2 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

"When engaging" language means that Qi'ra wouldn't apply to bonus attacks. You could fire one Cluster Missile, but not the second, which would be more absurd than this already is. Qi'ra's language is as good as it could be to be both brief and clear.

Yes you would be able to fire the second, it trigger during your attack, and you are still the engaged ship. But yes it would not work during Dengar bonus attack, but that is ok, because anyway they want to make sure Jumpmaster are never played again.

It's important to remember here that we don't know the intent, we're only guessing it based on the card's wording. In reading Qi'ra I don't think the intent if for her to be able to fire while on rocks but rather to not be obstructed by them because of the rather clear timing on her "while attacking" vs the RR obstacles entry of "can not attack" you can't get to a state where you are attacking to trigger her ability if you can't attack at all.

1 hour ago, muribundi said:

You think the intent is that. There is absolutely no way to know their intent. Their intent may as well be that your are not able to attack because they did not literally say: You can perform attack while at range 0 of an obstacle. (Like your Dash example, and everything was under costed in 1e, so can't be a basis. All other upgrade of cost 2 or less in 2.0 are mostly bad)

And I have no respect for your side right now, so we are equal. You act like a flat earther. The language do not support your claim, so you bent it because you want the intent to be so.

You're trying to tell me the word "ignore" doesn't mean "ignore."

Trying to tell me 0 isn't on the real number line between 0 and 1.

My best understanding is that "performing an attack" stretches from determining if an attack is legal, checking ranges and targets, determining weapons, rolling and modifying the dice, comparing results, dealing damage. That all seems like one continuous process, splitting that up would create two or more things, which all seem like part of a larger sequence, to which the only real description I can give it is "performing an attack."

//

I will say, I think this is all covered under Catch-22. "There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he were sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to, but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle. (p. 56, ch. 5)" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22

//

And as to where the intent comes from, that's what @AramoroA said they thought FFG would do, rule it works based on intent.

7 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

You're trying to tell me the word "ignore" doesn't mean "ignore."

Trying to tell me 0 isn't on the real number line between 0 and 1.

Again you're saying ignore without the surrounding context which makes me think you're trying to be deliberately misleading. It does NOT say ignore the rock, it says ignore the rock while you're performing an attack. Which you cannot do. And anyhow from the ruling Ignore does not mean Ignore, it means 'Ignore the effects of', meaningless in this instance of course.

There's even precedence for it in the rules. If you're stressed you cannot perform actions, you cannot even attempt to perform an action. By your reasoning you could attempt to perform the action while stressed and simply fail. That is not how the rules work. If you cannot do something, you cannot even attempt it. If you cannot even attempt to perform an attack how do you think an ability that only work when performing an attack would work?

4 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

"When engaging" language means that Qi'ra wouldn't apply to bonus attacks. You could fire one Cluster Missile, but not the second, which would be more absurd than this already is. Qi'ra's language is as good as it could be to be both brief and clear.

It wouldn't affect Cluster Missiles since that happens during the Aftermath, which is still part of Engaging.

It would affect other bonus attacks.

I'm on your side on this but I do think FFG needs to state it more clearly. It seemed like they did with the Q&A but then people have hung on to this little bit. I did send a form request asking for the clarification (as the Q&A thread said that's where those answers come from). Maybe we'll get an additional clarification eventually.

25 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

My best understanding is that "performing an attack" stretches from determining if an attack is legal, checking ranges and targets, determining weapons, rolling and modifying the dice, comparing results, dealing damage. That all seems like one continuous process, splitting that up would create two or more things, which all seem like part of a larger sequence, to which the only real description I can give it is "performing an attack.

Let's try it this way. Let's say I set a number of rules that must be followed while on my property, and two of them are as follows:
- You may not come inside my house.
- While you are inside my house, you can ignore my rules.

If you come up to my door, can you come inside? No. Because you aren't inside my house yet and therefore you can't ignore the rule against coming inside. You'd have to already be inside in order to come inside which, obviously, makes no sense at all.


Qi'ra (as written) is the same. If she could attack on a rock, then she'd be attacking and could then ignore the rock. But her ability doesn't start until she IS attacking, and she can't start attacking without her ability. Therefore, she can't attack at all.

1 hour ago, theBitterFig said:

You're trying to tell me the word "ignore" doesn't mean "ignore."

Literally no one is telling you that. Trying to say that we are is just setting up the strawman that you seem so determined to beat on. Ignore does mean ignore, but Qi'ra's ability to ignore a rock while attacking never gets a chance to trigger when she's sitting on one.

I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and relax. Discussions over rules shouldn't become nasty.

Someone mentioned the Golden Rule. The RRG trumps the Rule Book. Card abilities trump the RRG. Card abilities that use the term "cannot" are absolute.

