It makes no sense to assume you can do anything you want since the rules don't specifically say you can't.

It's exactly like he said: Immediately is a tiebreaker in the case of simultaneous effects that could normally be resolved in any order you see fit. You either resolve an immediate effect first, or not at all.

The problem with your argument is you say you're not trying to 'bank' the action, but you are, because once you have done something else, such as execute your maneuver, you have now wandered into a completely undefined area outside the rules where 'after' has no clear meaning. Nowhere does it say "after...as long as its still your turn" so why NOT try and argue you could use that other action after you attack, or on your opponent's turn? Nothing says you can't, right?

If you have two actions that could each trigger, and one of them is Immediate, you do that one first. But even with AS, you don't get to action, move, PTL for another action, because if is now 'after you have executed a maneuver' and not 'after executing an action.'

It is an undefined area in the rules and that is why it is being called into question. The terms used in the game do not have a glossary or reference like they clearly should. Obviously one cannot really use actions outside of the action step in the activation phase normally but with upgrades like PTL and Advanced Sensors it becomes possible to perform actions outside of the Action Step. Because of this the timing is now already out of order and different from the normal rules or the game. So already it is something being performed outside of the action step with Advanced Sensors. Now the whole thing is called into question about the timing of the upgrade and the timing of the phase. Which would work and why, within the current written rulings.

It's really not a grey area. After you perform any action, you can use PTL to perform a free action. Not next turn, not after going for a smoke, not after ordering a pizza, not after executing a maneuver. There is absolutely zero precedent I know of anywhere in the game to suggest you can take an action, do something else, THEN go back and use PTL to take your free action. None.

Once you've done something else, the condition 'after performing an action' is no longer being met. The game lets you occasionally interrupt and insert things out of order. It does not remember what you did earlier - only what you did last.

Honestly, this really isn't anything new. It's always been possible to perform actions outside the Action Step, since the very beginning of the game.

Yes, the idea of saving it for a different turn seems over the top, but why not? You're saying that later in your activation is "after", well, so is the next turn, it's just more "after". You're drawing a line between the two because one sounds crazy, but you're literally making that line up out of thin air. But let's entertain it for a minute. So you want to draw the line at the end of a ship's activation - fine. Turr with PtL take a shot, then does his barrel roll, thereby triggering PtL. What's the window for that one? How long can he wait before using the second action? He's not even IN an activation, so your limiter doesn't work.

As I pointed out above, the rules are not entirely silent on this. Page 9: Card abilities without the “Action:” header may be resolved when specified on the card and do not count as the ship’s action. When the card says you resolve it, you resolve it - right then, not whenever you want, not later in your activation or the turn or next turn. When specified. And just because I know it's coming, "may" does not mean "you may resolve it right then or later", it means the use is optional. This is defined in the rules as well.

Not going to go back and quote it, but some also seem to be seriously confused on stress and how it affects actions. While stressed, you cannot take actions at all - not even free actions (page 17). Losing your Perform Action step and having a stress prevent you from acting are two completely different things. If you lose your Perform Action step, but have some means to get a free action, you can still take that. That's what the FAQ entry referenced above is pointing out. It does nothing to override the stress limitation.

You have to agree though, there is no were that says actions have to play out a certain way if there is no immediate after it, just that they have to before that ship is done with its personal allotted turn, whether or not there is a movement in between them caused by adv sensors.

I don't have to agree with that. It makes no sense to do so.

Making sense has nothing to do with it being within the rules of the game.

RaW FTW!!

Honestly, this really isn't anything new. It's always been possible to perform actions outside the Action Step, since the very beginning of the game.

Yes, the idea of saving it for a different turn seems over the top, but why not? You're saying that later in your activation is "after", well, so is the next turn, it's just more "after". You're drawing a line between the two because one sounds crazy, but you're literally making that line up out of thin air. But let's entertain it for a minute. So you want to draw the line at the end of a ship's activation - fine. Turr with PtL take a shot, then does his barrel roll, thereby triggering PtL. What's the window for that one? How long can he wait before using the second action? He's not even IN an activation, so your limiter doesn't work.

