Greetings, fellow rules nerds! Someone has pointed out that the Aftermath step is commonly considered to be part of the attack (see: Torani Kulda + Captain Jostero). If this is true, then a B-wing that uses FCS to reroll an attack die could not then spend the lock during the Aftermath step to perform its bonus attack.

On the surface, this strikes me as exceedingly silly, especially given the devs specifically stating that this interaction (i.e. performing an S-foils bonus attack after using FCS) would be possible when they spoiled the S-foils on stream. Then again, I was one of the dissenters who thought (and still thinks) that the Aftermath step doesn't happen both during and after an attack simultaneously, so obviously I would have zero problem with FCS + foils working just fine. I wanted to bring this interaction to everyone's attention so that multiple perspectives could be shared and the conversation can devolve into yelling result in an amicable "FCS PLZ TELL US WHAT'S GOING ON, IN THE MEANTIME CHECK WITH YOUR TO" before the S-foils get released.

I have zero problem doing what FFG has told us they want us to do.

Did FFG ever clarify the interaction between Torani Kulda and Captain Jostero?

good find. i'm not happy to say that according to the rules, the aftermath step is one of the steps taken when performing an attack - and so the bonus attack happens during the attack as well, which means if you reroll with FCS during you original attack, you cannot spend the lock during the bonus attack. that's RAW. does not seem intentional.

from a different perspective, the sixth step of performing an attack called the aftermath clearly states "Abilities that trigger after an attack are resolved in the following order." - which in and of itself indicates that it's not occurring during the attack itself. yet, the aftermath step is listed as one of the steps of performing an attack.

another case of bad writing. i'm going with interpreting that the aftermath step is after the attack and not a part of the attack. causes less problems and makes more sense.

Here's how i read this

Quote

If a card instructs a ship to perform a bonus attack, it performs an additional attack during the Aftermath step.

"additional attack" may be 'nested' in an attacks aftermath step, but it is not, itself, part of or during that attack that triggered the bonus attack. Think if as an instance inside the attack, segregated and treated separately from the main attack.

This is how I interpret bonus attacks during the aftermath step.

Very good spot: I hope that the RRG update that will accompany the new releases will clarify this.

Personally, I would hope that you can FCS the first attack, then spend the lock to perform the bonus attack, otherwise this otherwise excellent upgrade falls flat unless your name is Braylen "Rerolls for days" Stramm.

I wouldnt go far as to say it "falls flat". If the entire worth of the s-foils hinged on FCS working with it, then it wouldnt be built very good regardless if it Did work or not.

Just because a specific, good combo may not work like someone wants it to, doesnt make it ****.

I think it's a valid situation. Say that Ten Numb gets the lock on a ship at R3, outside of your HLC bullseye or Autoblaster range. Ten can still use FCS for the single reroll, then later, roll into range 1-2 for the double-tap, forgoing the extra modification to be able to take two shots in a round. It can be worthwhile to take both, even if you can't use them both in the same turn.

3 minutes ago, emeraldbeacon said:

I think it's a valid situation.

I agree. Im just disputing the fact that the only way s-foils is good, is if FCS works with it. I dont think thats true. Honestly i think S-foils, by itself is a decent upgrade. Were getting 2 attacks on a b-wing. Lets not look gift horses in the mouth. S-foils on the B-wing is a good upgrade. If it does work with FCS, that's just gravy.

I think it works. Just becuz the bonus attack occurs in the window of the aftermath step, it’s still it’s own attack IMHO.

This combo can already be done in game now... it hasn’t come up yet.

Hera Ion FCS VTG. Reroll one, spend lock on second. IDK ....

7 minutes ago, JBFancourt said:

I think it works. Just becuz the bonus attack occurs in the window of the aftermath step, it’s still it’s own attack IMHO.

This combo can already be done in game now... it hasn’t come up yet.

Hera Ion FCS VTG. Reroll one, spend lock on second. IDK ....

The question is, is the "aftermath" step considered to be part of the first attack, or is something that happens after the first attack? If "aftermath" is divorced from the attack itself, then the combo works: you're no longer under the restriction imposed by Fire Control system, that would prevent you from spending the lock. If, however, the various "aftermath" steps are still considered to be part of the initial attack, then you would be disallowed from spending the lock, meaning that the cost for the second attack could not be paid.