Using the Golden Rule, Q'ra would work if the ship she's in is sitting on an asteroid that she has locked.

If she is to ignore obstacles that she has locked, while moving and attacking, then she ignores the rock she's on if she has it locked.

A part of the problem are the exceptions that FFG throws into the game. Can't perform actions when stressed? See Tycho, at least in 1e. Dash is another one. Guri doesn't have the Focus action but can get a focus token from her ability. The list goes on.

Before you ask a question stop and figure where it fits in the hierarchy of the Golden Rule. That may stop a few arguments before they start.

3 hours ago, Stoneface said:

I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and relax. Discussions over rules shouldn't become nasty.

Someone mentioned the Golden Rule. The RRG trumps the Rule Book. Card abilities trump the RRG. Card abilities that use the term "cannot" are absolute.

Using the Golden Rule, Q'ra would work if the ship she's in is sitting on an asteroid that she has locked.

If she is to ignore obstacles that she has locked, while moving and attacking, then she ignores the rock she's on if she has it locked.

A part of the problem are the exceptions that FFG throws into the game. Can't perform actions when stressed? See Tycho, at least in 1e. Dash is another one. Guri doesn't have the Focus action but can get a focus token from her ability. The list goes on.

Before you ask a question stop and figure where it fits in the hierarchy of the Golden Rule. That may stop a few arguments before they start.

Qi'ra's ability does not explicitly remove the restriction from attacking so it's not comparison in this case.

You cannot attempt to perform an action whilst stressed. But you can Afterburner because it explicitly say's whilst you're stressed on it.

Qi'ra does not give this exemption to allow you to perform the attack which you are not allowed to do so there is no conflict between the Rules and Cards here.

1. I agree Ignore could probably do with a definition in the rules reference. It's come up on a couple of different abilities and will probably come up again as the game grows. I know it sounds stupidly obvious but defining it once gives an unarguable standard to work to and makes it clear what it is and is not a caveat to. If you're going to do it with can, cannot, and must, ignore is no less worthy of definition.
2. For what it's worth, a bundle of rules quotes:

Quote

ENGAGEMENT PHASE
When a ship engages, it may perform an attack.

Quote

ATTACK
Ships can perform attacks which thematically represents the ship firing its
blaster cannons, ordnance, or other weapons.
If a ship performs an attack, it becomes the attacker then follows these steps:
1. Declare Target: During this step, the attacking player identifies and
names the defender of the attack.
a. Measure Range: The attacking player measures range from the
attacker to any number of enemy ships and determines which enemy
ships are in which of its arcs.
b. Choose Weapon: The attacking player chooses one of the
attacker’s primary or special weapons.
c. Declare Defender: The attacking player chooses an enemy ship
to be the defender. The defender must meet the requirements defined
by the weapon.
d. Pay Costs: The attacker must pay any costs for performing the
attack.

Quote

OBSTACLES
Obstacles act as hazards that can disrupt and damage ships. A ship can
suffer effects by moving through, overlapping, or while being at range 0 of
obstacles.

While a ship is at range 0 of an obstacle it may suffer different effects.
• Asteroid: The ship cannot perform attacks.

Quote

Qi'Ra

While you move and perform attacks, you ignore obstacles that you are locking.

So, working through:

• Engaging =/= attacking. Which makes sense, as other things can trigger 'when you engage'. It also means, by the same logic in reverse, that 'when attacking' (Qi'ra's trigger) doesn't cover your entire engagement.
• Attacking begins with the Declare Target step; meaning 'check if you're entitled to shoot' (am I on a rock or disarmed) isn't a step within the attack itself. If you cannot perform attacks, you never proceed to step 1 of the attack process or trigger Qi'Ra.

On the one hand, this feels stupid. On the other hand, that does feel like what's written. On the other, other hand, the exact same expansion also provided a pilot (Outer Rim Pioneer) whose pilot ability cuts straight through the problem: 'Friendly ships at range 0-1 can perform attacks at range 0 of obstacles.'

2 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

On the other, other hand, the exact same expansion also provided a pilot (Outer Rim Pioneer) whose pilot ability cuts straight through the problem: 'Friendly ships at range 0-1 can perform attacks at range 0 of obstacles.'

I don't think we can take this into account much because of the differences in their abilities. ORP only cares about whether you can make attacks at range 0 of an asteroid. Qi'ra cares about ignoring any effect of obstacles, which includes what ORP does. The issue is that Qi'ra has the limiting factor of "when attacking" which is the only hangup.

FFG needs to clarify if we check for rocks before "perform an attack" starts or if it is part of "perform an attack."

