match the name on the ship token.

I agree with everybody else that this sounds like it could be a fun scenario or house rule. But within the context of the rules as written, it doesn't work.

1 hour ago, DerFurst said:

Fairly hostile responses and vehement defenses towards what was supposed to be a fun suggestion. Some have you have gone so far as to assume this is my favorite ship, and act like it's your job to keep it down, strangely. Are many people here this hostile to every suggestion?

Given the fragility of the new Disney canon and the precedent set by the book I've mentioned, the option to classify the interdictor as a "Star Destroyer" for use of this title is definitely there. After all, the title card for the 7th fleet reads "Star Destroyer only," it does not explicitly state that the name of the card requires "Star Destroyer" to be on it, only that it is a Star Destroyer. It's small nuances in wording that cause people on these forums to argue for multiple pages on whether or not cards like "strategic adviser" allow you to pass your turn on any ship in your fleet rather than just the ship the card is equipped to.

This is the rules forum, repost in offtopics if you want to have a discussion based on non game star wars.

Now, having said all of the above...

1. Welcome to the forums @DerFurst ! I sincerely hope we haven't put you off from participating further. We rules nerds are a tough bunch.
2. Thank you for bringing to my/our attention that "Interdictor-class Star Destroyer" (which used to be an ISD-based ship in Legends) is now the canon name for the Rebels Interdictor prototype. That's genuinely an interesting development!

3 hours ago, OlaphOfTheNorth said:

From a legalistic standpoint, neither version of the ship card is titled "Interdictor Star Destroyer" and therefore neither version qualifies for the title.

3 hours ago, DiabloAzul said:

It's as simple as that.

For tournament play , the 7th fleet title can only be equipped to ships with "Star Destroyer" in their name. Which does not include the Interdictor.

For your local games, by all means do whatever you feel like doing!

3 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

Yeah, sorry dude, the title would be awesome on the Interdictor but really wanting it doesn't make it so. Olaph is right.

3 hours ago, Mad Cat said:

Yep house rule it, or write a Scenario where it is a special rule and play it with your friends.

You can't expect us to believe that the FFG Armada designer who wrote the 7th fleet card expects all players of this game to have total knowledge of every utterance in the expanded universe comics/novels/background books. And then expect us all to understand that one of those elements written maybe 15 years before this game existed justifies using this title on your favourite ship.

So hostiles all of you!!

The Interdictors isn't tanky enough as it is?

28 minutes ago, Norsehound said:

The Interdictors isn't tanky enough as it is?

Poor thing needs all the help it can get...

On 1/19/2018 at 4:30 PM, Norsehound said:

The Interdictors isn't tanky enough as it is?

Only if you put Early Warning System on it. Along with 7th Fleet.

7th fleet amd exodus fleet should hav ea shape restriction not a name restriction. Triangles and pickles only.

I would allow it in casual games for sure.

19 minutes ago, Xeletor said:

7th fleet amd exodus fleet should hav ea shape restriction not a name restriction. Triangles and pickles only.

I would allow it in casual games for sure.

Except that you've just disallowed the Gladiator Star Destroyer... for what reason?

And what is a pickle? Or what if an MCXX is released that is shaped differently.

(to be clear - in friendly games I'm on board with the Interdictor being a star destroyer)

27 minutes ago, slasher956 said:

Except that you've just disallowed the Gladiator Star Destroyer... for what reason?

And what is a pickle? Or what if an MCXX is released that is shaped differently.

(to be clear - in friendly games I'm on board with the Interdictor being a star destroyer)

Gladiator takes demolisher anyway. It does not deserve to be called a star destroyer if the interdictor isn't

I'm just joking around anyway. And a pickle is any ship that fits through the round hole left by the speed dial bottom in the cardboard that comes with the ship, duh.

42 minutes ago, Xeletor said:

Gladiator takes demolisher anyway. It does not deserve to be called a star destroyer if the interdictor isn't

I'm just joking around anyway. And a pickle is any ship that fits through the round hole left by the speed dial bottom in the cardboard that comes with the ship, duh.

And there was me thinking a pickle was a chutney you put on cheese sarnis... or maybe a sticky situation....

Your Interdictor can be a Star-Destroyer if my Transport can be a MC (it looks like one, so it should be one)