18 minutes ago, MasterShake2 said:

"The most common way for a unit to gain suppression is to be the target of a ranged attack. After a ranged attack, if the attack's dice roll produced one or more (hit) or (crit) results, the defender gains one suppression token, even if those results were cancelled."

Like, seriously, this is the only part of the RRG that talks about ways to get suppression from attacks and it only mentions ranged attacks as doing it natively. There is no rule anywhere in the RRG that causes suppression from any other kind of attack.

Nope, that is from the L2P and not the RRG.

The RRG is the source for the rules of the game and it simply states that suppression is gained by an attack, not specifically a ranged attack.

1 hour ago, Soulless said:

Nope, that is from the L2P and not the RRG.

The RRG is the source for the rules of the game and it simply states that suppression is gained by an attack, not specifically a ranged attack.

The RRG is not definitive. Golden Rule order of presidence is L2P > RRG > Cards. Only moving to the next if the rules doesn’t exist in the previous or it is contradicted by next, the keyword here is contradicted.

The L2P states “After a ranged attack”. The RRG omits the word ranged, but doesn’t contradict this, so the rule from the L2P stands.

21 minutes ago, Alathazal said:

The RRG is not definitive. Golden Rule order of presidence is L2P > RRG > Cards. Only moving to the next if the rules doesn’t exist in the previous or it is contradicted by next, the keyword here is contradicted.

The L2P states “After a ranged attack”. The RRG omits the word ranged, but doesn’t contradict this, so the rule from the L2P stands.

The RRG itself states that is is, in fact, "the definitive source for the rules of Star Wars: Legion".

If the L2P booklet, a simplistic rendition of the rules intended for beginner, says that suppression applies only to ranged attacks and the RRG, considered the main and definitive rulebook of the complete game, says it applies to all attacks, are your opinion that the L2P is the one to encourage?

Again, golden rule states L2P before RRG. And the first paragraph states: “Before using this document, players should
read and understand the rules presented in the Learn to Play booklet.” No rules in the L2P are altered, just some are left out. The L2P is the fundamentals of the game.

14 minutes ago, Soulless said:

The RRG itself states that is is, in fact, "the definitive source for the rules of Star Wars: Legion".

If the L2P booklet, a simplistic rendition of the rules intended for beginner, says that suppression applies only to ranged attacks and the RRG, considered the main and definitive rulebook of the complete game, says it applies to all attacks, are your opinion that the L2P is the one to encourage?

Again, golden rule states L2P before RRG. The first paragraph states: “Before using this document, players should
read and understand the rules presented in the Learn to Play booklet.” No rules in the L2P are altered, just some are left out. The L2P is the fundamentals of the game.

It may say definitive, but it also says “If something in this reference contradicts the Learn to Play booklet, the Rules Reference takes precedence.” and “If an effect on a card or another component contradicts rules found in the Learn to Play booklet or Rules Reference, that component takes precedence.” - these completely contradict the idea of it being a definitive source.

The RRG omits the word ranged it does not contradict the L2P and say all attacks.

Oops, sorry for the double post there, I thought I had hit cancel after realising that I hadn’t quoted you @Soulless, must have hit save by mistake.

2 minutes ago, Alathazal said:

Again, golden rule states L2P before RRG. The first paragraph states: “Before using this document, players should
read and understand the rules presented in the Learn to Play booklet.” No rules in the L2P are altered, just some are left out. The L2P is the fundamentals of the game.

It may say definitive, but it also says “If something in this reference contradicts the Learn to Play booklet, the Rules Reference takes precedence.” and “If an effect on a card or another component contradicts rules found in the Learn to Play booklet or Rules Reference, that component takes precedence.” - these completely contradict the idea of it being a definitive source.

The RRG omits the word ranged it does not contradict the L2P and say all attacks.

As I see it, the RRG is indeed altering the rules from how they are described in the L2P. By leaving out "ranged" from its description, it states very clearly that suppression applies to attacks. An attack, if nothing else is stated, indicates all forms of attacks. It is altering the rules and weather or not you wanna call that a contradiction or not, it is still a substantial change from how it is ruled in the L2P book and in that situation it would be completely illogical to allow the L2P to take precedence.

It would also raise the question as to why the L2P is not left to be a "living document" as the RRG is, if it is considered such a fundamental rules document?

Im not arguing that the "ranged" part may have been mistakenly left out of the RRG, its very possible but I will not accept the L2P as a ruling document for the complete game. You are suggesting that any rules dispute that may arise can only be answered by checking both the L2P and the RRG then crosschecking them for contradictions or merely "omitted words".

And double posting is fine, I do it all the time

I think we have flogged this one to death. Personally I am taking the rules information as follows L2P >> FFG >> Cards.

And I don’t feel the RRG has intentionally errated the L2P on this subject. But we will need FFG to come back on this, I am surprised they are not active on these forums.