22 minutes ago, CaptainIxidor said:

I don't think we can take this into account much because of the differences in their abilities. ORP only cares about whether you can make attacks at range 0 of an asteroid. Qi'ra cares about ignoring any effect of obstacles, which includes what ORP does. The issue is that Qi'ra has the limiting factor of "when attacking" which is the only hangup.

Agreed All I meant by that point was that if you have a custom YT-1300 with pioneer docked, there's no question you can shoot, where Qi'Ra lets you ignore the obstacle.

Let's approach this differently. Would you agree that since Qi'ra' s ability allows her to ignore obstacles that she has locked that it follows then she ignores the effect of those obstacles? Would you agree with the following examples?

Q'ra moves through an asteroid and doesn't roll for damage or lose her action.

Q'ra moves through a debris field and doesn't get stressed, roll for damage and doesn't forfeit her action.

Q'ra lands in a debris cloud and attacks but the closest to closest point to the Defender goes through the cloud but the defender does not get an additional green die.

Of course the abovementioned situations presume that she has the obstacles locked.

Her ability allows her to ignore stress from debris, shoot from within a debris field and deprive the defender from getting another green die and ignore the effects of moving though an asteroid.

If you agree that the situations I've mentioned are accurately presented and correctly resolved, why is it the can't attack while sitting on a rock?

3 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

If you agree that the situations I've mentioned are accurately presented and correctly resolved, why is it the can't attack while sitting on a rock?

Because she can never get to the state of "while attacking" because you can't attack while on a rock; though as stated above it would be great if they would specify exactly when "attacking" begins to specifically include/exclude checking if you're able to perform an attack.

8 minutes ago, MockingBird ME said:

Because she can never get to the state of "while attacking" because you can't attack while on a rock; though as stated above it would be great if they would specify exactly when "attacking" begins to specifically include/exclude checking if you're able to perform an attack.

Do you agree that the situations I presented are correctly resolved? Let's start with that first. Then we'll get to the "While Attacking".

25 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

Do you agree that the situations I presented are correctly resolved? Let's start with that first. Then we'll get to the "While Attacking".

Because you cannot Perform an Attack, so an ability that only works when you're performing attacks has no effect.

She definitely avoids those effects.

But unless checking for rocks happens at the same time as Perform an Attack and not before, then she can't ignore them while attacking.

I personally think this is explained by asking when the game wants us to check for being at range 0 of an asteroid. There is no point in time where this matters except for the Perform an Attack step. I'm confident that when FFG finally answers this, that determining this will be part of the Perform an Attack step.

But until we have that clarification, the RAW does seem to indicate it's not possible to actually start the Perform an Attack step. But it just feels entirely wrong when looking at the card and the previously provided clarifications.

14 hours ago, CaptainIxidor said:

personally think this is explained by asking when the game wants us to check for being at range 0 of an asteroid. There is no point in time where this matters except for the Perform an Attack step. I'm confident that when FFG finally answers this, that determining this will be part of the Perform an Attack step.

But until we have that clarification, the RAW does seem to indicate it's not possible to actually start the Perform an Attack step. But it just feels entirely wrong when looking at the card and the previously provided clarifications.

Agreed. I concur that @Stoneface is correct with all those examples - and whether Qi'Ra could shoot if ignoring a rock isn't in question; if she ignores it, the rock isn't there, therefore she can shoot.

The issue is that her card defines two periods of time when she ignores rocks; when moving and when performing attacks.

She does not have permission to ignore rocks at other times, e.g. when performing actions, so could not, for example, barrel roll onto an asteroid if she had it locked (without something else coming into play, like collision detector).

Therefore, the debate is around the fact that, as noted, being on a rock appears to stop you entering the perform an attack step. At the moment, there is no explicitly defined "check if you're allowed to attack" step we can easily reference to see whether it falls during a period of time Qi'Ra is ignoring the rock or not.

It must come up each time you attack rather than being part of an engagement - otherwise a disarm token or being on a rock would not 'block' bonus attacks which may occur out-of-sequence - but the question is which comes first in order; qi'ra's trigger or the 'on an asteroid' trigger.

The 'can't shoot' side's argument is that the 'on an asteroid' trigger must come before you count as performing an attack, since that's what it stops you doing, whilst Qi'Ra's trigger is 'whilst attacking' which must come after you start performing an attack. If they resolve in that order (which people are entitled to disagree with, because that's where the lack of clarity lies) then it's pretty ironclad that you never get as far as checking for Qi'Ra's trigger and hence she can't help.

If you can choose to resolve her trigger first, then you're fine, because as soon as her trigger resolves, the rock ceases to exist for all intents and purposes for the duration of that attack.

28 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

If you can choose to resolve her trigger first, then you're fine, because as soon as her trigger resolves, the rock ceases to exist for all intents and purposes for the duration of that attack.

