Just now, gjnido said:

I think this might add some context to the Cova ruling:

In page 13 of the RR, under Maneuver:

"Some abilities reference a ship’s revealed maneuver outside of that
ship’s activation . A ship’s revealed maneuver is the maneuver selected on
its dial, which remains faceup next to that ship’s ship card until the next
Planning Phase

Also, the Cova ruling is in the SPECIFIC CARD SECTION of the FAQ. Not in the ACTIVATION PHASE AND ACTIONS

1 minute ago, JJ48 said:

1. We're not adding rules; we're showing the logical consequences of the rules already there.

2. That's not even a Golden Rule (so would you be breaking it by claiming it's one?) From page 2:
GOLDEN RULES
If a rule in this guide contradicts the Rulebook, the rule in this guide takes precedence.
If the ability of a card conflicts with the rules in this guide, the card ability takes precedence.
If a card ability uses the word “cannot,” that effect is absolute and cannot be overridden by other effects.
During an attack or while otherwise resolving an effect involving dice, each die cannot be rerolled more than once.

On the plus side, this means Damaged Engine may as well be blank, too.

1. Yes you are applying the definition of a key phrase anytime a part of that phrase is used. That would be equivalent of applying the "rotating arc" rules anywhere "arc" was mentioned

2. I meant in a general since, I lapsed and forgot the game had actual golden rules. But nevertheless, I think you would agree that adding rule is not allowed

Surely, if an ability does not reference the revealed manoeuvre, then it is a continuous effect because there is nothing to say that it is not.

It simply says treat as is, so that's what you do. It doesnt change the revealed manoeuvre, it just treats it differently.

R4, Leia treat the revealed manoeuvre as reduced, but it remains as printed for the purpose of revealed abilities.

8 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

On the plus side, this means Damaged Engine may as well be blank, too.

7 minutes ago, prauxim said:

No, they continuously affect maneuver, they never affect Revealed Maneuver

1. <Reveal Dial>: The ship’s assigned dial is revealed by flipping it faceup
and then placing it next to its ship card.

2. Execute Maneuver: The ship executes the maneuver selected on the <revealed dial>.

From Maneuvers:

• Some abilities reference a ship’s revealed maneuver outside of that
ship’s activation. A ship’s revealed maneuver is the maneuver selected on
its dial, which remains faceup next to that ship’s ship card until the next
Planning Phase.

The maneuver that you're instructed to execute in step 2 of the Activation Phase is the maneuver on the dial revealed in step 1 and is looked at by "revealed maneuver" abilities.

9 minutes ago, Tyhar7 said:

You execute the maneuver on the revealed dial. To me that maneuver is the revealed maneuver on the revealed dial + mods. R4, Nien.. ect

Revealed Maneuver is a proper noun / key phrase. Its bolded and uses a different font. You can't back-hack its definition to anywhere the words reveal/revealed are used.

The other terms you bolded are not bolded anywhere in the RR. "Reveal" is never bolded in the RR outside of Revealed Maneuver and Revealed which is an Activation phase timing

If the term Revealed alone implied "as printed" they would have included that in it's definition as opposed to the Revealed Maneuver definition

2 minutes ago, prauxim said:

1. Yes you are applying the definition of a key phrase anytime a part of that phrase is used. That would be equivalent of applying the "rotating arc" rules anywhere "arc" was mentioned

Not at all.
Per the entry for Maneuver: "A ship’s revealed maneuver is the maneuver selected on its dial ,"
Per the entry for Activation Phase: "The ship executes the maneuver selected on the revealed dial. "

Assuming "revealed dial" simply means "dial", simple logic means the second phrase is equivalent to "The ship executes the revealed maneuver." Since the FAQ has stated that a "revealed maneuver" is the printed maneuver, without modification, modifications should not be taken under consideration during execution of the maneuver.

Now, this reasoning breaks down if "revealed dial" does not mean the same thing as "dial", but in that case, we have no definition of what it does mean, and the rule becomes gibberish until defined.

maneuver selected on the revealed dial =/= to Revealed Maneuver

If Revealed Maneuver was not a bolded key term, I would totally agree that they seem to be the same thing.

But bolded key phrases have specific, often non-intuitive meanings, which is why they exist. Look at phrases like while attacking , you can't take a piece of that definition and go try to apply it anywhere where "while" is used, its not intended for use in any other scenario

4 minutes ago, prauxim said:

maneuver selected on the revealed dial =/= to Revealed Maneuver

Except that according to the entry for Maneuver, it means exactly that . Unless you're arguing that "revealed dial" does not mean "dial", in which case I'd like to hear how you define it.

Also, even without the logical connection, your "examples" are way off mark. Even if we couldn't logically prove the two to be synonymous (though, we can and have), the similarity between the two would be more like card text talking about "an arc that can rotate" and applying the rules for "rotating arc" to it.