They aren't active here because then people would be arguing semantics of someone's forum post. Suppression is just for ranged attacks, though you can also get them from Suppressive keyword and some Command cards. There will likely be environment cards that do the same.

How do you suppress someone in melee? Do they hit the deck in response to an uppercut?

16 minutes ago, steveisbig said:

How do you suppress someone in melee? Do they hit the deck in response to an uppercut?

I would imagine having Darth Vader getting his Whacking Day practice in on your mates might have you running for the hills or curling up in a ball with your thumb in your mouth, depending on your fight or flight response.

20 minutes ago, steveisbig said:

They aren't active here because then people would be arguing semantics of someone's forum post. Suppression is just for ranged attacks, though you can also get them from Suppressive keyword and some Command cards. There will likely be environment cards that do the same.

How do you suppress someone in melee? Do they hit the deck in response to an uppercut?

Well thats why the discussion arose since according to the RRG (if not taking the L2P into consideration) you CAN receive a suppression token from a melee attack. In which case a "suppression token" is indicating an effect that can be received by both melee and ranged attacks and as someone mentioned previously could have used a more suitable term then "suppression".

To answer your question at the end, suppression in melee could indicate the unit being "staggered" or "dazed" by the oncoming attacks and thus not able to function unhindered. Wargaming is always abstract to some degree, you shouldnt ignore that when discussing these things or else you will get yourself hung up on a lot of things.

edit:

Digimortal is right though, weve taken this as far as can go and now only try to persuade eachother of their wrongs which is a dead end so best just agree to disagree and wait for clarification at some point.

I can’t believe this thing is still alive! If you’ve played any previous FFG game then you know that the RRG takes precedence over L2P, it even says it in the RRG. It’s really not as complicated as some are making it out to be..

3 hours ago, Soulless said:

Well thats why the discussion arose since according to the RRG (if not taking the L2P into consideration) you CAN receive a suppression token from a melee attack. In which case a "suppression token" is indicating an effect that can be received by both melee and ranged attacks and as someone mentioned previously could have used a more suitable term then "suppression".

To answer your question at the end, suppression in melee could indicate the unit being "staggered" or "dazed" by the oncoming attacks and thus not able to function unhindered. Wargaming is always abstract to some degree, you shouldnt ignore that when discussing these things or else you will get yourself hung up on a lot of things.

edit:

Digimortal is right though, weve taken this as far as can go and now only try to persuade eachother of their wrongs which is a dead end so best just agree to disagree and wait for clarification at some point.

@Soulless Agreed this is as far as it should go, to be honest I see the arguments for both ways, so will probably just agree with my opponent before hand how they want to play it let in be thank you for a good debate on the subject though.

14 minutes ago, power500500 said:

I can’t believe this thing is still alive! If you’ve played any previous FFG game then you know that the RRG takes precedence over L2P, it even says it in the RRG. It’s really not as complicated as some are making it out to be..

Yes, we know. The problem is that we've already had a number of mistakes/omissions in the RRG, so an alteration to the rules as previewed seems suspiciously like an oversight.

Ultimately, we're all still learning the game and we're all pretty sure an FAQ/Errata is coming, so while competitive games should default to the RRG as written, friendly games can interpret the rules in whatever way makes the most sense to both players.

For what it's worth, the TO I was talking to yesterday has a direct line to Alex Davy and has been talking for a few months. She said Suppression is only gained on ranged attacks, not melee.

There were a lot of rules questions during Adepticon, so expect a large revision to the RRG in the coming weeks.

But for now, RAW doesn't specify ranged.

Always good to get the last word in.

How many more people need to say FFG have said its ranged not melee to them. We even had the guy doing the learn to play videos who said ffg said it was not melee for crying out loud.

1 hour ago, DarkTrooperZero said:

How many more people need to say FFG have said its ranged not melee to them. We even had the guy doing the learn to play videos who said ffg said it was not melee for crying out loud.

The good news is that FFG can always update the RRG to clarify anywhere a readers’ confusion like this might arise.

2 hours ago, DarkTrooperZero said:

How many more people need to say FFG have said its ranged not melee to them. We even had the guy doing the learn to play videos who said ffg said it was not melee for crying out loud.

People harping on this stuff constantly is how we get rapid updates to FAQs. If so many people had not raised a stink about the mess Nym and Trajectory simulator made in X-wing*, it would not have gotten FAQed so quickly.

*Trivia: This one wasn't actually FFG's fault. They couldn't define "launching a bomb" in the rules until the Resistance bomber came out, but due to TLJ being delayed the bomber was finished while Nym was still in playtesting.

Just to throw out there..

The entire suppression system is an evolution from Dust Warfare. You could suppress in both close combat and ranged in that game. Legion has followed that original system really closely, so it’s entirley possible it works in both, but enough have reported from Adepticon that it only works for ranged, and so I’m using that until we see an FAQ.