Ok so say we go with the version stated above where we resolve the events in the order of our choice where we chose to either resolve gunner first then move to Vader then death(removal) or vice versa until FFG gives a ruling, hopefully specific to this situation, do you believe that FFG will consider this? And if so any thoughts as to how long it will take before they do?

Every game effect is something that has a specific timing, including ship removal. If there were something uniquely fast about ship destruction, then abilities such as Fel's Wrath would never have the opportunity to trigger.

I find this an interesting stance that you have taken in this post. Aren't you trying to determine intent by stating "if there were something uniquely fast about ship destruction, then abilities such as Fel's Wrath would never..."?

http://teamcovenant.com/buhallin/2013/04/02/raw-vs-rai/

Isn't the RAW approach to take the rules as written? In the absence of card text, ship destruction takes place immediately when damage exceeds hull points.

I was using Fel's Wrath as an example, not as justification. It was said that "The removal of destroyed ship is not an action you can take in any order. It just happens." which is not the case. It's a rule, just like any other - subject to timing rules and overriding rules like any other. Fel's Wrath probably isn't the best example, but I wasn't in a position to go hunting for specific examples so I went with what came to mind I will generally use RAI enough to assume that the designers intended an ability to function within the rules. If an ability requires a bit of handwaving to make it work, that's fine with me, so long as there's only one way it can be read. The secondary weapon kludge is a good example of this.

The problem in this case is that the Vader rulings are all over the place. Ships aren't necessarily immediately destroyed when they receive damage equal to hull - they stay around long enough for the rest of the damage to be dealt to them, even if it's not simultaneous fire. It's common to read the "Vader after each attack" as meaning Vader goes before Gunner (making Gunner's immediately meaningless), but the only way anyone has suggested to resolve the Vader/Simultaneous Fire ruling relies on an "immediately" for the timing.

We honestly don't know what happens to triggered effects with a ship that has been removed, but the Vader rulings point pretty strongly to playing them out. Nobody really knows for sure why the simultaneous fire/Vader ruling is what it is, and nobody knows whether Gunner would fall under the same ruling or not. As I said above, we've all got theories, but there are some serious disagreements.

But there isn't actually any specific statement on this situation, and with no broadly applicable understanding of the rules, we can't reliably extrapolate one.

Kevin, thanks for taking the time to post your reply. As you pointed out in your blog, it almost seems like parts of the FAQ have left us in a worse state. That's why I took the approach, in the absense of clear text stating that Gunner can "outlive" a ship's destruction, that there was no card text in this case superceeding the rule book on the timing of a ship's destruction.

There is clear text on the choice of order for multiple effects and your great blog post on timing makes it clear to me that choosing Vader's effect before Gunner's will result in a dead-end for Gunner because the rule text, Gunner & Vader card text, and FAQ on Vader currently don't allow for ship occupants to have actions beyond the ship's destruction in normal combat.

There is clear text on the choice of order for multiple effects and your great blog post on timing makes it clear to me that choosing Vader's effect before Gunner's will result in a dead-end for Gunner because the rule text, Gunner & Vader card text, and FAQ on Vader currently don't allow for ship occupants to have actions beyond the ship's destruction in normal combat.

I actually agree with this (generally).

The problem (as I see it) is all about "immediately". If "immediately" effects go off first, we have a good reason why the simultaneous fire ruling is what is is - ship destruction and Vader both trigger from the same event (the attack) but removal is immediate and Vader is not, so the ship is removed before Vader goes. But the Vader ruling at least suggests that the pattern is Attack-Vader-Gunner-Attack, which means that the non-immediate Vader goes before the immediate Gunner.

There is a difference though between triggering new actions after destruction, and resolving triggered actions after destruction. I actually think the current FAQ suggests strongly that effects (let's avoid 'actions' ) can last past a ship's destruction, because otherwise Vader wouldn't be able to destroy his own ship - or rather, he would be able to destroy it, but the destruction would interrupt the completion of the ability and it wouldn't be able to finish. Once Vader's been declared, it finishes all the way.

