The action interpretation bears no complication if the pilot is the gunner as well (i.e. in a Starfighter). The problem I have is with multi-crewed starships (like the YT-1300).

Let's supose a normal Pilot's turn in the YT-1300. He does Gain the advantage as an action and then Evasive Maneuvers. Assume a normal gunners turn, aim manoeuvre and Fire weapon action.

Evasive maneuvers is clear:

"Executing Evasive Maneuvers upgrades the difficulty of the dice pool once for all attacks made against the ship (...)

I don't know if how I've been doing it is correct, but to me it makes sense that the pilot would pick the defense zone of the enemy ship and all attacks from the pilot's ship (pilot attacks and gunners) would hit that defense zone. Solely because if the pilot is saying "I'm facing the rear of the enemy ship so my attacks hit that zone," I can't see how the gunners could hit the forward defense zone of the ship.

Does that mean that the gunners of the YT-1300 do not get any benefit from the pilot's Gain the Advantage action?

Honestly, this is the real question. In the book GtA is a pilot thing. In the beginner box, it extends to the gunners. On the last O66 podcast, Sam doesn't make an actual ruling, but he does suggest it does extend to the gunner (he talks about Lando flying the Falcon at Endor)

I make no bones about avoiding house rules, but until we get a solid answer, this is one of my exceptions. I think the gunners are supposed to benefit from the advantage, but the pilot is the one who decides the defensive zone being targeted.

I think, in a multi-person crew ship, advantages such as those pass to the gunner. I mean, thematically, it would make sense.

I wouldn't consider it a house-rule either, but rather as an interpretation of the written rules.

Well, I've done it both ways.

The pilot oriented interpretation seems punishing with a new and inexperienced crew, on the other hand, depending on initiative order, the gunners might lose it anyway as the opposing pilot might gain the advantage on the following initiative slot...

Going for the pilot oriented interpretations makes the most sense to me,from a sort of "realistic" point of view, but from a fun-and-games point of view I think the ship oriented interpretation could make as much sense.

I mean, unless the pilot has the "perform any one (1) action as a manoeuvre"-talent, the defensive zone he is going for isn't going to be known really before he gets to attack, in the following round. Much can happen in that time even if the opposing ship doesn't succeed in gaining the advantage, it can angle its shields and if the pilot still has the advantage he still gets to choose. So one interpretation could be that allied gunners must fire after his attacks, but then the effect is over...

To me, the pilot oriented interpretation makes sense for starfighters with droid crew - these should not get the bonus if the pilot decides to use them to attack. Letting it apply to gunners and crew of the ship makes the Action more tempting too, as the pilot will lose an action he could spend doing something else, so as Rook says, thematically and for the sake of fun and games, go for a "ship" and not a "pilot" oriented interpretation.

Does that mean that the gunners of the YT-1300 do not get any benefit from the pilot's Gain the Advantage action?

As the book went into detail, specifically pointing out how the other crew (gunners) are affected by by Evasive, I would think that if it were intended in other maneuvers it would be spelled out there as well. If nothing else it would have been picked up in errata. That would be my call....

Be that as it may, I do agree with what others have said about gunners being limited to targets designated by the pilot during said maneuvers (if I were to hand-wave this house rule into the game).

Interesting question. I would rule that the gunners are limited to hitting that target from the arc chosen by the pilot, and that they benefit for the ignoring evasive mods in regards to that target only.

Lets say that a freighter with two turret quad lasers are escaping 3 pirate Z-95's. The pilot acted first, using both gain the advantage to position behind one Z-95 and evasive manoeuvers. Then one of the gunners opens fire on that Z-95, hitting it in the rear and avoiding the penalties for evasive, badly damaging that fighter. The second gunner is more concerned with shooting another Z-95 that is still to act, so he slews his gun around to target that craft but suffers the penalties from the ship's evasive manoeuvers.

I don't agree on the gunners benefiting. The target is always in motion. It can choose which arc is hit except that the pilot can momentarily get an opening in through GtA . That opening is only there for moments, and only for the pilot. Despite the fact that the pilot can keep getting those openings on his turns, it doesn't mean that they are maintained throughout the entire length of the rounds. Gunners already get the benefit of having nothing better to spend maneuvers on than Aim, so I don't feel bad for them at all. A pilot that has to shoot too needs all the help he can get in this system.

I submitted the question to Sam. I hope he has some time to give us a reply on that.

I think the reply would be, as per usual, "do as you want, but be fair, and [insert intended interpretation of the rules followed by another do as you want, but be consistent]".

I also think the intention is that it applies to pilot only, but it is hardly game breaking to let it apply to gunners too.

I think the reply would be, as per usual, "do as you want, but be fair, and [insert intended interpretation of the rules followed by another do as you want, but be consistent]".

I also think the intention is that it applies to pilot only, but it is hardly game breaking to let it apply to gunners too.

Actually, I like that it only affects the pilot.

I got the answer from Sam

Hello Yepes,