It's always been possible to do so outside of the Perform Action Step and yet there is no ruling about the timing or structure of Actions outside of that step other thatn what is listed on the card itself which tends to be very limited in it's explanation.

That is a good question, what is the window for it? It is defined solely by the terms used within the game. The problem is there is no baseline, no reference, no glossary or guide to what each term used in the game definitively means. There is only a few that are mentioned within the rulebook, such as the phrase "You". After and Immediately after have not been defined well enough. If Immediately After means Immediately/Right Then/After that but before this and After also means Immediately After, then why do they not just say After for everything or Immediately After for everything? Why make that distinction and then not define the limitations clearly enough? If what you are saying is true, that Immediately After is in the case of 2 Effects being triggered at once then why do they not just specify that Immediately After means it always comes first when resolving Effects? I have not read anything within the rules or the FAQ saying that Immediately After is defined as only being applied in the instance of multiple effects being resolved. Can you show me where that is written?

As I pointed out above, the rules are not entirely silent on this. Page 9: Card abilities without the “Action:” header may be resolved when specified on the card and do not count as the ship’s action. When the card says you resolve it, you resolve it - right then, not whenever you want, not later in your activation or the turn or next turn. When specified. And just because I know it's coming, "may" does not mean "you may resolve it right then or later", it means the use is optional. This is defined in the rules as well.

May Be is also another unclear term used within this game. It is obvious they wanted to keep things as simple as possible with this game but the lack of explanations for terms and the assumption that you would understand them to be pretty much the same as other games is a big assumption. The Star Wars LCG has a Glossary and explains each of the specific terms for the game within the Rulebook and not as many issues are raised in regards to how a card's text applies to the rules of the game when everything is defined well enough.

Not going to go back and quote it, but some also seem to be seriously confused on stress and how it affects actions. While stressed, you cannot take actions at all - not even free actions (page 17). Losing your Perform Action step and having a stress prevent you from acting are two completely different things. If you lose your Perform Action step, but have some means to get a free action, you can still take that. That's what the FAQ entry referenced above is pointing out. It does nothing to override the stress limitation.

That part was a bit off-topic as this discussion is solely meant to be about the issue of using Adv Sensors and PTL and the timing of it as defined by the rules of the game, the FAQ and the text on the cards. I know we got a bit sidetracked earlier but this is really about that.

You aren't going to get any argument from me that a lot of this isn't defined as tightly as it should be. We've had to extrapolate and reverse-engineer an awful lot.

But that doesn't mean all bets are off. There are notable distinctions when "immediately" is used. Gunner is a good example - being "immediately" means it goes faster than a normal effect, such as the second Cluster Missile attack. This is supported by the FAQ. It's not firmly specified, but we suspect that it will also play a big role in Gunner, Vader, and a destroyed ship during Simultaneous Fire - Gunner and destruction are immediate, Vader is not. So when you ask why not just use immediate everywhere, that's the why. They use it to distinguish "faster" effects.

If your approach to the rules is "Tell me where it says I can't", you're going to have a hard time with X-wing. The rules just aren't written that tightly. But I'd challenge you to turn it around. The idea that you have to perform an effect when the conditions are triggered, not some time later, is pretty simple, and at least implied in the rules. What makes you think that every "after" trigger lets you go when you might want to later? More importantly, since it seems that even you agree that "after" has limits, how do you draw those limits?

You're right that I can't conclusively prove this. I can pretty conclusively say that this view is consistent with every ruling out there, and the game pretty much goes to abject chaos if you don't have it. That'll have to be enough.

You aren't going to get any argument from me that a lot of this isn't defined as tightly as it should be. We've had to extrapolate and reverse-engineer an awful lot.

But that doesn't mean all bets are off. There are notable distinctions when "immediately" is used. Gunner is a good example - being "immediately" means it goes faster than a normal effect, such as the second Cluster Missile attack. This is supported by the FAQ. It's not firmly specified, but we suspect that it will also play a big role in Gunner, Vader, and a destroyed ship during Simultaneous Fire - Gunner and destruction are immediate, Vader is not. So when you ask why not just use immediate everywhere, that's the why. They use it to distinguish "faster" effects.