What's the exact timing on that? You've got me. But IMHO, you actually CAN'T choose Vader before Gunner. I think when you have multiple abilities triggered by the same event, immediate effects still go before non-immediate effects, making the order Attack-Gunner-Vader-Vader. But that's weird, so we get an out-of-rules ruling that seems to make it Attack-Vader-Gunner-Vader (there's at least some ambiguity in the response, IMHO).

As an interesting side note on this discussion, right after the last FAQ came out I sent an email to FFG asking for clarification on how Vader and Gunner interacted, what the specific timing would be, and what "immediately" meant when it was used as a term. That was almost 4 months ago, and no response. In my considerable experience trying to decrypt and reverse engineer the rules for this game, FFG answers the easy questions, but rarely respond to questions that are more foundational in nature, or hit the thorny issues. The secondary weapons issue is another good example - several of us sent that in, with a rather deafening silence in response. Take that as you will.

Two simple questions

Is Gunner is allowed to go off if you're destroyed in a simultaneous fire situation?

If the answer is yes as its currently played that way.

Then how is being destroyed by vader and different?

This has to be a question for the next FAQ,

Can you stretch simultaneous fire examples to cover vader possible not but do we expect two different rules for basically the same outcome?

Two simple questions

Is Gunner is allowed to go off if you're destroyed in a simultaneous fire situation?

If the answer is yes as its currently played that way.

Then how is being destroyed by vader and different?

This has to be a question for the next FAQ,

Can you stretch simultaneous fire examples to cover vader possible not but do we expect two different rules for basically the same outcome?

Yes - gunner works in simultaneous fire situation. You are in limbo. You get to resolve your combat steps this combat phase. Gunner activates on the miss, therefore your attack is not over and you are not removed before it activates.

Vader in simultaneous fire was obvious to me, if you have no hull points you cannot "spend" them to do extra damage.

To me the immediately on simultaneous fire represents the idea that you must make the second attack with this ship now. You cannot go off and shoot with someone else and come back to the gunner ship. So immediately means more - before the next set of things happen but after the current one finishes rather than do this right the hell now before anything else.

Now for Vader and Gunner we are not in remotely the same situation. You have 2 hull points left. You shoot, miss and activate Vader. He does his damage, you take damage. As you add the damage cards you check to see if you are destroyed. If you are - remove from board. So gunner never gets to activate.

The most absurd way I can apply the rules as has been described (in how immediately is read) would be the following:

Colonel Jendon with Gunner + Vader is shooting at Biggs (who is on 1 hull). Jendon misses first shot, activates Vader, Biggs takes the crit. Now under your reading of the rules the gunner activated immediately on the miss (so Biggs is not removed as Gunner happened first), so for your second shot you have to shoot Biggs again...

I also think there is some misunderstanding in what resolving effects in any order means, that doesn't mean they are all activated and you can do all of them. It means I have 2 effects I activate do now, I get to choose which one to do first. I then resolve that effect and all it's subsequent effects. Once that is done (assuming I am still able) I can process the second effect. The second effect isn't yet triggered, but the situation is such that it could be.

I actually think the current FAQ suggests strongly that effects (let's avoid 'actions' ) can last past a ship's destruction, because otherwise Vader wouldn't be able to destroy his own ship - or rather, he would be able to destroy it, but the destruction would interrupt the completion of the ability and it wouldn't be able to finish. Once Vader's been declared, it finishes all the way.

I don't see that Vader has two steps, it is one step, you take 2 damage and simultaneously the opponent takes 1 critical damage. So saying your are dead and the effect must persist so that the damage is done is just pure obfustication and totally unhelpful.

This (the scenario in the OP) is not a simultaneous fire situation.

Vader doing the last damage to the ship does not create a simultaneous fire situation.

