9 hours ago, Big Easy said:

Any time the Empire is about to win they should think about how gamey it is and remember that the Rebels are the good guys and not try to game it so much. /Simulation'd

Jokes aside, "gamey" to me is not letting little things slide with your opponent like forgetting to take a second action. Following RAW is part of the game.

I'd make the counterargument that it's even more important to follow RAI... but I'm pretty sure RAW and RAI are identical here.

2 hours ago, GreatMazinkaiser said:

I'd make the counterargument that it's even more important to follow RAI... but I'm pretty sure RAW and RAI are identical here.

RAI won't be enforced at tournaments. Only RAW.

2 hours ago, GreatMazinkaiser said:

I'd make the counterargument that it's even more important to follow RAI... but I'm pretty sure RAW and RAI are identical here.

The issue I have here is that, unless you somehow have a line directly to the designer, THERE IS NO WAY TO KNOW WHAT THE DESIGNER INTENDED. You can attempt to speculate and guess all you want... But you cannot really know what RAI is.

This is why you enforce RAW. Everyone has access to the rules. They go to a tourney, and expect the rules to work as they read them. Then a TO goes, oh noes, this works this other way, because I believe that's what they intended, even tough it says different on the RRG...... And this causes issues.

RAI is all well to generate discussion, and to make points....but RAW is all that matters when playing, specially at a tourney. Now at home, of course, do what you want!

Forget targeting scopes on Luke's Lightsaber.

The targeting scopes on E-11s and A-280's work when you line up a melee hit with the butt of the rifle, too! How's that for a mental image?

53 minutes ago, kaffis said:

Forget targeting scopes on Luke's Lightsaber.

The targeting scopes on E-11s and A-280's work when you line up a melee hit with the butt of the rifle, too! How's that for a mental image?

They also appear to work with hand grenades.....

7 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

RAI won't be enforced at tournaments. Only RAW.

I think where Weiss is concerned that's not gonna be true...

29 minutes ago, GreatMazinkaiser said:

I think where Weiss is concerned that's not gonna be true...

Why?

2 hours ago, Xiervak said:

Why?

Weiss has been quoted as having Arsenal as stacking (a unit quality which doesn't stack as per RAW) The devs have confirmed that it does stack though in their article, and this one will be fixed in errata (or so I've heard). Putting Weiss on an ATST and tapping him out for his ability allows an ATST to use all 4 of its weapons, if equipped during an attack action .

4 hours ago, syrath said:

Weiss has been quoted as having Arsenal as stacking (a unit quality which doesn't stack as per RAW) The devs have confirmed that it does stack though in their article, and this one will be fixed in errata (or so I've heard). Putting Weiss on an ATST and tapping him out for his ability allows an ATST to use all 4 of its weapons, if equipped during an attack action .

Not saying that something specifically stacks in the RRG is not tantamount to saying that something does not stack.

This is an extremely common error in reading of a rules set.

3 hours ago, Derrault said:

Not saying that something specifically stacks in the RRG is not tantamount to saying that something does not stack.

This is an extremely common error in reading of a rules set.

However when something isn't quoted as being stacking here is what happens.

X gives you Arsenal 2

Y gives you Arsenal 2

You now have Arsenal 2 twice not arsenal 4. This again is also similar to the RPG and their card games.

1 hour ago, syrath said:

However when something isn't quoted as being stacking here is what happens.

X gives you Arsenal 2

Y gives you Arsenal 2

You now have Arsenal 2 twice not arsenal 4. This again is also similar to the RPG and their card games.

Well it is quoted as stacking according to their preview for it, but ffg previews aren't rule sources and are known to make mistakes. Pretty sure it will be addressed in the first wave of corrections.

Quote

2 hours ago, syrath said:

However when something isn't quoted as being stacking here is what happens.

X gives you Arsenal 2

Y gives you Arsenal 2

You now have Arsenal 2 twice not arsenal 4. This again is also similar to the RPG and their card games.

Ahm, no. Arsenal gives you the opportunity to fire 2 weapons per attack. When you have the keyword twice you have the opportunity to fire 2 weapons per attack twice, but no weapon could be fired more then one time per attack. Precise 1 let you reroll one dice more when you spend an aim token. When you have precise 1 twice, you could reroll 1 dice more when you spend an aim token twice, but no dice could be rerolled more the once. Nowhere in the rules is a hint, that you could use the same keywords only onetime per action.

