Hey

I iám talking to this guy on facebook.

We are takling about sabrethrow. If vader can throw his lightsabre after having moved 2 times?

Or is it a action that he must take. So only moves 1 time, then throw, or as i say, move 2 times then throw.

What say you?

Read the card. The attack after a move is free.

He can move twice and then use saber throw.

Due to the “one action of each type per activation” (except move) he just can’t move once, free throw, move again and throw again.

Thx

Then i was right,

16 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

Read the card. The attack after a move is free.

He can move twice and then use saber throw.

Due to the “one action of each type per activation” (except move) he just can’t move once, free throw, move again and throw again.

And in the same vein he cant melee, move, saberthrow.... 1 attack is 1 attack, and saberthrow is treated as an attack (last line of the card)

Edit: relentless makes the attack free, i wouldn't be too hard on anyone for getting it wrong just yet as there will probably be confusion between the full action icon on saberthrow and luke's "charge" mirror ability being restricted to melee attacks even if he has saberthrow (once again wording on the hero ability)

26 minutes ago, Ralgon said:

Relentless makes the attack free, i wouldn't be too hard on anyone for getting it wrong just yet as there will probably be confusion between the full action icon on saberthrow and luke's "charge" mirror ability being restricted to melee attacks even if he has saberthrow (once again wording on the hero ability)

Wasn’t trying to be hard on anyone, my apologies if it came out that way.

My general advice to anyone is read what the card says. Perhaps I should have said “show him the card”?

Now, I understand that sometimes a game gets so big in scale this doesnt work as well (looking at you, xwing).

10 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

Wasn’t trying to be hard on anyone, my apologies if it came out that way.

My general advice to anyone is read what the card says. Perhaps I should have said “show him the card”?

Now, I understand that sometimes a game gets so big in scale this doesnt work as well (looking at you, xwing).

was more aimed at the op than you, apologies....

There was actually an interesting point that came up with this.

Relentless let’s you make a free attack action.

Saber throw however is a card action, that is counted as an attack action.

The question was, is that sufficient to let relentless trigger it, or does it only become an attack action after its used as a card action?

1 minute ago, Thoras said:

There was actually an interesting point that came up with this.

Relentless let’s you make a free attack action.

Saber throw however is a card action, that is counted as an attack action.

The question was, is that sufficient to let relentless trigger it, or does it only become an attack action after its used as a card action?

This was covered over on Reddit. 1) “Card actions” aren’t a type of action, it’s a phrase used to distinguish between these actions and the standard suite of actions. 2) the Saber Throw card text says that the “Saber Throw” action is treated as an attack action 3) this text is not conditional on completing the action (otherwise you could attack and then saber throw).

Finally, if nothing else the intent that saber throw can be used with relentless is clear from the fact that “charge” exists. No reason to create a separate keyword if Darth Vader can’t take an upgrade to give him access to a ranged attack.

Just now, Thoras said:

There was actually an interesting point that came up with this.

Relentless let’s you make a free attack action.

Saber throw however is a card action, that is counted as an attack action.

The question was, is that sufficient to let relentless trigger it, or does it only become an attack action after its used as a card action?

Not that it matters yet, but it's both at the same time. The last line only gives information, not a timing. In the future that may be disadvantageous (potential abilities/upgrades that prevent either the use of force powers or attacks would both work on saber throw)

47 minutes ago, Ralgon said:

Not that it matters yet, but it's both at the same time. The last line only gives information, not a timing. In the future that may be disadvantageous (potential abilities/upgrades that prevent either the use of force powers or attacks would both work on saber throw)

Yes, while the interpretation is that it being an Attack trumps it being a Card Action (it is both), it should be more clear. However, in this case move-move-saber throw is listed in an example in either the L2P or RRG (I can't remember which), so we can rest easy knowing this is the case and even apply the precedent to future parallel interpretations..

1 hour ago, WAC47 said:

This was covered over on Reddit. 1) “Card actions” aren’t a type of action, it’s a phrase used to distinguish between these actions and the standard suite of actions. 2) the Saber Throw card text says that the “Saber Throw” action is treated as an attack action 3) this text is not conditional on completing the action (otherwise you could attack and then saber throw).

Finally, if nothing else the intent that saber throw can be used with relentless is clear from the fact that “charge” exists. No reason to create a separate keyword if Darth Vader can’t take an upgrade to give him access to a ranged attack.

Point 1 - A Card action is 100% one of the “standard suite of actions”.

Page 11, bullet 3 of abilities

Page 11, actions heading, several bullet points.

Point 2 - The point is, is that text active before using it/at the same time? If so, why? Say it’s any other card. You don’t get to use the text of those cards until you use the card action.

Point 3 - That’s one of the points of the discussion and why it may need to be cleaned up/clarified.

I agree the intent is probably pretty obvious. I’m not as sure they have the rules tight enough to back that up.

19 minutes ago, Thoras said:

Point 2 - The point is, is that text active before using it/at the same time? If so, why? Say it’s any other card. You don’t get to use the text of those cards until you use the card action.

Apparently because its text that describes the properties of the action itself. Given there's no icon distinction between action types, the system allows this and that's fine as long as they're consistent about it. If they want to introduce ysalamiri and have it disable Force upgrades or Force actions and then give Palpatine a Force Lightning action that says "this action is treated as a Force action", you have a way to support this without needing a bunch of unique icons.