Simultaneous fire and abilities like wrath's are specific and defined exceptions to the very clear general rule that a ship with damage equal to it's hull is removed before it can do anything else (ie. trigger gunner). You can't 'extend' them, 'stretch' them or otherwise imply what would happen in other scenarios from them.

Just wanted to say this as several posts seem to be mixing the two together.

Right the way I look at this is that Vader and Gunner have " After performing an Attack " as their timing step. Ship removal however has " When the number of Damage cards dealt to a ship is equal to or greater than its hull value"

The rules say you perform Effects that happen at the same time in an order you choose. But these don't happen at the same time. The ship removal happens during the resolution of Vader (not when you are choosing a card for "After performing an Attack").

SO if you had a ship with 3 or 4 hull left

• Finish Performing an Attack
  • Choose to use Vader
    • Apply Damage to both ships.
  • Choose to use Gunner
• Start New Attack.

However when it has 2 or less hull remaining what you get is

• Finish Performing an Attack
  • Choose to use Vader
    • Apply Damage to both ships.
    • "the number of Damage cards dealt to a ship is equal to or greater than its hull value "
      • Remove the Ship

The important thing to note is there is nothing else that could happen in the "number of Damage cards dealt to a ship is equal to or greater than its hull value " timing step, so the ship destruction has to happen first. By the time you finish resolving Vader's card, there is no ship and so you can't move on to play another card in the "After Performing an Attack" timing step.

Now Fel's Wraith. Fel's Wraith also happens " When the number of Damage cards dealt to a ship is equal to or greater than its hull value" , so it is happening in the same timing step as the removal of the ship. So you can choose which of those two you do first.

Where the confusion comes is with Simultaneous Attacks. There is no rule that stops a ship being removed during it's own Attack Phase. But Simultaneous Attacks stops other ships at the same PS being removed until they have had their Attack Phase. If a ship is kept on the board due to a Simultaneous attack (Even though the ship has Damage cards equal to the hull value), they could still use Gunner.

Exactly.

I think the important thing is there is no stack. Which I think some of the arguments here are alluding too. You can't get to the "After performing an Attack" Timing Step, load up with all the cards and effects that could happen in this step, and then use them all no matter what happens.

You get to the "After performing an Attack" Timing Step, you choose one effect/card that could happen "After performing an Attack", you resolve that card. If you are still in the "After performing an Attack" Timing Step you choose another card and resolve it. If for some reason the "After performing an Attack" Timing Step ends you can't play any more cards.. EG you start a new Attack by playing Gunner, or your ship is removed by Vader.

The rules of simultaneous attacks are If such a ship would be destroyed, it simply retains its Damage cards without being removed from the play area. It may perform an attack as normal during the Combat phase.

Q: If a ship attacks twice through some effect, such as the Gunner upgrade, can the ship use the ability of Darth Vader (the Upgrade card) twice? A: Yes, once after each attack

Q: When the Simultaneous Attack Rule keeps a ship in play until it performs its attack, are all effects pertaining to that ship still in play? A: Yes. Effects from the ship’s pilot ability, upgrades, Damage cards, etc. are still active and may affect the game

Q: When a ship would be destroyed, but remains in play because of the Simultaneous Attack Rule, are that ship’s effects still active in the game? A: Yes. Any effects related to that ship are still active until that ship is removed from the play area

So during simultaneous atttack gunner triggers. So a ship can be destroyed and still attack.

Now saying gunner can trigger after being destroyed by simultaneous fire and not by vader creates two different rulings, and there is nothing in the faq to suggest two separate rulings. Any arguments about gunners timing steps see the previous comments where we dont actually know how the gunner works.

Out of interest has any of the tournament players been to a tournament where the TO has ruled vader/gunner can't be used in this manner?

Well they are really two seperate situations.

In one you are choosing to destroy your own ship, and therefore can't use Gunner afterwards.

In the other the enemy destroys your ship and you get to take your Attacks as you have the same PS.

My problem with the fact that if Vader kills himself, you don't get a gunner attack comes from simultaneous fire (SF).