Actually this isn't true. The rock can still obstruct activating things like Trick Shot. So it's still there.

I am very confused. This has an official response from a week before this post was even made:

"A ship that is “ignoring obstacles” does not apply the effects of overlapping or moving through them"

If you do not apply the effect of overlapping you can shoot.

"However, the obstacles are still treated as being present for effects that check for their presence or absence. Additionally, an attack is obstructed by an obstacle even while the effects of the obstacle are ignored. This applies to cards such as Outrider, Han Solo [Pilot, Customized YT-1300], and Trick Shot (Talent)."

So trick Shot etc still work.

This is another case of people trying to twist wording. I see multiple times during this post people quoting 'while attacking' and the card DOES NOT SAY THIS. It says "while you move and perform attacks". In the rule book the entire process is entitled 'performing an attack" (X-Wing rule book page 20) and the rule book also states: "During the engagement phase, if a ship is at range 0 of an asteroid, it cannot PERFORM AN ATTACK" while Qi-ra's card states "While you move and PERFORM ATTACKS, you ignore obstacles that you are locking.". These 2 statements use the same wording for the event, making it clear that Qi-ra does let you perform the attack.

2 hours ago, Bob Zero said:

while Qi-ra's card states "While you move and PERFORM ATTACKS, you ignore obstacles that you are locking.". These 2 statements use the same wording for the event, making it clear that Qi-ra does let you perform the attack.

So if you say the while is not part of it, the card could just read: "Perform attacks, you ignore obstacles that you are locking."

No it can't be read like that, so the "While you perform attacks" make it so you must be attacking first to ignore obstacle.

Quote

so could not, for example, barrel roll onto an asteroid if she had it locked

In fact yes you can, in 2.0 everything that change position of your ship is seen as a move. Example for Barrel Roll: "All three positions would cause the ship to overlap or move through an
obstacle." So you are "While you move" during a Barrel Roll.

3 hours ago, Bob Zero said:

I am very confused. This has an official response from a week before this post was even made:

"A ship that is “ignoring obstacles” does not apply the effects of overlapping or moving through them"

If you do not apply the effect of overlapping you can shoot.

"However, the obstacles are still treated as being present for effects that check for their presence or absence. Additionally, an attack is obstructed by an obstacle even while the effects of the obstacle are ignored. This applies to cards such as Outrider, Han Solo [Pilot, Customized YT-1300], and Trick Shot (Talent)."

So trick Shot etc still work.

This is another case of people trying to twist wording. I see multiple times during this post people quoting 'while attacking' and the card DOES NOT SAY THIS. It says "while you move and perform attacks". In the rule book the entire process is entitled 'performing an attack" (X-Wing rule book page 20) and the rule book also states: "During the engagement phase, if a ship is at range 0 of an asteroid, it cannot PERFORM AN ATTACK" while Qi-ra's card states "While you move and PERFORM ATTACKS, you ignore obstacles that you are locking.". These 2 statements use the same wording for the event, making it clear that Qi-ra does let you perform the attack.

The argument is that checking for the state of being at range 0 of an asteroid is checked before the game lets you move to the state of "when attacking," keeping her ability from functioning in this case.

Because the Perform an Attack step does not specifically say, "check for range 0 of an asteroid as a sub-step of this step," the assumption from those on that side of the argument is that this is checked at all times, including when you would move to try to enter the Perform an Attack step while engaging, which could prevent you from entering that state.

Meanwhile, the other side of the argument (which I'm on) thinks it works just fine, because the only time we care about this particular effect of an asteroid is when we are attempting to attack, so checking it before entering the Perform an Attack step is irrelevant.

Until FFG clarifies at what point we check for being at range 0 of the asteroid, we're just going in circles.

I'm coming round to agreeing that Rules as written and intended are Qi'ra helps you ignore moving across and shooting across locked asteroids, the escape shuttle pilot "Outer Rim Pioneer" actually allows friendly ships at range 0-1 to perform attacks on obstacles.

So I think, combining the ORP escape shuttle with Qi'ra on Han with trickshot is how your meant to do this. Thoughts?

First line in FAQ says you ignore the effects of overlapping.

Q: What does “ignores obstacles” mean? Do Han Solo [Pilot, Customized YT-1300] and Qi’ra [Crew] work together? What about Dash Rendar [YT-2400] and Outrider [Title]?

@muppetfluffer what exactly "ignoring obstacles" means is not in question in this thread, the main issues has been a timing question; Qi'ra's ability says "while attacking" so there's debate over if "cannot attack at range 0 of a rock" takes effect before or while attacking. The former and she can't shoot off a rock, the latter and she can.