Is there a section where it says that you are not allowed to treat your revealed manoeuvre differently?

Because that's what these other cards do.

You execute your revealed manoeuvre whilst treating it as the relevant upgrade card suggests, unless that upgrade card specifically references your revealed manouevre.

6 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

Is there a section where it says that you are not allowed to treat your revealed manoeuvre differently?

Because that's what these other cards do.

You execute your revealed manoeuvre whilst treating it as the relevant upgrade card suggests, unless that upgrade card specifically references your revealed manouevre.

That's good thinking, and was how I interpreted it prior to this Rules Reference. However, this most recent FAQ explicitly clarifies that "revealed maneuver" is not affected by R4 or cards worded like it.

14 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Except that according to the entry for Maneuver, it means exactly that . Unless you're arguing that "revealed dial" does not mean "dial", in which case I'd like to hear how you define it.

Also, even without the logical connection, your "examples" are way off mark. Even if we couldn't logically prove the two to be synonymous (though, we can and have), the similarity between the two would be more like card text talking about "an arc that can rotate" and applying the rules for "rotating arc" to it.

No, I am arguing that Revealed Maneuver, being a bolded, camel cased, explicitly defined term, is not equivalent to anything else . Even "maneuver revealed" would not be equivalent. Similar to how Attack Arc is not equivalent to "arc in which you are attacking"

38 minutes ago, prauxim said:

No, I am arguing that Revealed Maneuver, being a bolded, camel cased, explicitly defined term, is not equivalent to anything else . Even "maneuver revealed" would not be equivalent. Similar to how Attack Arc is not equivalent to "arc in which you are attacking"

Where are you seeing it bolded?

Its bolded/camel cased here (if you Ctrl+F its the topmost hit)

Some abilities reference a ship’s revealed maneuver outside of that ship’s activation. A ship’s revealed maneuver is the maneuver selected on its dial, which remains faceup next to that ship’s ship card until the next Planning Phase. ◊ If a ship’s dial is not revealed, or it was not assigned a dial that round, that ship does not have a revealed maneuver.

1 minute ago, prauxim said:

Its bolded/camel cased here (if you Ctrl+F its the topmost hit)

Some abilities reference a ship’s revealed maneuver outside of that ship’s activation. A ship’s revealed maneuver is the maneuver selected on its dial, which remains faceup next to that ship’s ship card until the next Planning Phase. ◊ If a ship’s dial is not revealed, or it was not assigned a dial that round, that ship does not have a revealed maneuver.

Ok, and then it explicitly defines it the same way it defines which maneuver you perform. You've yet to address the fundamental argument.

1 hour ago, JJ48 said:

Ok, and then it explicitly defines it the same way it defines which maneuver you perform. You've yet to address the fundamental argument.

I've fully addressed. You may not agree with one of the steps (presumably the last one), but the logic chain is there

• Revealed maneuver is a special term
• Special terms can have meanings beyond simply what the individual words combined mean
  • E.g. attack arc
• The Cova FAQ applies to revealed maneuver
• Because special terms have special meanings, rules/ruling/FAQs related to the special term don't necessarily affect anything which does not itself reference that special term
  • e.g. language referring to "attack arc" wouldn't apply simply because you attack someone in said arc

14 minutes ago, prauxim said:

I've fully addressed. You may not agree with one of the steps (presumably the last one), but the logic chain is there

• Revealed maneuver is a special term
• Special terms can have meanings beyond simply what the individual words combined mean
  • E.g. attack arc
• The Cova FAQ applies to revealed maneuver
• Because special terms have special meanings, rules/ruling/FAQs related to the special term don't necessarily affect anything which does not itself reference that special term
  • e.g. language referring to "attack arc" wouldn't apply simply because you attack someone in said arc

Ok, I agree with all of those points. It still doesn't address my argument, though. My argument was based on the definition of "revealed maneuver", not the word "revealed" appearing in Activation Phase. Remove the word "revealed" from "dial", and my argument still stands.

Heimfire has the right of it. These changes to the rules reference so they could backup the questionable ruling on Cova R4 now make the lack of timing triggers or steps on R4 Astro and Nien and similar starkly apparent.

Everyone is caught up with revealed maneuver b ut the question is now when and how do you even apply R4 and Nien? This Cova ruling has made no place in the reading of the rules for how we understood these change difficulty of a maneuver effects to work to be applied.

It illustrates that everyone has "just known" how to handle these change difficulty of a maneuver effects. The rules provide ways to handle this had they bothered to word cards with change difficulty of a maneuver effects clearly and not as "you know what we mean."

They wrote rules about replacement effects but did not use those types of wordings on change difficulty of a maneuver effects. They did not specifically have these sorts of change difficulty of a maneuver effects apply in the check difficulty step. They did not clarify how these effects interact with stressed ships picking or changing to red maneuvers on their dial.

They left us to "just know."