So, if you're dead, but alive due to SF, you can attack, and it seems like most people seem to think Gunner can attack as well. Therefore, it is logical, and most seem to still agree, if you kill yourself with Vader, but SF still exists, you can use Gunner.

So, I don't understand why Gunner would work on a Vader suicide during SF, but would not work when he is the only PS (or the others have all attacked) of his level. It seems "cheap" to me.

Now, if you wanted to argue and say that Gunner shouldn't kick in during SF because under SF you're supposed to remove your ship as soon as you got the opportunity to attack, which you did when you did your first attack, then I could get behind the Vader suicide does not yield a Gunner attack. But I believe this was FAQ'd that you do. I'm too lazy to look it up right now though.

So, I don't understand why Gunner would work on a Vader suicide during SF, but would not work when he is the only PS (or the others have all attacked) of his level. It seems "cheap" to me.

You can't use Vader on a Simulataneous Attack, see the FAQ.

Simultaneous fire (SF) supersedes the normal rules due to special conditions. In the absence of special conditions the normal rules apply. You cannot apply special conditions to normal conditions. Otherwise you wind up with the madness of card text being applied to any situation.

Honestly, the only reason we are discussing this is because we have two cards that state "immediately" but are left with a scenario where the ship is destroyed, in normal conditions, and Gunner's "immediately" is left in limbo.

Several of us feel that the FAQ adequately addresses this by giving the attacking player control over what order they choose to execute events. If the player chooses to execute Gunner first, so be it. Vader can then destroy his own ship and there is no issue.

The FAQ also makes it clear that Vader cannot execute anything after the ship is destroyed. The ship is destroyed. The only hangup some folks have is that Gunner wasn't able to execute "immediately". But I argue that was the player's choice. If they chose to execute Vader first that's just bad planning.

You can't use Vader if you're already dead, that was FAQd. But can you use Gunner if SF killed you already?

So, lets look at a scenario. You have a OGP with 2 hull, equipped with Vader and Gunner. Your opponent has 2 Rookies. They have init so they attack first.

Rookie 1 attacks and misses

Rookie 2 attacks and does 2 damage, killing you, but due to SF you're not removed from the board

You attack Rookie 1 and miss, but since you're already dead, you cannot use Vader

Does Gunner kick in???

If the answer is no, then that answers all of our questions about Vader killing yourself w/ and w/o SF regarding whether Gunner works.

If the answer is yes, then one can pose the following scenario / question.

Consider that you have init instead.

You attack Rookie 1 and miss

You trigger Vader and put a crit on Rookie 1 and kill yourself

Does Gunner kick in???

If the answer is no, then we've established that killing yourself is different than being killed by an opponent.

If the answer is yes, then we're saying that Gunner is protected by SF, and your initial attack doesn't satisfy the "removed from the board immediately after having an opportunity to attack" clause of SF.

So, if we're saying yes, then the question/scenario becomes there are no rookies, and you're attacking Luke.

You attack Luke and miss.

You trigger Vader and put a crit on Luke and kill yourself

Does Gunner kick in???

If the answer is no, then we've established that the only reason he kicked in before was due to SF, which doesn't make sense to me.

If the answer is yes, then we've answered our question with a progression of logic. Basically, there's no reason for the answer to be no if we answered yes to the previous two questions.

My problem with the fact that if Vader kills himself, you don't get a gunner attack comes from simultaneous fire (SF).

So, if you're dead, but alive due to SF, you can attack, and it seems like most people seem to think Gunner can attack as well. Therefore, it is logical, and most seem to still agree, if you kill yourself with Vader, but SF still exists, you can use Gunner.

So, I don't understand why Gunner would work on a Vader suicide during SF, but would not work when he is the only PS (or the others have all attacked) of his level. It seems "cheap" to me.

