So this came up tonight. Kath was attempting a shot on my X wing. The two closest points were range 3, but it was outside of Kath's firing arc. However, the ship was in her firing arc, but at a distance greater than 3.

We deemed that she didn't get to shoot, but what is the official ruling on this?

It must be within the firing arc and in range 1-3 in order to attack.

When you are measuring for combat, the "firing line" between two ships must be in the firing arc. This applies for range checks and obstacle checks both.

This can create a few oddities, where two ships firing at each other may be at different ranges, or one shot may be obstructed but the other isn't. But that's the way it works.

When you are measuring for combat, the "firing line" between two ships must be in the firing arc. This applies for range checks and obstacle checks both.

This can create a few oddities, where two ships firing at each other may be at different ranges, or one shot may be obstructed but the other isn't. But that's the way it works.

Dare I ask you to check page 20, first column, last section (the bold characters are from the rule book while the red highlights are mine):

A ttacking T hrough O bstacles

Obstacles represent space features that are difficult

to fire through.

When measuring range during combat, if the edge of

the range ruler between the closest points

of the two ships overlaps an obstacle token, the

attack is considered obstructed . Because of this

obstruction, the defender rolls one additional defense

die during the “Roll Defense Dice” step of this attack.

Remember that range is always measured as the

shortest distance between the two ships’ bases.

The attacker cannot attempt to measure range

to a different part of a base in order to avoid

obstructing obstacles.

Magadizer and Buhallin are quite correct. This was answered some time ago when we were discussing obstacles.

You do not measure range outside of your firing arc .

That is why, depending on the angle two ships could be at different ranges to each other.

I'll find a post and repost here shortly.

Start at the beginning and read the entire thing...

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/967876/another-obstruction-question/page/1

You see that James answered this.

I posted from BBG since the pictures still exist, otherwise I would have used FFG.

Hello Derrick,

If the shortest distance between two ships is obstructed, but the obstruction lies entirely outside the attacker's firing arc, is it obstructed?

In the case of a typical primary or secondary weapon attack such as Proton Torpedoes that requires the ship to shoot within its firing arc, the attack is NOT obstructed. With these attacks, the shortest distance line WITHIN the firing arc is the only line that matters.

In the case of a turret attack, such as the Ion Cannon Turret or the Millennium Falcon's primary weapon, the firing arc is ignored. The shortest distance between the attacker and defender is also the line of attack, so if that line crosses an asteroid, the attack is obstructed.

Thanks for playing!

James Kniffen

Associate Game Designer

Fantasy Flight Games

[email protected]

The answers provided in this email should not be considered official for the current X-Wing tournament season. Please refer to the current FAQ for rules questions, or consult your Tournament Organizer.

It must be within the firing arc AND in range 1-3 in order to attack using standard primary weapons. Both conditions must be met. Then, you measure closest point. That rule is there to prevent people from shoothing "around" an obstacle.

Yes magadizer is right. Arc, range then shortest distance.

Oops.

It must be within the firing arc AND in range 1-3 in order to attack using standard primary weapons. Both conditions must be met. Then, you measure closest point. That rule is there to prevent people from shoothing "around" an obstacle.

Just to make sure we aren't glossing anything here...

The shortest line you measure is not necessarily the shortest line between the two ships. It's the shortest line which is within the firing arc . For firing range this is explicitly in the rules (Range, page 10) and for obstacles James' email clarified that you use the same line.

I think you may be saying exactly that, but I found it a bit confusing, so wanted to clarify

@Forensicus: If you check the BGG thread Ken linked, I went your direction until we got the email from James clarifying it. I'm happier with it this way, it makes more sense even if it can lead to some asymmetrical attack situations.

It must be within the firing arc AND in range 1-3 in order to attack using standard primary weapons. Both conditions must be met. Then, you measure closest point. That rule is there to prevent people from shoothing "around" an obstacle.

Just to make sure we aren't glossing anything here...

The shortest line you measure is not necessarily the shortest line between the two ships. It's the shortest line which is within the firing arc . For firing range this is explicitly in the rules (Range, page 10) and for obstacles James' email clarified that you use the same line.

I think you may be saying exactly that, but I found it a bit confusing, so wanted to clarify

@Forensicus: If you check the BGG thread Ken linked, I went your direction until we got the email from James clarifying it. I'm happier with it this way, it makes more sense even if it can lead to some asymmetrical attack situations.

