I didn't see this asked anywhere. I was wondering how the text for IG-88B works vs escort.

"At the start of Squadron Phase, you may toggle your activation slider to the activated side. If you do, you may perform an anti-squadron attack against each enemy squadron at distance 1. Treat these attacks as obstructed."

Couple scenarios that I want to confirm.

1. IG-88B attacks all squardons in range ignoring Escort

2. IG-88B attacks only those with keyword escort and can only do so once. If there is only 1 escort, IG-88B will therefore only make 1 attack.

3. IG-88B performs an attack on each squadron but must direct those attacks at squadrons with keyword escort. Example: IG-88B is in range of 1black squadron and 4 ties. IG-88B targets generic squadron 1 but attack is directed to Black Squadron. IG-88B targets generic squadron 2 but attack is directed to Black Squadron and so on until black is dead or all eligible attacks are completed.

I am assuming scenario 3 is an extreme case and is not likely, but we have not had a squadron with text like this before. I am guessing scenario 2 is the only option.

2, but if you kill the escorts first you may continue hitting things.

Escort's "cannot" is a very strong barrier to overcome, and the only specific exception it makes is for counter attacks.

54 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

2, but if you kill the escorts first you may continue hitting things.

Escort's "cannot" is a very strong barrier to overcome, and the only specific exception it makes is for counter attacks.

This is what I came up with responding to this in our FB group and agree. "Cannot" overrules a lot of stuff.

I just replied in ACFC, but for the broader audience here:

2.

The "cannot" in the Escort keyword trumps everything per the Golden Rule.

The relevant rules:

===

IG-88B : At the start of Squadron Phase, you may toggle your activation slider to the activated side. If you do, you may perform an anti-squadron attack against each enemy squadron at distance 1. Treat these attacks as obstructed.

---

Escort . (Squadrons you are engaged with cannot attack squadrons without Escort unless performing a Counter attack.)

---

RRG pg 1 THE GOLDEN RULES : If a card effect uses the word “cannot,” that effect is absolute.

===

IG-88B allows an attack against everything in distance 1.

Escort prevents you from attacking anything without Escort while you're engaged.

Those two effects are in direct opposition, thus the Golden Rule applies: "cannot" wins.

This is currently my only problem with IG88B.

Getting him placed well (and survive) is already hard. But with the escort he is too easy to counter.

43 minutes ago, Tokra said:

This is currently my only problem with IG88B.

Getting him placed well (and survive) is already hard. But with the escort he is too easy to counter .

Good points.

I truly haven't put enough thought into the new squadrons yet to grok them all, but maybe Hondo would help with this ? You'd have to activate him and lose out on his Rogue for the round, but you could use him to yoink an Escort away to clear up IG's shots.

Escorts “cannot” is a rulebook rule, being found there as a keyword. technically not a card effect. It is not absolute. The fact the word appears on a card is reminder text only.

... but I can’t hang out here at the moment.

Wouldn't it be too much to write on IG88B "treat this attack as obstructed couterattack"? Would have solved the whole problem 😁

Or just the part: Ignore escort for this attacks...

2 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Escorts “cannot” is a rulebook rule, being found there as a keyword. technically not a card effect. It is not absolute. The fact the word appears on a card is reminder text only.

... but I can’t hang out here at the moment.

This makes a lot of sense reading Kyrsta Agate now. And also match with ECM's FAQ (but makes it looks like an errata rather than just a clarification as it is against RAW)

3 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Escorts “cannot” is a rulebook rule, being found there as a keyword. technically not a card effect. It is not absolute. The fact the word appears on a card is reminder text only.

... but I can’t hang out here at the moment.

That's... a pretty tenuous claim. If "an effect printed on the card" is not the definition of "card effect," you're undermining the entirety of the Golden Rule..

4 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

Exactly.

Escort .

That is the Keyword rule there.

The Italic is Reminder Text, not Rules Text and should not be taken as so. We had another Rule where Reminder Text was a barrier to understanding (I think it was the Snipe and Flight Controllers Interaction) and it was made clear via email responses to that one that Reminder text isn't Rules text.

A keyword. Printed on and conferred by the card.

I'm extremely skeptical of that interpretation. Most of the time I can at least see both sides of these questions, but excluding a card effect from the golden rule because it ALSO appears in the rule book seems pretty tenuous to me.

Escort is defined in, but NOT conferred by, the RRG. I can't see the argument for it not being a card effect.

😅

I'm also not saying it doesn't need to be explicitly ruled either.

I feel, from a personal standpoint, that being able to shut down a very tricky, very difficult to use ability with a single easy move is... problematic from a game effect. I can't explicitly state that it was intended that way, because I'm not a designer, didn't design it, and didn't write rules for it. I'm only interpreting it from a game perspective based on the responses that have been given to other questions.

Effectively, if you delete all of the reminder text, everything after "Escort", then "Escort" becomes a rulebook rule of sorts, and subject to no longer being overwritten.