Vader can't suicide in SF. (See FAQ)

If you are attacking already and suicide with Vader, SF is never invoked. SF only happens when you would attack later at the same PS in the same combat phase but are destroyed by another attack. (Note I don't say enemy here - you could be destroyed by the blast of a friendly assault missile!). Note since when Vader suiciding you have already HAD your turn to attack you don't activate SF.

Simultaneous file (SF) supersedes the normal rules due to special conditions. In the absence of special conditions the normal rules apply. You cannot apply special conditions to normal conditions. Otherwise you wind up with the madness of card text being applied to any situation.

Honestly, the only reason we are discussing this is because we have two cards that state "immediately" but are left with a scenario where the ship is destroyed, in normal conditions, and Gunner's "immediately" is left in limbo.

Several of us feel that the FAQ adequately addresses this by giving the attacking player control over what order they choose to execute events. If the player chooses to execute Gunner first, so be it. Vader can then destroy his own ship and there is no issue.

The FAQ also makes it clear that Vader cannot execute anything after the ship is destroyed. The ship is destroyed. The only hangup some folks have is that Gunner wasn't able to execute "immediately". But I argue that was the player's choice. If they chose to execute Vader first that's just bad planning.

It was not bad planning at all! I was trying to make use of the gunners effect.

Example:

Attack and miss rookie A

Activate Vader killing rookie A

Gunner activates attacking rookie B

The whole point was to try to kill two ships in one attack round.

My problem with the fact that if Vader kills himself, you don't get a gunner attack comes from simultaneous fire (SF).

So, if you're dead, but alive due to SF, you can attack, and it seems like most people seem to think Gunner can attack as well. Therefore, it is logical, and most seem to still agree, if you kill yourself with Vader, but SF still exists, you can use Gunner.

So, I don't understand why Gunner would work on a Vader suicide during SF, but would not work when he is the only PS (or the others have all attacked) of his level. It seems "cheap" to me.

Vader can't suicide in SF. (See FAQ)

If you are attacking already and suicide with Vader, SF is never invoked. SF only happens when you would attack later at the same PS in the same combat phase but are destroyed by another attack. (Note I don't say enemy here - you could be destroyed by the blast of a friendly assault missile!). Note since when Vader suiciding you have already HAD your turn to attack you don't activate SF.

So, regarding my 3 questions I posed earlier, it sounds like you are of the opinion that during SF, Gunner doesn't activate since you already had an opportunity to attack.

And if that's the ruling, then no matter the circumstances, Gunner doesn't exist during SF. Therefore, Vader suicide doesn't matter since we've already ruled on SF because gunner is already ruled to not get an attack.

It was not bad planning at all! I was trying to make use of the gunners effect.

Example:

Attack and miss rookie A

Activate Vader killing rookie A

Gunner activates attacking rookie B

The whole point was to try to kill two ships in one attack round.

LOL, sorry, didn't mean to say you were a bad planner. But your example proves my point. If you know that executing Vader before Gunner would blow up the chance of using Gunner in non-simultaneous combat, wouldn't you choose your actions as:

Attack and miss rookie A

Gunner activates attacking rookie B

Activate Vader on rookie B

Yes, you might not successfully kill two ships, but you did get the 2nd attack from Gunner. This approach is within the rules, FAQ, and card text as currently written, without resorting to, as Kevin put it in his blog, (paraphrasing) Rules The Way I Wish They Would Work.

My problem with the fact that if Vader kills himself, you don't get a gunner attack comes from simultaneous fire (SF).

So, if you're dead, but alive due to SF, you can attack, and it seems like most people seem to think Gunner can attack as well. Therefore, it is logical, and most seem to still agree, if you kill yourself with Vader, but SF still exists, you can use Gunner.

So, I don't understand why Gunner would work on a Vader suicide during SF, but would not work when he is the only PS (or the others have all attacked) of his level. It seems "cheap" to me.

Vader can't suicide in SF. (See FAQ)

If you are attacking already and suicide with Vader, SF is never invoked. SF only happens when you would attack later at the same PS in the same combat phase but are destroyed by another attack. (Note I don't say enemy here - you could be destroyed by the blast of a friendly assault missile!). Note since when Vader suiciding you have already HAD your turn to attack you don't activate SF.

