So a few ships mention "if a friendly ship in your firing arc..." would this also qualify for the ship using the ability? Example is new Kanan able to spend a force to decrease the attack die used against his own ship by 1?

Are you asking if a ship is in its own firing arc? If that's the question, I'd say the answer is no.

I don't think we have a definitive "yes or no" answer to this question, but by my analysis, I'd agree with @jwilliamson12 ; A ship is not within its own firing arc. My reasoning: in the First Edition rules reference guide, on page 11, it states:

Quote

A ship’s primary firing arc is the area formed by extending the firing arc lines printed on the front of the ship’s token. A firing arc extends across the play area. A ship is inside a firing arc if any part of its base falls inside the area formed by extending the firing-arc lines.

Since no part of a ship's base (remember, the nubs don't count for purposes of combat) overlaps the area formed by extending the firing arc lines from its own base, it can't be in its own firing arc. Since there's no reason to expect Second Edition to alter these rules, I'd expect it to stand.

Not that there isn't a Lucasfilm precedent for an aircraft shooting itself...

I dunno. I kind of want to make a Rules-As-Intended argument that, because Kanan is probably intended to be able to reduce the attack dice of a ship shooting himself, a ship ought to be in arc of itself, in the same way a ship is friendly to itself, and is in range of itself.

I think if Kanan was intended to not be able to reduce the attack dice of ships attacking him, he'd have been worded "another friendly" rather than just "friendly."

Sort of inline with the original question, has Range Zero been defined yet? This might have a bearing on the answer.

19 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

Sort of inline with the original question, has Range Zero been defined yet? This might have a bearing on the answer.

I don't know if there's an explicit definition, but general consensus has been " yourself and anything you are touching/overlapping (game state)"

10 hours ago, emeraldbeacon said:

I don't know if there's an explicit definition, but general consensus has been " yourself and anything you are touching/overlapping (game state)"

I can't wait for the rule book to be released. The I get to re-learn all the terminology that's been changed. ☹️

4 hours ago, Stoneface said:

I can't wait for the rule book to be released. The I get to re-learn all the terminology that's been changed. ☹️

Pilot Skill-itiative! Comb-agement phase! Target locks!

On 7/6/2018 at 5:24 PM, theBitterFig said:

I dunno. I kind of want to make a Rules-As-Intended argument that, because Kanan is probably intended to be able to reduce the attack dice of a ship shooting himself, a ship ought to be in arc of itself, in the same way a ship is friendly to itself, and is in range of itself.

I think if Kanan was intended to not be able to reduce the attack dice of ships attacking him, he'd have been worded "another friendly" rather than just "friendly."

That's a good point too and now I'm even more curious to see what the verdict will be

On 7/6/2018 at 6:24 PM, theBitterFig said:

I dunno. I kind of want to make a Rules-As-Intended argument that, because Kanan is probably intended to be able to reduce the attack dice of a ship shooting himself, a ship ought to be in arc of itself, in the same way a ship is friendly to itself, and is in range of itself.

I think if Kanan was intended to not be able to reduce the attack dice of ships attacking him, he'd have been worded "another friendly" rather than just "friendly."

My argument about comparing in-arc to in-range is that range outside facing in, whereas arc is inside going out, if that makes sense.

When determining range, the range is a parameter in which the ship is the radius. So the ship has to fall within the parameters of the range.

My understanding of arc is that it extends out from the point of the markers on the ship base.

But it's very possible they intended it to apply to Kanan himself. Either way, they will need to make a ruling to verify one way or another.

Based on @emeraldbeacon 's quoted definition, then you're not in your own firing arc. Which makes sense, I guess.

On 7/6/2018 at 12:27 PM, GILLIES291 said:

So a few ships mention "if a friendly ship in your firing arc..." would this also qualify for the ship using the ability? Example is new Kanan able to spend a force to decrease the attack die used against his own ship by 1?

Simply... no. From what we have seen, if they wanted a ship to use its own ability, that add the range disclaimer... (IE, range 0-1). The fact no range is mentioned, means that it applies to ships to other ships.

6 minutes ago, shaunmerritt said:

Simply... no. From what we have seen, if they wanted a ship to use its own ability, that add the range disclaimer... (IE, range 0-1). The fact no range is mentioned, means that it applies to ships to other ships.

I don't find that convincing. If we're taking about how FFG could have phrased things differently, Kanan doesn't state a range, but Kanan also says "a friendly ship" and not "another friendly ship," which would certainly have closed the door to any discussion. Kanan may or may not be intended to work on ships attacking himself, but missing a range doesn't seem more important than missing "another."

*sigh* This is actually kind of one of the things which irks me most about 2e. There's this big push for clarity, but like, could FFG have just hired a technical writer to edit their cards?