If your approach to the rules is "Tell me where it says I can't", you're going to have a hard time with X-wing. The rules just aren't written that tightly. But I'd challenge you to turn it around. The idea that you have to perform an effect when the conditions are triggered, not some time later, is pretty simple, and at least implied in the rules. What makes you think that every "after" trigger lets you go when you might want to later? More importantly, since it seems that even you agree that "after" has limits, how do you draw those limits?

You're right that I can't conclusively prove this. I can pretty conclusively say that this view is consistent with every ruling out there, and the game pretty much goes to abject chaos if you don't have it. That'll have to be enough.

That is basically my intention of this topic, to point out that there is something that could possibly be ruled in a way none of us that understand the intention of the rules wants to happen, all because of unclear terms and definitions. I wish that there was a Terms Guide or Reference released from within the FAQ, it would pretty much fix the entire conundrum. Until then it's something that is highly suggested to be impossible within the game but it is also not ruled out completely. For that I wanted to know if there was something I was missing within the Rules or FAQ that disproved this from happening. It looks like there is evidence to suggest so but not definitive proof. I wouldn't know how to draw the limits of an undefined effect from a game that I did not create and I tend to not like having to interpret intentions of what is or isn't allowed rather than having a clear explanation why or why not.

On a similar note, I am not a fan of the "Tell me where it says I can't" method of thinking but rather "Tell me where it says I can and if it does not, does it tell me I cannot?" It doesn't tell me I CAN Activate PTL after the Maneuver, so then does it not? No, not really that either.

Anyway, I'm glad to see most everyone seems to agree that this should not be allowed within the rules of the game (as it is pretty ridiculous) and my only intention was to find out if there is proof to show it cannot happen. There is no definitive proof YET.

Normal:

Maneuver -> Action -> PTL if available -> End of ship's turn, continue to next PS level

Adv Sensor:

Action -> maneuver -> Skipped action phase -> Since it still is technically following a action: PTL if available -> End of ship's turn, continue to next PS level

Except for one big obvious fact. You are not 'technically' following an Action. You are 'technically' following a Maneuver.

If you perform PTL after the movement you are not doing it after an action, you are doing it after a maneuver.

You have to execute PTL after an action. It is clearly written on the card. If we follow your procedure, you are activating it after a maneuver, which is not what the card says.

If I read you right, Jehan, that's exactly what I've been trying to say. The game only remembers what you did last. If you moved last, it's following a maneuver. If you took an action last, it's following an action.

The entire argument here is predicated around the idea that, whether they want to call it that or not, the game will let you "bank" that second action for later in your turn. One of many problems with that being there's no evidence that the game will let you do anything of the sort. Or 'remember' that it still 'owes' you an action.

He's getting hung up on the fact that certain elements of the game include the "immediately" wording while others do not, and taking that to mean anything not 'immediate' can have a big, vague, undefined meaning of "after" applied to it, which is completely unsupported in the framework of the rules.

This despite many, many attempts to explain that the Immediately wording sets precedence in the case of TWO simultaneous abilities going off which could normally be executed in any order you chose. If one of them is immediate, you do that one first or not at all. And again, I don't think the other side of this debate has been able to point to a single actual supported instance in the rules of "Immediately" being used to refer to or affect anything ELSE, but they're determined to draw an inference from that rule to this one in order to use it to justify a delayed second action.

Taken from the FAQ

"Q: If a ship is required to skip its “Perform

Action” step, is it still allowed to perform

free actions outside of the “Perform

Action” step?

A: Yes."

Tell me how Lando is ruled to give a free action to his stressed out buddies then.

Tell me.

They can't. Stressed ships can't take actions. Lando doesn't give an action to stressed ships because the stressed ship can't take actions.

Page 7:

Page 17:

I made it bigger for you for ease of reading.

I mean, why limit it to its own turn? If we're going to assume you can bank actions as long as you like unless very specifically indicated otherwise, why limit it to your ship's specific turn?

Seriously dude, have I not stated this blatantly enough for you, I do not want to bank anything, this is going off the wording of this card. I am not trying to do anything out side of the ships turn, nor am I wanting to. I have a question on when a card can be triggered due to wording on a chain combo effect card. By all means and rules in this game, PTL is not an immediate action, you have performed an action before a maneuver, which just means that it was done one step before hand. Once the ship has had its turn, all open actions, whether you took them or not, are gone, all is final.