I kinda thank you for the response though a couple of things pop up in my mind:

1. The email response DOES also make the most sense to me, but it also clearly states that it is not "kosher" or considered valid. One must confer with the FAQ and/or TO
2. The wording in the latest FAQ in July 2013 makes ABSOLYTELY no change to the wording in the core rulebook. NONE!! (This is quite embarrising IMO)
3. The example shown in the BGG thread isn't the very best since it is filled with confusing issues involving both whether or not the ships are actualy within range in combination with the question of obstruction or no obstruction.
4. IF one chooses to follow the page 20 rules (and the FAQ there won't be any asymmetri; both ships will be measuring the same line when checking for obstruction (the closest point to point no matter firing arcs)
5. I/we (in our gaming group) also find the rules/FAQ to be silly, but are currently abiding to the rulebook/FAQ in this respect.

What must one do???

How you choose to take the email is up to you. It probably should have made the FAQ, but for whatever reason it didn't. Personally, I consider email responses such as that to be just as solid as if it's printed in the FAQ. Other opinions may (and do) vary, but unless you question the source (and we have no reason to in this case) it's word from the devs on how it should be played. That's good enough for me.

Why would you use a different range-path for determining obstructions than for determining firing ability/efficiency? The rules actually talk about how to determine range and closest point in the rulebook with an example. Does that same example need to be reiterated every time 'closest point' is talked about?

To me this is more a case of 'conflicting information' in the rulebook than an actual new ruling. Hence the e-mail clarification.

Thematically, I could understand both ways: you can block the view of something and they'll get an advantage or just blocking the firing lane can gain the same advantage. But the way that range is determined in combat seems fairly clear (I didn't realize that this was that big of a source for confusion).

Non-turret weapons can only fire within the firing arc. You must measure to the closest point within the arc, even if there is actually another point on the base closer to the firing ship.

Yes, they should have put an errata in the FAQ to add the clause that you measure closest point to closest point "within the firing arc" but they didn't, at least yet.

There is only a contradiction if you read the range requirement too strictly, without the understanding that there are two conditions for determining range.

It should have been spelled out better, but it's not. It's still perfectly comprehensible and playable.

How you choose to take the email is up to you. It probably should have made the FAQ, but for whatever reason it didn't. Personally, I consider email responses such as that to be just as solid as if it's printed in the FAQ. Other opinions may (and do) vary, but unless you question the source (and we have no reason to in this case) it's word from the devs on how it should be played. That's good enough for me.

Really?? I will try not coming off as a **** in the following, but exactly HOW am I (or anyone else) supposed to validate the authenticity of the email and thus take it to "over rule" the FAQ/Rule Book?? Like I wrote I find it illogical, but it is written quite clear and straight forward in both the Rule Book AND the FAQ that when checking for obstruction.

This might seem as redundant, but please look again at this exact copy-paste from the Rules of Play:

A ttacking T hrough O bstacles

Obstacles represent space features that are difficult

to fire through.

When measuring range during combat, if the edge of

the range ruler between the closest points

of the two ships overlaps an obstacle token, the

attack is considered obstructed . Because of this

obstruction, the defender rolls one additional defense

die during the “Roll Defense Dice” step of this attack.

Remember that range is always measured as the

shortest distance between the two ships’ bases.

The attacker cannot attempt to measure range

to a different part of a base in order to avoid

obstructing obstacles.

Non-turret weapons can only fire within the firing arc. You must measure to the closest point within the arc, even if there is actually another point on the base closer to the firing ship.

Yes, they should have put an errata in the FAQ to add the clause that you measure closest point to closest point "within the firing arc" but they didn't, at least yet.

There is only a contradiction if you read the range requirement too strictly, without the understanding that there are two conditions for determining range.

It should have been spelled out better, but it's not. It's still perfectly comprehensible and playable.

Ohhh, I am all for playing "rules as intended" (as for Daredevil (before and after the latest FAQ) and Adrenalin Rush) but in this case it STILL haven't been changed in the 2 or 3 FAQ's

Why would you use a different range-path for determining obstructions than for determining firing ability/efficiency? The rules actually talk about how to determine range and closest point in the rulebook with an example. Does that same example need to be reiterated every time 'closest point' is talked about?

To me this is more a case of 'conflicting information' in the rulebook than an actual new ruling. Hence the e-mail clarification.

Thematically, I could understand both ways: you can block the view of something and they'll get an advantage or just blocking the firing lane can gain the same advantage. But the way that range is determined in combat seems fairly clear (I didn't realize that this was that big of a source for confusion).

Ahhh, this is not a case of what "I" or "you" would use; this is a thing that is stated clearly in the Rules of Play and haven't been changed in a subsequent FAQ but only in an (official??) email.

Whatever. Have a beer and go have some fun playing X-wing. There are two conditions listed in different places. You have to put them both together to get the complete picture. if you don't interpret one in terms of the other, then you don't get the complete rule. Unfortunately, much of the rulebook has important things scattered throughout in in that way. It could definitely benefit from a little redundancy in order to make some basic rules clearer.

