Hi,

short question, Grand Inquisitor ability to apply range 1 bonus to range 2-3 :

Does the defending still gets the additionnal die for range 3?

I guess not... but nothing is clear about what happens to range 3 bonus...

the card doesn't say anything about the range three bonus - and so it simply does not affect it.

Grand Inquisitor was one of the most confusingly worded cards of 2e in my mind. 1e TGI was bad, because he created "zombie" conditions: the attack counted as Range 1, regardless of the actual range, but only for some abilities.

2e Grand Inquisitor is better, in that it doesn't change the attack range, but specifies a set of ranges where TGI's range bonus can be added, or where he can deny a range bonus. It no longer "counts as" range 1, so it does not deny an enemy their Range 3 defensive bonus.

But with the specificity of the ranges and conditions in the text of the card, they ought to have taken the next step, and not couched the dice added or subtracted in range bonus language. Just "When you defend at Range 1, you may spend 1 force to cause the attacker to roll 1 fewer attack die. When you perform a primary attack at Range 2-3, you may spend one force to roll 1 additional attack die." It's frustrating because FFG clearly saw the right direction, but stopped halfway there.

21 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Grand Inquisitor was one of the most confusingly worded cards of 2e in my mind. 1e TGI was bad, because he created "zombie" conditions: the attack counted as Range 1, regardless of the actual range, but only for some abilities.

2e Grand Inquisitor is better, in that it doesn't change the attack range, but specifies a set of ranges where TGI's range bonus can be added, or where he can deny a range bonus. It no longer "counts as" range 1, so it does not deny an enemy their Range 3 defensive bonus.

But with the specificity of the ranges and conditions in the text of the card, they ought to have taken the next step, and not couched the dice added or subtracted in range bonus language. Just "When you defend at Range 1, you may spend 1 force to cause the attacker to roll 1 fewer attack die. When you perform a primary attack at Range 2-3, you may spend one force to roll 1 additional attack die." It's frustrating because FFG clearly saw the right direction, but stopped halfway there.

Your suggestion would not 100% be the same, though, as it would allow Grand Inquisitor to deny attack dice to missiles and torpedoes at range 1, and deny him a range bonus on hypothetical range 2-3 special attacks.

2 hours ago, Maui. said:

Your suggestion would not 100% be the same, though, as it would allow Grand Inquisitor to deny attack dice to missiles and torpedoes at range 1, and deny him a range bonus on hypothetical range 2-3 special attacks.

I'm not quite as concerned with whether it's 100% the same, but whether it's less confusing. This is at least the 3rd or 4th thread onhere about range bonuses and the Grand Inquisitor, and they've already had to make rules reference errata based on him, with extra clarification to rule out the possibility of Range 1 bonuses on Ordnance. That would have been worth a slight buff against Advanced Proton Torpedoes, and a slight nerf on a kind weapon which doesn't exist yet.