I find it hilarious that you keep bring that up, which is something I nor the OP have never stated wanting to know about and the ruling on that is quite clear that once a ships turn is done, it is done, even if it has not had an action assigned to it, thus meaning you can no longer chain off it.

Normal:

Maneuver -> Action -> PTL if available -> End of ship's turn, continue to next PS level

Adv Sensor:

Action -> maneuver -> Skipped action phase -> Since it still is technically following a action: PTL if available -> End of ship's turn, continue to next PS level

There is no ruling right now, stating that PTL could not be used, while still being in the ships designated turn, but after a maneuver instead of after a action, but with an action being used that turn on that ship. Though neither is there a ruling saying it can. I personally want to know if there is any rule, stating that this is acceptable or not.

Do you really want to go down this direction, or even consider it? I guess we'd really better figure out what "after" means! Can I take my second action due to PTL after performing a maneuver? Can I take it after another ship has moved? "After" this game is over, can I get that free action next time I play? Do you consider time to be a continuum or a recursive wheel? Do you believe in the afterlife? If I die and "afterwards" am reincarnated as a cracked peg on a Y-Wing, do I get that second action then?

I think these are all really legitimate questions and all Star Wars® X-Wing™ Miniatures Game tournaments should be suspended until all can be carefully considered and resolved.

Yes, you have hit the crux of it. A large contingent of players have decide to reinvent the meaning of the word 'after.' Bingo.

Now, I don't mind quibbling over the rules - I kind of wish we didn't have to, but I enjoy a good debate - but it seems like all of a sudden a lot of the rule questions coming up aren't even based in the rules. They've become less about interpreting wording or interactions with other rules, and more like "I want to be able to do this, and it doesn't explicitly say that I can't." And then we wind up fighting over the meaning of words like "after," and trying to invent the unsupported concept of the game 'remembering' where you left off while you go do something else and then come back and finish your actions.

Well, let's not worry too much. "After" this argument is over, we will all die and it will be forgotten.

It will love on, in infamy, forever!

LIVE. LIVE on. How did I not catch that?

I think I forgot the original question .. no wait.

Advanced Sensors essentially move your action fase to before you reveal your maneuver dial.

Does PtL trigger after you have performed the free action but before you reveal your maneuver dial? Yes. Then you'd better not have chosen a red maneuver after recieving that stress token.

PtL triggers after you perform an action. This has never been a problem before, and I don't see why Advanced Sensors would have made it into one.

The rules were never written to be complicated, and every expansion has only added small layers, I think most of you are fighting too hard to bend/explain this.

And then we wind up fighting over the meaning of words like "after," and trying to invent the unsupported concept of the game 'remembering' where you left off while you go do something else and then come back and finish your actions.

Can you show me where in the rules/FAQ that it talks about the game only "remembering" the very last thing you did? I don't quite remember that section.

Again this is not something I want to do in the game (really I think it would be dumb) but what I am saying is that undefined terms lead to confusion about the rules. The difference between "after" and "immediately after" has been stated many times in this discussion but I don't really remember it being stated anywhere in the rules/FAQ. From what I can tell, it has been interpreted by players because there is no official say on it. Because of everyone accepting this to be fact, people are telling me I am wrong in what I am saying. Also the sarcastic comments being posted are hilarious.

You don't remember it because it exists even less than the section saying the game has any mechanic by which it can 'track' everything you're doing and let you do half of A, go do B, and then come back to finish off A when you feel like it.

If your argument requires you to not only redefine "after," but then create a scope for it that doesn't exist - because if you open up 'after' to mean anything beyond "right after, but not as fast as immediately after," there is quite literally no framework which can hold it. Because everything that happens 'after,' as you argue it could/should be defined, could constitute after.

If one argument fits comfortably and logically within the framework of the existing rules, and the other one completely shatters them, it's probably not a huge stretch which one is correct.

