They won't let me type that bad swear dr0p.
Executive order interacting with movement
I can think of no reason why the issue isn't cleared up, and have come to the only remaining conclusion: this has been one of the most effective trolling efforts I've seen in a while.
AUCodeMonkey said:
I can think of no reason why the issue isn't cleared up, and have come to the only remaining conclusion: this has been one of the most effective trolling efforts I've seen in a while.
I feel like David Duchovny in Zoolander, having just explained to Ben Stiller why male models are the perfect assassins. "Seriously? I just told you."
This is simultaneously awesome, since I've never been accused of being a troll before, much less an effective one, and frustrating, since I feel like I explained my position pretty well and nobody really refuted it. You guys just don't think it matters like I do.
Everyone who has responded to your question has attempted to explain the reason you are allowed to move if an in-game mechanic (the brig) moves your character or if you can use an action to "move" (while piloting), the problem is you are not willing to accept the explanation. I think we could understand your position a little better if even a single person agreed with you, but as you yourself have stated, no one does. I can't effectively shut down your whole argument, but I'll tackle the issue of "moving" as an action while piloting a viper.
Drinkdrawers
said:
You can't define game rules based on theme. That would result in all sorts of chaos. A player, whether or not they're in a viper is moving when they go to a different location. You have to define rules based on language.
Drinkdrawers said:
The card reads, "He may move his character and then take 1 action, OR not move and take 2 actions." That sentence is compound; it has one subject with two verbs that both apply to the subject. I'm going to rewrite it and redistribute the subject to both verbs. "He may move his character and then take 1 action, OR he may not move and take 2 actions." The object (his character) must also apply to both verbs. The sentence now reads, "He may move his character and then take 1 action, OR he may not move his character and take 2 actions." Now (looking at the last half of the sentence) I read that to say that, if I want to do what it says I have two things to do. 1. Not move. 2. Take 2 actions. Not in that order, because the second clause in the sentence doesn't specify an order. Not in that order, but simultaneously and completely. The (admittedly modified, but within the rules of English) sentence says "he may not move his character."
So, if my character is in a viper, and I activate that viper to move to a new location, I am moving my character.
A player who wants his character to pilot a viper simply moves his character to the “Hangar Deck” location and uses the action listed there. He then launches a viper as normal (see the previous section), places his piloting token beneath it, and removes his character token from the game board, placing it on his character sheet.
Moving and Actions when Piloting
While a character is piloting a viper, his player still takes his turn as normal. During his Movement step, he may move the viper to an adjacent space area or move his character back to a location (see “Moving From a Viper” below). In addition to the normal things that a player may do during his Action step (for example, play a Skill Card), he may also choose to activate his viper (to move again or attack).
Skowza said:
Everyone who has responded to your question has attempted to explain the reason you are allowed to move if an in-game mechanic (the brig) moves your character or if you can use an action to "move" (while piloting), the problem is you are not willing to accept the explanation. I think we could understand your position a little better if even a single person agreed with you, but as you yourself have stated, no one does.
I feel like everyone's been saying, "You should accept this explanation because that's the way it's played." Whereas I'm saying, "Based on this language here, I interpret this to mean such and such." If I'm unwilling to accept an explanation, it's because it's explaining something other than my hang-up.
Skowza
said:
If you want to define rules based on language, since it seems you do based on this post...
Yes, this is what I'm looking for. Thank you .
Skowza
said:
... we can examine the actual language as it is written in the core rules, pg 26/27:
A player who wants his character to pilot a viper simply moves his character to the “Hangar Deck” location and uses the action listed there. He then launches a viper as normal (see the previous section), places his piloting token beneath it, and removes his character token from the game board, placing it on his character sheet.
Moving and Actions when Piloting
While a character is piloting a viper, his player still takes his turn as normal. During his Movement step, he may move the viper to an adjacent space area or move his character back to a location (see “Moving From a Viper” below). In addition to the normal things that a player may do during his Action step (for example, play a Skill Card), he may also choose to activate his viper (to move again or attack).
Based on the wording here, moving a piloted viper is not actually moving "your character" - your character has been removed from the board, and you are only moving "your viper" or "the viper" and a player is only moving "his character" when returning to a location. This language is used consistently throughout the rulebook, therefore even with your interpretation, XO does not restrict a pilot from moving his viper around the board.
That's a good point. It does make a distinction between a person 'moving his viper' as opposed to 'moving his character,' which is the language on the XO card. Ok, yeah. Maybe there is a distinction between 'moving a character (which you do during the movement step or as the first part of an XO),' and 'moving,' which is how you get around outside of those times. That makes sense, and I think it aligns with the language in the rules. I still wish something like that was explicitly stated, though, so we didn't have to infer it.
Skowza
said:
As far as moving out of the brig goes, just stay out of the brig in the first place and this won't be a problem. Although if I was in your gaming group, I'd put you in the brig myself just for making this argument
I don't bring it up during games. That's no fun. As I read this thread, I think I come off as being more annoyed than I am in real life. While I do think communicating as clearly as possible is important, I can ignore it when other things are more important. But this is what forums are for, right?