So, regarding my 3 questions I posed earlier, it sounds like you are of the opinion that during SF, Gunner doesn't activate since you already had an opportunity to attack.

And if that's the ruling, then no matter the circumstances, Gunner doesn't exist during SF. Therefore, Vader suicide doesn't matter since we've already ruled on SF because gunner is already ruled to not get an attack.

No, gunner does activate in SF as far as I am concerned.

It all comes down to what "opportunity to attack" means in the Simultaneous rule.

• It could mean you may make one attack and are then destroyed.. In which case Gunner could not be used as you would be removed before you make your Gunner attack.
• It could also mean you may make the ship Active, and then the ship is removed as soon it finishes it's Activation (IE. another ship is made Active). In which case Gunner can be used.

I believe most tournaments including Worlds played it the second way, so it is likely "opportunity to attack" covers all attacks you could make when Active.

Vader does not come into it as you can't use Vader when you have 0 hull, and Simultaneous rules only come into effect when you are lowered to 0 hull before you have had a chance to Activate.

The second part is Vader destroying your ship when your ship is Active. Simultaneous rules do not come into effect here as they only cover when a ship is reduced to 0 hull when it's not Active. Therefore you would have to play by the standard rules for removal, under the standard rules the ship is removed as soon as it reached 0 hull. So you would take your first attack, activate Vader and destroy your ship, it would be removed from the board before you got a chance to use Gunner.

Though there is nothing stopping you activating Gunner on the first shot. taking a second attack and then destroying yourself with Vader.

My problem with the fact that if Vader kills himself, you don't get a gunner attack comes from simultaneous fire (SF).

So, if you're dead, but alive due to SF, you can attack, and it seems like most people seem to think Gunner can attack as well. Therefore, it is logical, and most seem to still agree, if you kill yourself with Vader, but SF still exists, you can use Gunner.

So, I don't understand why Gunner would work on a Vader suicide during SF, but would not work when he is the only PS (or the others have all attacked) of his level. It seems "cheap" to me.

Vader can't suicide in SF. (See FAQ)

If you are attacking already and suicide with Vader, SF is never invoked. SF only happens when you would attack later at the same PS in the same combat phase but are destroyed by another attack. (Note I don't say enemy here - you could be destroyed by the blast of a friendly assault missile!). Note since when Vader suiciding you have already HAD your turn to attack you don't activate SF.

So, regarding my 3 questions I posed earlier, it sounds like you are of the opinion that during SF, Gunner doesn't activate since you already had an opportunity to attack.

And if that's the ruling, then no matter the circumstances, Gunner doesn't exist during SF. Therefore, Vader suicide doesn't matter since we've already ruled on SF because gunner is already ruled to not get an attack.

No, gunner does activate in SF as far as I am concerned.

On page 10 it states note: Each ship may attack only once per round.

While on page 16 it says After this ship has had its opportunity to attack this round, it is immediately destroyed and removed from the play area.

As it reads in simultaneous attacks you are destroyed after making your 1st attack. So technical the Gunner should never be allowed. But thats not how its played.

We don't understand why the Gunner is allowed only that its allowed.

Maybe

Q: When the Simultaneous Attack Rule keeps a ship in play until it performs its attack, are all effects pertaining to that ship still in play?

A: Yes. Effects from the ship’s pilot ability, upgrades, Damage cards, etc. are still active and may affect the game.

Or maybe Gunner just allows it.

I still think it comes down to what "opportunity to attack" means, as a phrase it's very ambiguous, it could definitely refer to a ships entire Activation in the combat phase, not just a single attack.

I still think it comes down to what "opportunity to attack" means, as a phrase it's very ambiguous, it could definitely refer to a ships entire Activation in the combat phase, not just a single attack.

Well thats true, FFG are know for their ambiguity.