You don't remember it because it exists even less than the section saying the game has any mechanic by which it can 'track' everything you're doing and let you do half of A, go do B, and then come back to finish off A when you feel like it.

So what you're saying is nothing says it only remembers the last thing you did?

You don't remember it because it exists even less than the section saying the game has any mechanic by which it can 'track' everything you're doing and let you do half of A, go do B, and then come back to finish off A when you feel like it.

So what you're saying is nothing says it only remembers the last thing you did?

I'm saying it doesn't remember anything at all. You do things in the order it tells you to, when it tells you to, or you don't do them at all. There is a nice simple definition for "after," and there is the other definition of "after," which is a completely meaningless, undefined term which breaks the entire structure of the rules. Why anyone would think that was the one to go with baffles me.

Flip it around for a second and apply the same logic to anything that says "before." If it doesn't say immediately before, can you just do it any time you feel like, and then argue that you're planning to get around to the other part of it later, so it still counts?

Look, Golem, we get it - it's something they don't specify. Welcome to the wonderful world of interpreting X-wing rules.

It would help a lot to know what your purpose is here. Are you trying to point out the oversight in the rules? Again, yeah, we get it - and get in line. Nobody's disagreeing.

Or are you trying to challenge the generally accepted view of the system which most of us have reverse engineered over the last year, and seriously suggesting that "after" means "Any time after that I happen to feel like"?

Either way, we really should be done here. If it's the former, you should be harassing FFG over it, not us. If it's the latter, you're basically trying to destroy the game engine for... well, I honestly don't know what it's for, but that's what you're doing.

If you want to know how it should work, we have a reasonable, well-established understanding of the rules, which people have shared with you. Sure, it didn't come direct from FFG, and if you really want to make a stink about it, we can't prove it. But your alternate model is completely unworkable. So even if I can't prove that ours is strictly right via FFG, I believe we've pretty conclusively shown that the alternative is wrong.

So, what's the actual point of all this?

Look, Golem, we get it - it's something they don't specify. Welcome to the wonderful world of interpreting X-wing rules.

It would help a lot to know what your purpose is here. Are you trying to point out the oversight in the rules? Again, yeah, we get it - and get in line. Nobody's disagreeing.

Or are you trying to challenge the generally accepted view of the system which most of us have reverse engineered over the last year, and seriously suggesting that "after" means "Any time after that I happen to feel like"?

Either way, we really should be done here. If it's the former, you should be harassing FFG over it, not us. If it's the latter, you're basically trying to destroy the game engine for... well, I honestly don't know what it's for, but that's what you're doing.

If you want to know how it should work, we have a reasonable, well-established understanding of the rules, which people have shared with you. Sure, it didn't come direct from FFG, and if you really want to make a stink about it, we can't prove it. But your alternate model is completely unworkable. So even if I can't prove that ours is strictly right via FFG, I believe we've pretty conclusively shown that the alternative is wrong.

So, what's the actual point of all this?

The point was to see if someone knew more than I did on it. From what I can see, everyone else is trying to tell me that the currently accepted view is a fact when we in fact do not know for sure. Sure, what I said doesn't go along with the currently accepted rules of the game but you said it yourself: The currently accepted view relies upon a commonly shared interpretation.

I understand that everyone views the interpretation as correct and that it would probably be ruled the same in tournaments as the alternative doesn't make a lot of sense. I also understand that the current interpretation is based upon things not written anywhere in the rules or faq and not addressed YET by the game designers.

Now that I know that no player knows any more on the subject than I do, what I would like to do is ask FFG to give us a timing chart for things like this and/or a clarification for terms used in the game. Even the Star Wars LCG has a timing chart and that would help tremendously. There is also a reference guide for all the terms used in the LCG as well and that is another wonderful thing I would love to see released for this game. Guess I should go contact FFG then. This has been very enlightening and I appreciate everyone's feedback on this subject, sarcastic or serious.

Throwing out a question here, isn't the only point of Advanced Sensors is to move your action from after the move to before the move? Astrophysics and what ever category Ion energy falls under aside, maybe the simple answer is it all works as each card says. You get an Ion Token, Advance Sensors gives you your action, you use PtL and you move your 1 space and the Ion Token goes away, for example.