My suspicion is that it's intended to allow launching and probably to use a 1 straight but for whatever reason it wasn't written completely.
2.0 Launch a Connor Net or Proximity Mine?
Perhaps there will be a gunner or someone who will come out that will let you launch a mine forward, in which case Deathrain's pilot text is for future proofing.
As much as I like the image of an angry Deathfire vaulting from his cockpit after his ship is destroyed, proximity mine tucked under one arm, I have to agree with bitterFig. There's a section in the rules reference specifically about "Replacement Effects" and Deathfire's ability is missing the crucial "instead" keyword - something that does appear on cards like Zuvio (quadjumper) and Ved Foslo (tie Advanced).
If FFG had intended for Deathfire to be able to launch a device that can't normally be launched, they would have simply written "you may drop a device, or launch a device instead of dropping it.". They specifically set up the "instead" keyword for special situations like this to allow effects that normally can't happen - it's not a scenario they didn't think of - and the fact that they didn't use it in this case would suggest, in my opinion, that they were simply future proofing.
Edited by kaisquaredOfficial ruling of relevance:
Deathfire cannot launch something they couldn't normally launch.
Which means currently the 'or launch' in his ability does diddly squat.
42 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:Which means currently the 'or launch' in his ability does diddly squat.
Sure. But it also means that if they ever release a Gunner who let you launch 1-forward instead of drop, or if they ever release a device which is launched by default, those will all work as intended with Deathfire, without requiring errata.
They really should have used some third generic term like "deploy" for "launch or drop." Notes for 3e.
16 hours ago, theBitterFig said:Sure. But it also means that if they ever release a Gunner who let you launch 1-forward instead of drop, or if they ever release a device which is launched by default, those will all work as intended with Deathfire, without requiring errata.
They really should have used some third generic term like "deploy" for "launch or drop." Notes for 3e.
I'm not sure why they would go for this crew as it would just be a great way to terror bomb yourself.
But yes, future proofing the rules probably.
16 minutes ago, AramoroA said:I'm not sure why they would go for this crew as it would just be a great way to terror bomb yourself.
In many ways, so is Genius.
where are you getting that any device cannot be launched? unless it specifies drop or launch, it can be dropped or launched.
On 10/4/2018 at 10:50 AM, AramoroA said:I'm not sure why they would go for this crew as it would just be a great way to terror bomb yourself.
But yes, future proofing the rules probably.
you can already launch one forward with any device that does not specify drop.
23 minutes ago, cwh008 said:you can already launch one forward with any device that does not specify drop.
This is just straight up not true.
The rules ref says devices may be dropped or launched. The specific device says which you can do with it. None of the current devices allow Launching. The only way in the game to Launch devices at the moment is TrajSim.
Edited by thespaceinvader56 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:This is just straight up not true.
The rules ref says devices may be dropped or launched. The specific device says which you can do with it. None of the current devices allow Launching. The only way in the game to Launch devices at the moment is TrajSim.
it is VERY true. You can launch any device that does not say it can only be dropped. It's also very true that there are no devices that currently allow for you to lunch them because they all say You must drop them
46 minutes ago, cwh008 said:it is VERY true. You can launch any device that does not say it can only be dropped. It's also very true that there are no devices that currently allow for you to lunch them because they all say You must drop them
Nope, wrong again.
You an launch a device that says it can be launched.
That's not the same as devices that don't say they can only be dropped.
2 hours ago, cwh008 said:You can launch any device that does not say it can only be dropped.
This is incorrect. Each device spells out precisely how it can be deployed, all the way down to which maneuver template may be use to do so. Absent an outside effect (e.g. Trajectory Simulator), you may only deploy a device in the manner specified by the upgrade card. Further, none of the current devices specify that they may only be dropped; they say "During the system phase, you may spend [1 charge] to drop" and simply do not provide another alternative.
If a hypothetical future device is released that says "you may drop or launch using the 1 forward template" then yes you'd be able to launch it because the card specifically says you can .
On the other hand, if for some reason a hypothetical future device is released with no printed deployment instructions, then you would not be able to drop OR launch it, because no existing game mechanism would allow you to.
Yeah... @thespaceinvader and @nexttwelveexits are both correct. Deathfire is so worded to be future-proof... as it stands, all devices have their STANDARD deployment explained on the card (which, so far, is always drop using the one-straight template). Certain effects like Trajectory Simulator permit launching a bomb instead of dropping it - but you need to follow all the guidelines on that card to do so. Other cards, like Skilled Bombardier (or the TIE Bomber ability, Nimble Bomber), allow you to use other templates to drop. They all expressly modify the deployment restrictions on the device itself.
One day , there may be a device that can be deployed with a launch in addition to (or instead of) a drop...