2 hours ago, Thoras said:

Point 1 - A Card action is 100% one of the “standard suite of actions”.

Page 11, bullet 3 of abilities

Page 11, actions heading, several bullet points.

Point 2 - The point is, is that text active before using it/at the same time? If so, why? Say it’s any other card. You don’t get to use the text of those cards until you use the card action.

Point 3 - That’s one of the points of the discussion and why it may need to be cleaned up/clarified.

I agree the intent is probably pretty obvious. I’m not as sure they have the rules tight enough to back that up.

What I mean is that: "Each card action is a unique action; a unit can perform different card actions during its activation. However, a unit cannot perform the same card action more than once during its activation." Card action as a phrase refers to a general class of actions, the rules of which appear on cards and not in the rules reference. The rules on the "Saber Throw" upgrade say to treat that action as an attack action. The rules do not say that "all card text only applies while the action is being performed" and it is clear from context that this text implies that "saber throw" is an attack action "for the purposes of all rules."

I personally think the intent and language are clear enough that a common sense interpretation can be made. I don't think we need that much hand-holding as a community, as long as we agree to not be jerks.

The folks running our demo made it sound like you can attack once. You have extra moves, etc but you can only use any type of act, which would be an attack, once with the unit

I was Vader and could move; do nasty things via Saber Throw and, then, move again or take a dodge token

I could not, though, move/throw and, then, move/throw

This game is Imperial Assault lite with terrain. You can only attack once per activation unless a card gives you the ability to do two attacks.

17 minutes ago, Dash Two said:

The folks running our demo made it sound like you can attack once. You have extra moves, etc but you can only use any type of act, which would be an attack, once with the unit

I was Vader and could move; do nasty things via Saber Throw and, then, move again or take a dodge token

I could not, though, move/throw and, then, move/throw

This is correct. You can only perform an attack action once per activation without a card that explicitly says to perform a second one (such as Luke’s one command card)

I am glad it's not just me! I asked on Reddit and the wave of snark made me feel like I had no clue what the **** I was doing?

I am not a fan of the way they did this. Most games require you read from the top down. I would have made it a Ranged attack action, period. The 'card action' makes it seem like you need an action to initiate it.

In any case, glad to see the community here is much nicer than on reddit.

Well, you do need an action to initiate it.

"Card Action" is just an icon that says "this effect is an action" (as opposed to "this effect is a free action" or "this effect is no action it just happens all the time"), but Vader's ability procs he can do a free attack action after he moves, which means Saber Throw counts.

You need an action to initiate it, and it counts as an attack action which is exactly what the card says.

23 minutes ago, loki_tbc said:

I am glad it's not just me! I asked on Reddit and the wave of snark made me feel like I had no clue what the **** I was doing?

I am not a fan of the way they did this. Most games require you read from the top down. I would have made it a Ranged attack action, period. The 'card action' makes it seem like you need an action to initiate it.

In any case, glad to see the community here is much nicer than on reddit.

Since I was involved in that reddit thread I want to apologize if I came across as snarky on reddit! That was not my intent. Hope the continued conversation over here has clarified my comments.

Not at all WAC47,

I appreciate the thought but it wasn't you. There were some folks who thought it was a simple "RTFC" and "case closed".

I can understand how someone might see it that way, but this isn't my first rodeo (i've been wargaming since the mid 90's; ASL) and having seen alot of different rulesets, it just wasn't that cut and dried to me.

Oddly enough, I think if it read:

(Treat this action as an attack action)

<action symbol> << Saber Throw text here>>

It would have made perfect sense to me... ah well...

That’s definitely one way to do it but if a card were to give multiple action options it could get messy having text outside the arrow paragraph. I’ve seen better ways to do it but a lot of it is the result of FFGs love of the half sized card layout.

16 hours ago, ScummyRebel said:

This is correct. You can only perform an attack action once per activation without a card that explicitly says to perform a second one (such as Luke’s one command card)

Important note: Son of Skywalker doesn't give Luke a second attack action. It gives him an "additional attack." This is important because the rules differentiate between actions and non-actions(my term). Like so:

"During a unit’s activation, it is possible for a unit to perform
more than one attack through the use of card abilities or
other game effects; however, that unit can only perform
one attack action during a single activation, regardless of
whether it is an attack action or a free attack action."

"Command cards, unit abilities, and other game effects can
allow units to perform attacks. The card granting the attack
will specify whether the attack is an attack action, a free
attack action, or neither"

The last line of this next quote is the most important distinction:

"• During a unit’s activation, it is possible for it to perform
multiple attacks through the use of command cards or
other abilities. If a game effect provides a unit with an attack
during its activation, and that attack is not an action or
free action, performing that attack does not count toward a
unit’s limit of a single attack action per activation. It is not
an action and therefore does not count against that unit’s
two actions per activation and does not trigger abilities that
occur after actions are performed."

I think a lot of the confusion at least for me was the fact that saber throw was a unique action and relentless were being combined, which I didn't know was possible. A lot of other similar games that they borrowed from don't allow this, so intuitively I assumed it wasn't possible to combine a unique action with a regular action and special ability.