I mean, how's this one, as it just hit me:

If Escort and its cannot were Absolute. Then IG88 (the first one) would not be able to ignore it explicitly. Becaues even though he says to ignore the Escort Rule, Escort's Rule is absolute under the Golden Rule in that Interpretation.

I know you're half joking, Ovi, but

1) Alt arts aren't authoritative afaik, and

2) I consider this (and all the squadrons that actually have escort without the amplifying text printed on) to be further evidence that it is a card effect. The meaning of "Escort" is defined in the RRG; its presence in a certain squadron is not. It is conferred on a given squadron by virtue of being in the card--I don't know how else you could define "card effect" that wouldn't include that.

3 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

I know you're half joking, Ovi, but

1) Alt arts aren't authoritative afaik, and

2) I consider this (and all the squadrons that actually have escort without the amplifying text printed on) to be further evidence that it is a card effect. The meaning of "Escort" is defined in the RRG; its presence in a certain squadron is not. It is conferred on a given squadron by virtue of being in the card--I don't know how else you could define "card effect" that wouldn't include that.

Addressing point 1 at least:

Forget Escort for a moment....

Valen Rudor : My card effect says you can't shoot me as there are others nearby.

IG88B : My card effect says I shoot you all.

Valen Rudor : No you can't.

IG88B : Yes I can.

Valen Rudor : No you can't.

IG88B : Yes I can.

Valen Rudor : No you can't.

IG88B : Yes I can.

Valen Rudor : No you can't.

IG88B : Yes I can.

Help, I'm caught in a curcular reference loop.
I think it continues until one of them sings at a higher pitch and for longer and then the other goes blue in the face and falls over. 😊

3 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

I know you're half joking, Ovi, but

1) Alt arts aren't authoritative afaik, and

2) I consider this (and all the squadrons that actually have escort without the amplifying text printed on) to be further evidence that it is a card effect. The meaning of "Escort" is defined in the RRG; its presence in a certain squadron is not. It is conferred on a given squadron by virtue of being in the card--I don't know how else you could define "card effect" that wouldn't include that. 

Well, hold a second...

OFFICIAL Art Arts are just as legal as standard cards in the Tournament regulations - there's a whole section it it. The disallowed ones are 3rd Party.

The are cards in the game, and legal for all intents and purposes...

2 minutes ago, Mad Cat said:

Forget Escort for a moment....

Valen Rudor : My card effect says you can't shoot me as there are others nearby.

IG88B : My card effect says I shoot you all.

Valen Rudor : No you can't.

IG88B : Yes I can.

Valen Rudor : No you can't.

IG88B : Yes I can.

Valen Rudor : No you can't.

IG88B : Yes I can.

Valen Rudor : No you can't.

IG88B : Yes I can.

Help me, I'm caught in a curcular reference loop.
I think it continues until one of them sings at a higher pitch and for longer and then the other goes blue in the face and falls over. 😊

Here Rudlr clearly wins as it is definitely a card effect.

1 minute ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Here Rudlr clearly wins as it is definitely a card effect.

Also cannot > can.

3 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Escorts “cannot” is a rulebook rule, being found there as a keyword. technically not a card effect. It is not absolute. The fact the word appears on a card is reminder text only.

... but I can’t hang out here at the moment.

This does not make any logical sense.

The rulebook rule being overridden is performing more than 1 attack.

"and ignores the escort keyword" would be a simple additon to the card but is not present.

"Perform an attack" is no different than any other attack. The attacks happen one at a time, so you would check at the start of each attack who you can actually declare as the target.

This mean Valen can avoid if IG88B is engaged by another squad.

Soontir would ping him for damage for any non counter attack not targeting him.

Nothing at all about IG88B implies it is anything other than being able to declare another target, but follows all rules for declaring an attack.

Step 1 of an attack is always declare a target. Eligible targets can still be limited.

Cannot always trumps can. Nothing here is changing the attack sequence, only how many attacks can be declared.

Sorry for double post, am on my phone.

10 minutes ago, Mog1255 said:

Also cannot > can.

Only when its a Card Effect.

That's what half the argument is about.

4 minutes ago, Mog1255 said:

This does not make any logical sense.

The rulebook rule being overridden is performing more than 1 attack.

That's not completely true. It is allowing to attack specific squadrons so it will conflict with any rule prevent that and in case of conflict there is also a rule to solve it. That is what we're talking here. That rule is the Golden Rule and only works for CANNOT cars effects, nor RRG CANNOT effects.

If a card say you may do something the RRG says you cannot, you my do that thing.

That's the reason IG may attack several times.

Escort says that squadrons you're engaged with cannot attack squadrons without escort. That validate as a conflicting rule but IF it is just a RRG rule then IG wins again. IF not he doesn't.

I concede it is not easy to say escort is not a card effect but I see it may be not.

For the record, I think IG-88B* should bypass escort from a balance perspective, for the reasons Tokra pointed out. I just think he needs a specific errata to do so.

*Can someone cleverer than me please come up with a catchy shorthand name for him? I propose "Bravo".