It must be within the firing arc and in range 1-3 in order to attack.

^ says it all.

It is real simple, 0% complexity. Have you people never played a miniatures game before?

/thread

If two ships are oriented so that their closest edges are parallel, there is no single closest-point-to-closest-point line between the two ships. If one ship attacked the other, could it choose which line to use? A: Yes. In this case, the attacking player chooses the best point from which to draw the line to the target, which may allow him to avoid having his attack obstructed by an obstacle

Is the only way a ship can get around the rule of attacking through an astroid on page 20 however you still have to make an attack via page 10 and that is the range needs to be in the weapons arch of fire.

Whatever. Have a beer and go have some fun playing X-wing. There are two conditions listed in different places. You have to put them both together to get the complete picture. if you don't interpret one in terms of the other, then you don't get the complete rule. Unfortunately, much of the rulebook has important things scattered throughout in in that way. It could definitely benefit from a little redundancy in order to make some basic rules clearer.

I do believe/find that you guys are misunderstanding me or my point a bit, maybe partly due to English not being my primary language which may cause my wording to be a bit cloudy/confusing so I will just say the following and then let it rest (since I actually think we are agreeing on the matter in principle)

1. Thx for the advice on the beer. I prefer single malts so I used my [Focus] to modify the advice to this liquid instead
2. From the start I/we played it the same way you and this email" says, but do you not agree that the Rules of Play AND the FAQ is in conflict/contradiction with that point??
3. TOTALLY agreeing on the scattering of information in the Rules of Play

Hopefully they will clear it up in the next FAQ, wouldn't you say (and hope??) that too?

Isn't it just common sense? How can an obstacle "represent space features that are difficult to fire through" if it's not in your firing arc?

So I couldn't let it rest :-)

Isn't it just common sense? How can an obstacle "represent space features that are difficult to fire through" if it's not in your firing arc?

Ohh, that's an easy question to answer if you allow me to make this scenario or comparison (can't recall the right word for it):

What would you (IRL) think would be the hardest or more difficult to hit:

A) Me standing in the open at "Range 3" without any cover at all

or

B) Me hiding behind an asteroid with most of my body at "Range 2" but with my head JUST peaking out from the asteroid at "Range 3"

Which shot would be the hardest??

I have made this image to illustrate it in a X-Wing scenario:

[/url] image free hosting">http:// image free hosting

Please ignore that it is in closer range than the title of this tread, okay? (All the lengths of the different colored bars are the same)

1. The blue bar illustrate a Range 1 distance connecting the closest points between the 2 ships (corner-to-corner). Refering to the Rules of Play page 20," Remember that range is always measured as the shortest distance between the two ships’ bases. The attacker cannot attempt to measure rangeto a different part of a base in order to avoid obstructing obstacles. ​
2. Therefore all of us would agree (I guess??) that the Bottom ship (located at the bottom) would have an obstructed Range 1 shot at the Top ship right??

3. Sticking to the EXACT and totally clear statement/wording in the Rules of Play this is the same measurment regarding obstruction that MUST be made for the shot when the Top ship fires regardless that it is outside the ships arc.

4. However the distance of the Top ship's shot would be a Range 2 since the closest point of the bottom ship's base within the Top ship's arc is at Range 2

(BTW, If we instead had 1 bar represent Range 3 then clearly the Top ship wouldn't have a shot while the Bottom ship would have a Range 3 obstructed shot)

Once again I would like to make it clear that, just like most of you, part of me would like to play it like proposed by som of you (arc first, then range when checking for both weapon range AND for obstacle) BUT this only refers to the Weapon Range (2nd section on page 10) while page 20 only relates to Obstacle Check. So there is 2 checks to be made:

1. The Active Ship checks for range within the Firing Arc. This determines the number of Attack Dice (+1 for Range 1 if using Primary Weapon) and Defence Dice (+1 for Range 3 if using Primary Weapon)

2. Then an Obstacle Check is made (by the defender??) to check if +1 Defence Dice can/may/must be added for Obstruction.

All this is just debate and I am okay with either way, but I am puzzled that anyone of you guys, especially the ones who in so many other treads are VERY adamant on "No, you can't just take popular opinionor common sense to surpass the Rule of Play" or "It's NOT official until it have been put in a FAQ" still choose to take an (copy-pasted) email response (which BTW has the wording " The answers provided in this email should not be considered official for the current X-Wing tournament season. Please refer to the current FAQ for rules questions, or consult your Tournament Organizer. "at the end of it )