The stacking of the weapon modifiers are only specified, because they are stacking with the number of minis with that weapons and no one should think that ie blast of the grenades would only be 1 regardless how many grenades are thrown.

7 hours ago, TobiWan said:

Ahm, no. Arsenal gives you the opportunity to fire 2 weapons per attack. When you have the keyword twice you have the opportunity to fire 2 weapons per attack twice, but no weapon could be fired more then one time per attack. Precise 1 let you reroll one dice more when you spend an aim token. When you have precise 1 twice, you could reroll 1 dice more when you spend an aim token twice, but no dice could be rerolled more the once. Nowhere in the rules is a hint, that you could use the same keywords only onetime per action.

The stacking of the weapon modifiers are only specified, because they are stacking with the number of minis with that weapons and no one should think that ie blast of the grenades would only be 1 regardless how many grenades are thrown.

RAW

Let's say I give you the opportunity that when to use an attack action you can attack with two weapons

Now let's say a friend of mine gives you the ability to attack twice when you do an attack action, you choose to attack. If you use my ability which is called Arsenal 2 you get two attacks. My friend has given you Arsenal 2 as well. You have the same quality twice you don't automatically double the ability. This is pretty common in both card games and other games that use similar techniques. IE for those that know how armor and cover works in the RPG cover gives defense X and armor gives defense X , you get to choose which you use (usually the higher) and if it is quoted as adding defense X it adds to it.

What is wrong here is that it is clear from dev responses and the preview that in this case they are meant to stack but RAW at this time, you just got the ability twice resulting in no net gain. FWIW I'm playing this as stacking, but just want to settle that by strict RAW interpretation the 2 Arsenals don't stack.

Also for what it's worth I started the training to be a Magic the Gathering judge and with the wording of the rules without an errata there would be no doubt on how this would have to be ruled in a tournament, here is hoping though that they clear that one up before official tournaments take place.

As for official rules they can go out the window when I play or my friends play against me with Weiss it's Arsenal 4 as far as I'm concerned

Edit by the opposing logic a team of stormtroopers gets precise X where X is the number of troopers.

2 hours ago, syrath said:

RAW

Let's say I give you the opportunity that when to use an attack action you can attack with two weapons

Now let's say a friend of mine gives you the ability to attack twice when you do an attack action, you choose to attack. If you use my ability which is called Arsenal 2 you get two attacks. My friend has given you Arsenal 2 as well. You have the same quality twice you don't automatically double the ability. This is pretty common in both card games and other games that use similar techniques. IE for those that know how armor and cover works in the RPG cover gives defense X and armor gives defense X , you get to choose which you use (usually the higher) and if it is quoted as adding defense X it adds to it.

What is wrong here is that it is clear from dev responses and the preview that in this case they are meant to stack but RAW at this time, you just got the ability twice resulting in no net gain. FWIW I'm playing this as stacking, but just want to settle that by strict RAW interpretation the 2 Arsenals don't stack.

Also for what it's worth I started the training to be a Magic the Gathering judge and with the wording of the rules without an errata there would be no doubt on how this would have to be ruled in a tournament, here is hoping though that they clear that one up before official tournaments take place.

As for official rules they can go out the window when I play or my friends play against me with Weiss it's Arsenal 4 as far as I'm concerned

Edit by the opposing logic a team of stormtroopers gets precise X where X is the number of troopers.

You say it is ruled that they dont stack because no where does stand that they stack or don't stack? Really bold . I understand that you see it the same way, that they stack. But say on the other Hand that the rules it stack not, while there is no rule like this.

Show me the rule that all are mention all the time. Show me the word that say unit Keywords do not stack and weapon Keywords stack. To be honest, i did not found it yet, but i may have missed it.

And your compare with precise X is little bit wrong. It is a unit Keyword. And unit Keywords only count once per unit, and not once per trooper or weapon. everything is identically for these two keywords. The only difference is how often the ability count for each attack. Once per unit or once per weapon.

I prefer the comon sense. And this one is, when they bring out a Card with the AT-ST, this card should have a use and should be playable. If it does not stack it would not be playable and be a worthess card.

