Cloaked Sarco

By DoubleDown11, in X-Wing Rules Questions

Sarco Plank: "While you defend, you may treat your agility value as equal to the speed of the maneuver you executed this round."

Rules reference: "A cloaked ship has the following effects: [...] Its agility value is increased by 2."

My question is does Sarco override the cloak, or does the cloak augment Sarco? I suppose it's sort of an order of operations question: does the cloak apply its bonus before Sarco outright replaces it, or does Sarco replace his agility before the cloak bonus gets applied?

I'm fairly certain Sarco+Cloak works in favour of Sarco getting a boatload of green dice but just want to be certain.

It seems to be an order of effects thing.

1 )You cloak your agility is increased to 4
2) You execute a speed 3 manoeuvre
3) Someone shoots you and you at that point choose to use Sarco's ability
4) Sarco's ability lets you treat your agility as 3.

Sarco is not setting your base agility or anything like, he's letting you treat your agility as if it was the same as your speed. He's not adding or subtracting a number from your agility, just letting you use one value instead of another. Your ship's agility IS 4 but he can let you treat it as 3 if you want to. Just as if you did a speed 1 manoeuvre you could treat it as 1.

Card_Pilot_162.png

Edited by AramoroA

Hrm, this one is tricky.

From the RR:

image.png.11c2aa7044fd93bfca975829314df8a8.png

So, it's clear that any ability that lets you roll more/fewer dice would stack with Sarco. (Range bonus, asteroid, etc.) But cloak tokens DO directly modify your agility. So, I agree that it seems to be an order of effects thing.

Elsewhere in the RR:

image.png.a383b096ae0455052f4ddf8ebb23f4a2.png

Since Sarco's effect is an ability and the cloak token is a game effect, then I'd also agree that Sarco comes after, therefore replacing the cloak effect.

RAW: I think @AramoroA is right and you only get one or the other. Though, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if FFG later erratas that and makes another weird exception to the rules.

Yeah reading @AramoroA I think I tend to agree with that as well, outside of an FAQ/clarification to the contrary.