I'm personally leaning towards the interpretation of "aftermath is after the completion of the attack," but I know there's going to be a debate, and I'm keeping an open mind.

@emeraldbeacon I'm not seeing a debate forming here just yet. A fair bit of concerned confusion yes, debate no. Does what they outline in the stream conflict with the formatting of the Attack part of the RR? Yep. Is there an intended change to it? /shrug Does how they rectify it matter to other abilities? Yep.

I think most of us are sitting here hoping this is addressed in the next few weeks with the next update. Then things are going to get interesting.

38 minutes ago, emeraldbeacon said:

The question is, is the "aftermath" step considered to be part of the first attack, or is something that happens after the first attack? If "aftermath" is divorced from the attack itself, then the combo works: you're no longer under the restriction imposed by Fire Control system, that would prevent you from spending the lock. If, however, the various "aftermath" steps are still considered to be part of the initial attack, then you would be disallowed from spending the lock, meaning that the cost for the second attack could not be paid.

I'm personally leaning towards the interpretation of "aftermath is after the completion of the attack," but I know there's going to be a debate, and I'm keeping an open mind.

agreed. the text is not consistent. it's on page four under Attack. "If a ship performs an attack, it becomes the attacker then follows these steps:" and then follows all the steps of attacking, including the aftermath step.

however, the description of the aftermath step itself on page five states "Abilities that trigger after an attack are resolved in the following order.", clearly describing that this step that is a part of the attack happens after the attack.

the language is contradictory, so there is potential for an endless debate. as stated earlier, i will go with the interpretation that the aftermath is after the attack itself and not during the attack, just like you. it just makes more sense that way.

hopefully, this will be clarified in the next update of the RR.

7 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

I'm not seeing a debate forming here just yet. A fair bit of concerned confusion yes, debate no...

Perhaps I should have worded it, "bracing myself for the potential debate" rather than "there's going to be a debate."

For reference..

In my opinion, some of the fine folks here over-interpret the gravity of the aftermath step of the attack. Isn't it but a safety net of the attack procedure, where bonus attacks triggered during the attack (e.g. Quickdraw) are moved not to nest one attack in another?

I do not see why would every bonus attacks have to be placed in the aftermath step. Take Snap Shot for example. It is a bonus attack performed way before any other attack in the turn will take place. I believe such a bonus attack resolves normally, as any attack would. Then itself, it features a Aftermath Step should it lead to bonus attacks triggering. Why would it have to trigger during an aftermath of a non-existing attack is beyond me.

Logically speaking, how can "After you attack" ability ever trigger during the attack? That's a time paradox of sort.

Edit: Cards, for reference

Too add, in the stream, Brooks didn't causally do that combo without thinking of the rules during play, he went out of his way to point out that specific combo saying "obvious combo is obvious" which seems to indicate the intended/expect them to work together, and its not them simply forgetting the rules or overlooking something. Seems very thought out and intentional.

Meaning The Aftermath step is not "performing an attack" as its a step specifically for "after attack" abilities.

5 hours ago, Ryfterek said:

Logically speaking, how can "After you attack" ability ever trigger during the attack? That's a time paradox of sort.

Agreed. You can't be both performing an attack and be 'after an attack' at the same time.

Putting the v1.06 RR rules for Attack here for reference (Starts page 4):

"ATTACK
Ships can perform attacks which thematically represents the ship firing its
blaster cannons, ordnance, or other weapons.
If a ship performs an attack, it becomes the attacker then follows these steps:
1. Declare Target: During this step, the attacking player identifies and
names the defender of the attack.
a. Measure Range: The attacking player measures range from the
attacker to any number of enemy ships and determines which enemy
ships are in which of its arcs.
b. Choose Weapon: The attacking player chooses one of the
attacker’s primary or special weapons.
c. Declare Defender: The attacking player chooses an enemy ship
to be the defender. The defender must meet the requirements defined
by the weapon.
d. Pay Costs: The attacker must pay any costs for performing the attack.
• During the Declare Target step, the attack arc is the arc that corresponds
to the chosen weapon. The attack range is determined by measuring
range from the closest point of the attacker to the closest point of the
defender that is in the attack arc.