The compare with Arsenal and number of attacks is not so well fitting as well. Arsenal is:

When choosing weapons during the “Form Attack Pool” step of an attack, each mini in a unit that has the arsenal x keyword can choose a number of its weapons equal to the value of x. Each chosen weapon contributes its dice and keywords to the attack pool.

If you are attacking and have to choose the weapon that you want to use for the attack, you can choose two weapons with Arsenal 2. And if you have a second Arsenal 2 you can choose another two weapons.
The only question is: Does the same effect from different sources work. And this was clearly said yes for weapon keywords. Imo unit keywords are at least in this part not different. When precise is stacking the Arsenal should stack as well (this is my understanding, from RAW and RAI).

33 minutes ago, Tokra said:

I prefer the comon sense.

Rocky slope.

Let's look at the wording

Arsenal 2 (while attacking , each mini in this unit can use up to two of its weapons). This does not say that you get an extra attack and it does not say it doubles the amount of weapons used. It specifically says that each mini in this unit can use two of it's weapons.Now we also know that Arsenal is not a weapon quality, but is a unit quality, and so far there is no rule to say that they stack, unlike weapon qualities where we even have a nice example given in the book for Impact.

So without stacking what this results in is that the ability on the ATST card says a unit quality that says when you attack you can use two weapons, and when it says it again on Weiss , you can now attack with two weapons. Since we know weapon qualities haven't been quoted as stacking (PURELY FROM A RULES STANDPOINT, Ie there is nothing I the rules stating otherwise) then they don't stack, anything else you are assuming that they do , and again let me stress this is taking it purely as someone living a vacuum having read the rules.

Essentially FFG messed up the wording of the card IMO, and have made it clear from the preview and others questions. Even when I chimed in on it I was just trying to clarify why someone in the thread had mentioned Weiss as a nod to why RAI matters. I will also stress that in no way would I actually condone anyone who would argue that they should play how I'm describing the rules as written, because it's plain wrong and not even relevant, until such times an official tournament hits, and I would expect the card misunderstanding to have been cleared up beyond a shadow of doubt by FFG by then

If you wish to continue the discussion with me point out a rule that exists (in either the begin to play document or the RRG) that says keywords for units stack,

Now with wording like Arsenal X - you can attack with up to X additional weapons the wording would work, but then having Arsenal 1, giving it twice might give a total of 3 attacks, depending on the rules and the wording

Perhaps I've missed something in the RRG that specifies Arsenal stacks or that unit qualities stack, if so please forgive my trespass and point me to the page because I'd like nothing more than for the card to have been worded correctly but until I'm shown otherwise RAW the card is not written as it is intended to be played (because as written its not worth the card it's printed on to use it with the ATST)

1 minute ago, Don Henderson fan club said:

Rocky slope.

Slippery slope?

Rocky slope isn't a phrase I'm aware of.

37 minutes ago, Tokra said:

.

The compare with Arsenal and number of attacks is not so well fitting as well. Arsenal is:

If you are attacking and have to choose the weapon that you want to use for the attack, you can choose two weapons with Arsenal 2. And if you have a second Arsenal 2 you can choose another two weapons.
The only question is: Does the same effect from different sources work. And this was clearly said yes for weapon keywords. Imo unit keywords are at least in this part not different. When precise is stacking the Arsenal should stack as well (this is my understanding, from RAW and RAI).

Note that I'm being clear I'm not talking RAI I'm talking RAW which would matter in tournament

Here you are confusing weapon qualities with unit qualities, the unit gains the following - when you attack you can attack with two weapons.

The way you are reading it is that when you attack with a weapon you can attack with another, which would be most likely w weapon quality since it applies to the weapon. The wording is key here

When the mini in this unit attacks ( and the unit can only attack with one weapon by default), it instead gets to attack with two of its weapons.

So the order of events are it chooses to attack (triggering both Arsenal 2's) which mean the first Arsenal two says - you can now attack with two weapons, and the second Arsenal 2 now says you can now attack with two weapons. I know that I'm talking technical rules lawyering here because it's very clear this isn't what was intended. It was essentially something missed during playtesting where the wording was either incorrect or at the very least misleading or missing further info.

The problem is that if you word of differently it can be more confusing take the following for example.