If I had to make a ruling I'd say no. I mean, just by basic logic I don't see how a ship could possibly be within its own arc. Can you point at your right index finger WITH your right index finger?

If FFG comes out and says otherwise later then fine, but that's my take. Presumably this will be clarified once the rules are released.

My opinion is that Kanaan doesn't specify "another" friendly ship (although I agree it would have been nice to just toss that extra word on thete for clarity) because it's just obvious a ship can't be in its own arc so the word is unnecessary.

One notable fact: "in your firing arc" doesn't care about range. Being in Kanan's arc means being within his firing arc lines, no matter HOW far they are away.

3 minutes ago, emeraldbeacon said:

One notable fact: "in your firing arc" doesn't care about range. Being in Kanan's arc means being within his firing arc lines, no matter HOW far they are away.

I think it's likely that in 2.0 the rules will define being in arc as being within range 3 in arc, otherwise there's dumb stuff like soontir measuring his bullseye across the whole board to see if he gets a free focus.

1 hour ago, player2072913 said:

I think it's likely that in 2.0 the rules will define being in arc as being within range 3 in arc, otherwise there's dumb stuff like soontir measuring his bullseye across the whole board to see if he gets a free focus.

Not just likely, I can confirm from conversation with Alex Davey at Euros that they WILL.

Is it just me or is the criteria for the ability just plain weird anyways? I suppose you can have ships trail behind Kanan in his rear arc. But usually with the Ghost, its wingman is off to the side. With Kanan, you’ll have to like barrel roll in front or behind him to get the ability to trigger. Did they think 0-1 range was too strong?

13 minutes ago, jwilliamson12 said:

Is it just me or is the criteria for the ability just plain weird anyways? I suppose you can have ships trail behind Kanan in his rear arc. But usually with the Ghost, its wingman is off to the side. With Kanan, you’ll have to like barrel roll in front or behind him to get the ability to trigger. Did they think 0-1 range was too strong?

You put a turret and a shuttle on the ghost and it has firing arcs on roughly 3/4 of its base...

What are the odds that the range criteria for being in arc is defined in the second edition rules as "0-3"?

4 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:

You put a turret and a shuttle on the ghost and it has firing arcs on roughly 3/4 of its base...

Ah Yeah forgot about the turret arc.

While the newly released rulebook doesn't mention about ships being in their own firing arcs, it's pretty clear on range and if you can target yourself.

Page 4 of the Core Set Rulebook says that "An object is at the range that corresponds to the range band that falls over the closest point of the second object. Two objects (ships, obstacles, devices) that are touching are at range 0 of each other. Likewise, an object is at range 0 of itself.

Page 8 of the Core Set Rulebook says that a "target must be at range 1-3".

So much like in 1.0, you can't target ships at range 0 (including yourself). Hopefully the forthcoming Rules Reference will be a bit more clear on firing arcs.

17 minutes ago, Nspace said:

While the newly released rulebook doesn't mention about ships being in their own firing arcs, it's pretty clear on range and if you can target yourself.

Page 4 of the Core Set Rulebook says that "An object is at the range that corresponds to the range band that falls over the closest point of the second object. Two objects (ships, obstacles, devices) that are touching are at range 0 of each other. Likewise, an object is at range 0 of itself.

Page 8 of the Core Set Rulebook says that a "target must be at range 1-3".

So much like in 1.0, you can't target ships at range 0 (including yourself). Hopefully the forthcoming Rules Reference will be a bit more clear on firing arcs.

Notable is that the rules above deal specifically with choosing a target to attack, in the Combat Engagement Phase. Other effects require that the target be at a different range, to take effect: Locks can choose any target at Range 0-3 (does that include yourself?)... coordinate works at Range 1-2 (no coordinate action to someone touching you?)... Jam works at Range 1 only... and so on. Unless we get a comprehensive Rules Reference like in First Edition, we may not clearly know what is and is not defined as "in arc."

7 hours ago, emeraldbeacon said:

Notable is that the rules above deal specifically with choosing a target to attack, in the Combat Engagement Phase. Other effects require that the target be at a different range, to take effect: Locks can choose any target at Range 0-3 (does that include yourself?)... coordinate works at Range 1-2 (no coordinate action to someone touching you?)... Jam works at Range 1 only... and so on. Unless we get a comprehensive Rules Reference like in First Edition, we may not clearly know what is and is not defined as "in arc."

Fortunately there is a rules reference coming.

The rules book is now available but not the reference. Arc however is not range restricted. They extend from the center of the base to the wdge of the playing area.

So even if it souds counter intuitive a ship is in its own arcs. After all thwy are pri ted on the base so rhe base is always in them.

And since Kanan does bot state the ship to be beyond range 0, you as well as any ship at range 0 in the arx should be elligeble.