• A primary weapon requires the attack range to be range 1–3. A primary
weapon has no cost by default.
• Special weapons have different requirements specified by the source of
the attack.
• A ship cannot attack a ship at range 0, even if the attack range would be
range 1.
• If there is no valid target for the chosen weapon, or if the attacker cannot
pay the costs required for the attack, the attacking player either chooses
a different weapon or chooses not to attack.
2. Attack Dice: During this step, the attacking player rolls attack dice
and the players can modify the dice.
a. Roll Attack Dice: The attacking player determines the number
of attack dice to roll. Starting with the attack value, modifiers that
increase or decrease the number of attack dice (such as range bonus
and other effects) are applied. Next, if any minimum or maximum
number of dice has been set, that limit is applied. There is always a
minimum of 0 and a maximum of 6. Then they roll that many dice.
b. Modify Attack Dice: The players resolve abilities that modify the
attack dice. The defending player resolves their abilities first, then the
attacking player resolves their abilities.
• The most common ways the attacker modifies attack dice are by spending
a focus token or spending a lock it has on the defender.
• Each attack die cannot be rerolled more than once during an attack.
3. Defense Dice : During this step, the defending player rolls a number of
defense dice equal to the ship’s agility value and the players can modify the dice.
a. Roll Defense Dice: The defending player determines a number of
defense dice to roll. Starting with the defender’s agility value, modifiers
that increase or decrease the number of defense dice (such as range
bonus, whether the attack is being obstructed by an obstacle, and other
effects) are applied. Next, if any minimum or maximum number of dice
has been set, that limit is applied. There is always a minimum of 0 and
a maximum of 6. Then they roll that many dice.
b. Modify Defense Dice: The players resolve abilities that modify
the defense dice. The attacking player resolves their abilities first,
then the defending player resolves their abilities.
• The most common ways the defender modifies defense dice are by
spending a focus or evade token.
• Each defense die cannot be rerolled more than once during an attack.
4. Neutralize Results: During this step, pairs of attack and defense
dice neutralize each other. Dice are neutralized in the following order:
a. Pairs of and results are canceled.
b. Pairs of and results are canceled.
The attack hits if at least one or result remains uncanceled;
otherwise, the attack misses.
5. Deal Damage: If the attack hits, the defender suffers damage for each
uncanceled and result in the following order:
a. The defender suffers 1 damage for each uncanceled result.
Then cancel all results.
b. The defender suffers 1 damage for each uncanceled result.
Then cancel all results.
6. Aftermath: Abilities that trigger after an attack are resolved in the
following order.
a. Resolve any of the defending player’s abilities that trigger “after you
defend,” excluding abilities that grant a bonus attack.

b. Resolve any of the attacking player’s abilities that trigger “after you
perform an attack,” excluding abilities that grant a bonus attack.
c. Resolve any of the defending player’s abilities that trigger “after you
defend” that grant a bonus attack.
d. Resolve any of the attacking player’s abilities that trigger “after you
perform an attack” that grant a bonus attack.
• Each ship may perform one attack when it engages during the
Engagement Phase.
• If a ship is destroyed at an initiative step during the Engagement Phase, the
ship is not removed until all ships of the attacker’s initiative have engaged.
• During an attack, a ship cannot choose to roll fewer dice than it is
supposed to roll.
• If a player would roll more dice than they have available, keep track of the
rolled results and reroll the dice necessary to equal the total number of
dice the player would have rolled all at once. Note that these dice are not
considered rerolled for the purposes of modifying dice."

Aftermath is a step of performing an attack in this game, as written FCS + B-Wing S-Foil bonus attack is illegal. As apparently intended refer to the portion of the stream that @Lyianx has linked earlier in this thread. There is nothing for us to argue here, only something for FFG to ******* fix.