1 hour ago, JJ48 said:

Ok, I agree with all of those points. It still doesn't address my argument, though. My argument was based on the definition of "revealed maneuver", not the word "revealed" appearing in Activation Phase. Remove the word "revealed" from "dial", and my argument still stands.

I see more clearly what you're saying now

Still, I think:

Revealed maneuver = "the maneuver selected on its dial" + all other rules pertaining specifically to revealed maneuver (including abilities/rulings/FAQ)

So "the maneuver selected on its dial" is not interchangeable with revealed maneuver because revealed maneuver can additionally have extra abilities/rulings tied to it (in fact, that's likely the exact reason why it was made into a special term)

------

Anyways, just realized something that may make that whole argument moot. Even if you thought the terms were equivalent and interchangeable, when you are trying to execute the maneuver and get to the check difficulty step, it only talks about the difficulty of the maneuver, so even if you are executing a white 2 hard "revealed maneuver", the check difficulty step checks the maneuver difficulty, no mention of revealed or selected. Said differently, R4 affects maneuver difficulty but not revealed maneuver difficulty

Glad I got out of this conversation long ago. Good grief!

The whole thing is such a ridiculous fiasco.

18 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Glad I got out of this conversation long ago. Good grief!

The whole thing is such a ridiculous fiasco.

Hey you're the one who clicked on page 6 of a RR thread. Something something consenting adults

5 minutes ago, prauxim said:

I see more clearly what you're saying now

Still, I think:

Revealed maneuver = "the maneuver selected on its dial" + all other rules pertaining specifically to revealed maneuver (including abilities/rulings/FAQ)

So "the maneuver selected on its dial" is not interchangeable with revealed maneuver because revealed maneuver can additionally have extra abilities/rulings tied to it (in fact, that's likely the exact reason why it was made into a special term)

------

Anyways, just realized something that may make that whole argument moot. Even if you thought the terms were equivalent and interchangeable, when you are trying to execute the maneuver and get to the check difficulty step, it only talks about the difficulty of the maneuver, so even if you are executing a white 2 hard "revealed maneuver", the check difficulty step checks the maneuver difficulty, no mention of revealed or selected. Said differently, R4 affects maneuver difficulty but not revealed maneuver difficulty

Interesting, but I'm not sure it helps. What maneuver are we checking the difficulty of? Obviously, the one we're executing. So it still boils down to whether we're executing the revealed maneuver.

Now, of course I know it's not what they intended, and it's not how people play it, and it's not how I think it should be played. But that's precisely why I want to draw attention to it. This is something that should be simple. If they want "revealed maneuver" to mean the printed maneuver, all they'd have to do would be to clarify the definition of "revealed maneuver" in the Maneuver section, and then edit the Activation Phase section to say you "execute the revealed maneuver, plus any applicable modifiers" or some such. Instead, we have an absurdity for no good reason. I get not wanting to errata the wording on the printed cards, but why not change the rules reference itself. Moreover, if this can happen with a rule that is obvious to everyone, where we all know what the correct reading should be, how much more could it happen with cases that are less obvious?

Again, I'm not advocating that people play that these cards do nothing. My real goal has been to make a sort of reductio ad absurdum argument highlighting why FFG needs to take greater care in ensuring the robustness of their Rules Reference.

11 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

edit the Activation Phase section to say "execute the revealed maneuver, plus any applicable modifiers"

That's just it "plus any applicable modifiers" is case by default due to the golden rule "card abilities take precedence". If you wrote it everywhere it was applicable, it'd be in every sentence.

Revealed maneuver is just a term that allows explicit reference to the unmodified/selected maneuver.

11 minutes ago, prauxim said:

That's just it "plus any applicable modifiers" is case by default due to the golden rule "card abilities take precedence". If you wrote it everywhere it was applicable, it'd be in every sentence.

Revealed maneuver is just a term that allows explicit reference to the unmodified/selected maneuver.

Which is only outlined as such in the FAQ involving Cova and nowhere else. That ruling contradicts R4 astro...

9 minutes ago, prauxim said:

That's just it "plus any applicable modifiers" is case by default due to the golden rule "card abilities take precedence". If you wrote it everywhere it was applicable, it'd be in every sentence.

Revealed maneuver is just a term that allows explicit reference to the unmodified/selected maneuver.

<sigh> Yes, until FFG explicitly ruled in the FAQ that the card ability doesn't take precedence. R4 Astromech says it changes the difficulty of moves. FFG ruled that it sometimes does, and sometimes doesn't. Specifically, it doesn't when referencing the maneuver selected on the ship's dial (the literal definition, from the rules reference, of "revealed maneuver"). Given that activation executes the maneuver selected on the ship's dial, and then checks the difficulty of the executed maneuver (which, you will recall, was the maneuver selected on the ship's dial), at what point is R4 Astromech allowed to actually "take precedence" and do what it says it does? And why?