2 hours ago, nitrobenz said:

I would consider all of those things, plus decloak, to fall under "while you move".

Decloak falls under "boost/barrel roll in some form or fashion" because, all a decloak move is, is a type of boost or barrel roll. Same goes for tractor beam movement (it just has the specific exception that allows it to overlap obstacles).

3 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

That transposes into the same thing. Why does it matter if the obstacle exists if your ignoring it? Because there's some other effect where you don't ignore it.

Eeeh not really. It matters because you are ignoring the limitations the obstacle is imposing on you, but not ignoring the fact that there is an obstacle there. In the same way that one person may be hindered in one environment while another has no issues in it, or even thrives in it. Hes not ignoring the environment, he's just adapted himself to deal with it in a way that it doesnt slow him down (if that makes sense).

2 hours ago, Lyianx said:

Eeeh not really. It matters because you are ignoring the limitations the obstacle is imposing on you, but not ignoring the fact that there is an obstacle there. In the same way that one person may be hindered in one environment while another has no issues in it, or even thrives in it. Hes not ignoring the environment, he's just adapted himself to deal with it in a way that it doesnt slow him down (if that makes sense).

So... ignoring but not entirely ignoring?

That's a bit facetious of me and a little uncool, but this is just a really messy set of rules. Whatever technical jargon FFG has tried to cook up winds up essentially splitting hairs, leading to a mostly-ignore-but-not-entirely-ignore situation. If it didn't show a fundamental misunderstanding of how the community interprets the rules, I probably wouldn't mind.

41 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

So... ignoring but not entirely ignoring?

That's a bit facetious of me and a little uncool, but this is just a really messy set of rules. Whatever technical jargon FFG has tried to cook up winds up essentially splitting hairs, leading to a mostly-ignore-but-not-entirely-ignore situation. If it didn't show a fundamental misunderstanding of how the community interprets the rules, I probably wouldn't mind.

What i mean is, ignoring in the sense that its not bothering you. Perhaps 'ignore' isnt the right word as it suggests actively not paying attention to something or 'forcing yourself' to not acknowledge it. Inattentive, maybe? I dono.

You're breathing air, but you are not actively paying attention to the fact that you are breathing air, yet you are not actively ignoring it either. Yet, the air is Still there. It doesn't not exist just because you are not bothered enough by it to give it any attention to acknowledge its presence.

Same thing with temperature (what i was trying to elude to with my previous comment). For one person, 40F might not bother someone. They may be perfectly comfortable, while another person is bothered by it, its too cold for them. For the person who isnt bothered by it, hes not ignoring the temperature in an active sense, its just not interfering with him for im to care about it. It still exists, but its not effecting him.

Its weird to explain properly i guess.. maybe that's why FFG is having difficulty with it.

On 10/29/2019 at 10:39 PM, theBitterFig said:

They probably think it's so obvious they're mad they have to answer it.

I keep thinking about how PO'ed the devs always seemed when they kept having to answer questions about Rigged Cargo Chute and a debris token being dropped on you.

Well, if they would just take a little time to write the rules properly and consistently, these sorts of things wouldn't happen.

<cue FFG ruling one way for struts, ruling the opposite way for Dash and Mining Guild TIE, and breaking several other card interactions unintentionally in the process>

2 hours ago, JJ48 said:

Well, if they would just take a little time to write the rules properly and consistently, these sorts of things wouldn't happen.

<cue FFG ruling one way for struts, ruling the opposite way for Dash and Mining Guild TIE, and breaking several other card interactions unintentionally in the process>

This is harder than you think. The problem with working with something for a long time, is you get to know it. You know how its suppose to work so when a relatively simple issue arises, your mind tends to skip over the "easy" solutions and jump straight to the "it must be broken because of all these reasons". For FFG, i imagine since they all know how the game is suppose to work, and what the writers are intending, they have a hard time each revision seeing it "from the outside perspective" of different interpretations.

That said, there are alot of glaring issues that i feel should have been caught, but i don't think this is one of them necessarily.

On 10/31/2019 at 6:15 PM, theBitterFig said:

So... ignoring but not entirely ignoring?

That's a bit facetious of me and a little uncool, but this is just a really messy set of rules. Whatever technical jargon FFG has tried to cook up winds up essentially splitting hairs, leading to a mostly-ignore-but-not-entirely-ignore situation. If it didn't show a fundamental misunderstanding of how the community interprets the rules, I probably wouldn't mind.

X-Wing is a fan of Schrodinger's ignoring.

I'm guessing nobody has received an answer from FFG on this...

9 hours ago, dsul413 said:

I'm guessing nobody has received an answer from FFG on this...

FFG doesnt typically respond directly to questions like this. If enough people ask them, then they will post a ruling on it either in the Rulings thread or in the next rules reference. If not, then they let the community answer it.

I think the only time they really directly answer questions like this are during their X-wing live streams, and even at that, it usually needs to pertain to the content they are showcasing (but not always).

In this case, i think FFG probably feels they've already answered this.