8 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

Aftermath is a step of performing an attack in this game, as written FCS + B-Wing S-Foil bonus attack is illegal. As apparently intended refer to the portion of the stream that @Lyianx has linked earlier in this thread. There is nothing for us to argue here, only something for FFG to ******* fix.

I dont think they need to fix anything, at least not with the aggression you are suggesting. Aftermath states "After attack". You cannot be in the middle of an attack while also triggering "after attack" abilities. If you are still able to be restricted by things that happen "during this attack", then you are still in the attack, not after it. Seems like FFG reads it this way, and excepts us to read it that way to. Clarification? Sure. But there seems to be nothing to '"fix".

8 minutes ago, Lyianx said:

I dont think they need to fix anything, at least not with the aggression you are suggesting. Aftermath states "After attack". You cannot be in the middle of an attack while also triggering "after attack" abilities. If you are still able to be restricted by things that happen "during this attack", then you are still in the attack, not after it. Seems like FFG reads it this way, and excepts us to read it that way to. Clarification? Sure. But there seems to be nothing to '"fix".

21 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

If a ship performs an attack, it becomes the attacker then follows these steps:

@Hiemfire seeing your fierce defense of what devs wrote (against what devs said...) I'd like to point out nothing in what you've quoted actually states what the attack is. The RR gives the steps an attacker is supposed to follow, but not what an attack is composed of.

Moreover, there's a certain interesting loophole in the text itself which I find particularly interesting in terms of how these steps correspond to when exactly attack is performed (also, observe how I managed not to paste whole page of RR on the forum, oh boy, some of us scroll through it on mobile... ; ) )

1 hour ago, Hiemfire said:

1. Declare Target:

(...)

If there is no valid target for the chosen weapon, or if the attacker cannot pay the costs required for the attack, the attacking player either chooses a different weapon or chooses not to attack.

So, given some circumstances the attacker may decide not to attack. But these circumstances are assessed during the "Declare Target" step and so the attacker would, asserting the attack is taking place throughout the six steps, already be performing an attack.

In other words, the attacker has to be performing an attack in order to be able to decide not to attack. But can he decided not to attack if he clearly already decided to attack to ever get to this point?

In other news, this is still just a boardgame so shall we just enjoy playing it the way it's been explained to us by the creators?

Hmm...

Lok Revenant (45)
Ion Cannon Turret (5)
Veteran Turret Gunner (8)
Havoc (4)
Fire-Control System (2)
Total: 64

@Lyianx & @Ryfterek Following the reasoning that you guys are presenting the above build with a target lock can used FCS for its primary then spend the lock to mod its bonus ICT attack since to you the Aftermath step isn't actually part the attack that FCS is used in. Look reasonable to you?

Yes @Hiemfire , looks reasonable to me that a "once per attack" (of sort) abilities can be used once per each attack you perform.

In this case, you can use lock once in first attack (for FCS), once in second attack (spending it).

Should the bonus attack be part of the first attack, then "this attack" would become very ambiguous reference - shouldn't abilities of nested "this attack" also apply to the primary "this attack"?

Also, should bonus attack be nested in the primary attack, have the attacker actually performed one, or two attacks?

17 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

Hmm...

Lok Revenant (45)
Ion Cannon Turret (5)
Veteran Turret Gunner (8)
Havoc (4)
Fire-Control System (2)
Total: 64

@Lyianx & @Ryfterek Following the reasoning that you guys are presenting the above build with a target lock can used FCS for its primary then spend the lock to mod its bonus ICT attack since to you the Aftermath step isn't actually part the attack that FCS is used in. Look reasonable to you?

Sounds correct, yes.

2 minutes ago, Ryfterek said:

Yes @Hiemfire , looks reasonable to me that a "once per attack" (of sort) abilities can be used once per each attack you perform.

In this case, you can use lock once in first attack (for FCS), once in second attack (spending it).

Should the bonus attack be part of the first attack, then "this attack" would become very ambiguous reference - shouldn't abilities of nested "this attack" also apply to the primary "this attack"?

Also, should bonus attack be nested in the primary attack, have the attacker actually performed one, or two attacks?

1 minute ago, Lyianx said:

Sounds correct, yes.

k. Just confirming for consistency reasons.