Well - there's that.
At least the Cluster missile + gunner + vader = purely theoretical, I don't think anything can take that loadout at the moment... maybe when we get the assault gunboat ...
I may be wrong, but couldn't the Firespray run that combo?
Well - there's that.
At least the Cluster missile + gunner + vader = purely theoretical, I don't think anything can take that loadout at the moment... maybe when we get the assault gunboat ...
I may be wrong, but couldn't the Firespray run that combo?
Firespray only has one crew slot, so you'd have to choose between Gunner and Vader.
Well - there's that.
At least the Cluster missile + gunner + vader = purely theoretical, I don't think anything can take that loadout at the moment... maybe when we get the assault gunboat ...
I may be wrong, but couldn't the Firespray run that combo?
Firespray only has one crew slot, so you'd have to choose between Gunner and Vader.
Right. I figured I must be overlooking something. Thanks!
Immediately wasn't intended to make one effect resolve prior to another in the same situation, The FAQ states that existing effects are resolved in the order determined by player or initiative. Immediately in the case of the Gunner is simply to keep the ship which is performing the attack from adding/playing another non-triggered effect before the attack is resolved.
It may not even have anything to do with the current cards, but could instead be worded this way to eleviate conflict with cards that are being tested now for release in future expansions. This is my determination based on the rules, FAQ and keeping it simple. I think this issue is WAY over thought and is a non-issue.
Immediately in the case of the Gunner is simply to keep the ship which is performing the attack from adding/playing another non-triggered effect before the attack is resolved.
Where does that idea come from? Can you quote any reference?
Which non-triggered effect would that be? Besides starting another attack with the same or (more likely) different ship? Is the word "immediately" required for this result? You need to use FCC (without "immediately") after the attack as well, not after the next attack.
If the idea is to "keep the ship which is performing the attack from adding/playing another non-triggered effect before the attack is resolved" I fail to see the relevance of the word "immediately". It seems identical to any attack-triggered effect without the word "immediately".
The idea that the word "immediately" is completely superfluous (i.e. just for emphasis and not with the weight of rule) is not without merit, but without FFG saying so in an FAQ, we cannot assume that it is so.
The idea that the word "immediately" is completely superfluous (i.e. just for emphasis and not with the weight of rule) is not without merit,
That is indeed one option. Did Sunsteel mean that?
No idea. I'm not him.
It looks like the thread "Immediately" has taken over the topic, however, yes since there is nothing in the rules that clearly defines what "immediately" is, it should be ignored until an FAQ gives it meaning and not left to each individual to interpret.
That's alot like saying, there's nothing in the rules that clearly defines what (choose a word used on a card, and place it here as per..) "attack" is, so we should ignore it until the FAQ gives us answers...
In all seriousness though - isn't the idea that "card text overrides rules" (pg 20) in play? The idea of activating immediately - right away - is fairly easily understandable - it's not that nebulous a word is it? If it's a problem in your play group or tournament - have a TO rule, or use the dice to resolve the rules dispute until there's an FAQ entry