If the mini gains the ability to use an additional weapon then arsenal 1 means you can use 2, with Weiss with Arsenal 1 it's now 3. If you word it as an additional 2 then at base it lets you use 3.

The simplest way round it is to make this unit keyword stack, even if the rest of the unit keywords dont.

Again please forgive me for trying to say how it works, I actually agree with you how it works. I'm just saying that taking it completely RAW it doesnt.

14 minutes ago, Tvayumat said:

Slippery slope?

Rocky slope isn't a phrase I'm aware of.

It’s like a slippery slope, only more of a pain in the backside ?

51 minutes ago, Tokra said:

You say it is ruled that they dont stack because no where does stand that they stack or don't stack? Really bold . I understand that you see it the same way, that they stack. But say on the other Hand that the rules it stack not, while there is no rule like this.

Show me the rule that all are mention all the time. Show me the word that say unit Keywords do not stack and weapon Keywords stack. To be honest, i did not found it yet, but i may have missed it.

Sorry mean to answer this one as well. Star Wars Legion:Learn to Play page 15

"Weapon keywords are cumulative" which it follows with the example on Impact RRG has weapon keywords as

Blast

Cumbersome

Fixed:Front/Rear

Impact X

Ion X

Pierce X

Spray

Suppresive

Tow Cable

Sorry for the double post. I felt I was doing you a disservice by not at least clearing up weapon qualities stacking.

Just now, syrath said:

Sorry mean to answer this one as well. Star Wars Legion:Learn to Play page 15

"Weapon keywords are cumulative" which it follows with the example on Impact RRG has weapon keywords as

Ahh thanks. The LTP Problem. I was reading the RRG up and down to find it. Who the heck is reading the lern to Play

8 minutes ago, Tokra said:

Ahh thanks. The LTP Problem. I was reading the RRG up and down to find it. Who the heck is reading the lern to Play

Yeah took me a while to find it , only place doing the launch event was 50 miles away and I remembered reading it ,I didn't have the RRG to refer to, so I knew it was in there. Ultimately the discussion is unimportant as I doubt if anyone is playing Weiss the wrong way (ie how I'm describing RAW). We also have the preview for confirmation as well.

6 minutes ago, syrath said:

Suppresive

The only exception. This one does not stack as written in the rrg page 42.

• Suppressive is not cumulative; if multiple weapons with the suppressive keyword are included in the same attack pool, the defender still only gains one suppression token.

I have the feeling that the end result will be something along the lines of Keyword X (I.e. Impact 1 or Pierce 1) keywords stack while, others do not, any exceptions will be specifically stated in the RRG. But for now we’re just playing common sense rules, only time will tell.

10 hours ago, syrath said:

RAW

Let's say I give you the opportunity that when to use an attack action you can attack with two weapons

Now let's say a friend of mine gives you the ability to attack twice when you do an attack action, you choose to attack. If you use my ability which is called Arsenal 2 you get two attacks. My friend has given you Arsenal 2 as well. You have the same quality twice you don't automatically double the ability. This is pretty common in both card games and other games that use similar techniques. IE for those that know how armor and cover works in the RPG cover gives defense X and armor gives defense X , you get to choose which you use (usually the higher) and if it is quoted as adding defense X it adds to it.

What is wrong here is that it is clear from dev responses and the preview that in this case they are meant to stack but RAW at this time, you just got the ability twice resulting in no net gain. FWIW I'm playing this as stacking, but just want to settle that by strict RAW interpretation the 2 Arsenals don't stack.

Also for what it's worth I started the training to be a Magic the Gathering judge and with the wording of the rules without an errata there would be no doubt on how this would have to be ruled in a tournament, here is hoping though that they clear that one up before official tournaments take place.

As for official rules they can go out the window when I play or my friends play against me with Weiss it's Arsenal 4 as far as I'm concerned

Edit by the opposing logic a team of stormtroopers gets precise X where X is the number of troopers.

No.

Unit keywords apply to the unit, weapons keywords are added for each weapon used.

Unit upgrade cards apply keywords to the entire unit.

Hence, Precise 1 on the stormtrooper unit card is exactly that, 1. Impact 1 on a grenade is applied exactly as many times as it gets used. Scopes add 1 to precise.