Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
71 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

Star Wars: X-Wing Miniatures Game» Forums » Rules

Subject: Blaster Turret vs. Dark Curse rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
LucCros
Canada
Oakville
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb

Came up in a recent game, where Roark with Blaster Turret wanted to shoot at Dark Curse outside his firing arc, therefore forced to use his Blaster Turret. Is Roark able to shoot at Dark Curse with this weapon?

Blaster Turret requires you to spend a focus token when performing the attack and Dark Curse prevents the attacker from spending focus tokens.

We decided Roark couldn't shoot. Dark curse just followed him around until finally killing him (since the HWK cannot k-turn).

Seemed strange to say the least... The Imperial player was sure having a good chuckle though...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryce K. Nielsen
United States
Elk Ridge
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
No. I think this was clarified in the FAQ?

-shnar
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Huhtala
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
You played correctly. A blaster turret can't shoot Dark Curse. It's in the last FAQ.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Wilder

Daly City
California
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Terrible ruling, but yes, DC is immune to BT. (I have to say, though, feeling guiltily hypocritical, enforcing that ruling -- as the pilot of DC -- was very fun. The same player had, on the same turn, also slapped a TL on DC.)
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
LucCros
Canada
Oakville
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb


Ah I see it in the FAQ now, I was looking in the Wave 3 section before.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Sibicky

Washington
msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Let it be known that this is one of the worst rulings that FFG has made thus far in this game. Sigh.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nolan Cluff

California
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't see how they could have ruled any other way. Dark Curse stops focus actions. Turret Laser requires focus actions to activate. What other way is there to rule this?

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Justin Bitton
United States
California
flag msg tools
With all due respect, could those of you who think this is a bad ruling, please elaborate on why? I mean, I understand why it would be frustrating to be the one playing against DC in this situation, but I don't see why you would consider it a bad ruling. For starters, in terms of the specific wording on the cards, there's no ambiguity.

Furthermore, from a thematic viewpoint, I think this ruling matches the spirit of both Dark Curse's special ability, and the requirements of using the Blaster Turret. Dark Curse is supposed to be a pilot who is difficult to get a bead on, therefore his special ability prevents would-be attackers from firing focused shots at him. Using the turret requires a pilot to divide his attention between maneuvering his ship, and trying to aim at an enemy outside of his forward firing arc, therefore it requires complete focus. Dark Curse's natural evasive skills make him too difficult to focus on, rendering the Blaster Turret ineffective against him.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron D
United States
Davis
California
flag msg tools
Mercury is my dog's name.
badge
I like hats.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is a ruling that really makes sense. I'm happy with it (and I feel like it shouldn't really surprise people like the Night Beast ruling tends to).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Wilder

Daly City
California
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dark Curse was created before the Perform Action step in the rules was defined in any way that made sense.

"Spending a focus token" had one use in attacking.

A focus token in the game is a resource that can represent two things: (1) Alertness, senses, "casting out with the force," or (2) activating something.

Everything Dark Curse stops is about messing up the ability to enhance an attack. Dark Curse's ability messes up on the ability to use alertness and/or the Force to shoot him down.

Then they created the Blaster Turret, got slightly better definition of how the Perform Action step works, went "Oh, crap," when someone figured out the implications with Dark Curse, and then James Kniffen -- who for whatever reason, and whether you consider it a good thing or not, prefers literalness in rules to design intent -- made the call that satisfied literalness in rules, at the cost of completely ignoring what -- up to then -- Dark Curse's ability has represented.

All of the sudden, literally out of nowhere, Dark Curse's ability didn't stop the enhancement of an attack ... it stopped the attack period. Think about it: you can't shoot at him blind, you can't just squeeze off shots hoping for a lucky hit ... you literally cannot activate your turret. (Well, unless it's got an Ion Cannon, but you know, whatever.) Practically, it's only one card (so far); but conceptually, that's a huge counter-intuitive change.

And it's not just bad because it break with the thematic ideas behind Dark Curse's ability, it's also bad because it means that from now on, every time they want to design a card that uses a focus token as a resource, if it's involved in attacking at all they have to evaluate what it does in relation to Dark Curse. That's not a huge thing, but it's one more design check on top of however many more, it's restrictive, and it was totally unnecessary.

Now, for those of you who like the ruling, why? Aside from adherence to "absolute letter of the rules," how does the ruling fit in with how Dark Curse worked before? Does Dark Curse make turrets malfunction? (If so, it sure doesn't seem to work on Ion Cannon Turrets.)

It's a terrible ruling, with only one benefit: it doesn't require an erratum. (For some people, that's a good enough reason, and I can even understand that. Errata is a pain in the ass. But that fact doesn't keep it -- and Night Beast's ruling, too, BTW -- from being terrible.)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Wilder

Daly City
California
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
J2B1 wrote:
Using the turret requires a pilot to divide his attention between maneuvering his ship, and trying to aim at an enemy outside of his forward firing arc, therefore it requires complete focus.

Oh ... except for the Ion Cannon Turret, right?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron D
United States
Davis
California
flag msg tools
Mercury is my dog's name.
badge
I like hats.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jeff Wilder wrote:
Dark Curse was created before the Perform Action step in the rules was defined in any way that made sense.

"Spending a focus token" had one use in attacking.

A focus token in the game is a resource that can represent two things: (1) Alertness, senses, "casting out with the force," or (2) activating something.

Everything Dark Curse stops is about messing up the ability to enhance an attack. Dark Curse's ability messes up on the ability to use alertness and/or the Force to shoot him down.

Then they created the Blaster Turret, got slightly better definition of how the Perform Action step works, went "Oh, crap," when someone figured out the implications with Dark Curse, and then James Kniffen -- who for whatever reason, and whether you consider it a good thing or not, prefers literalness in rules to design intent -- made the call that satisfied literalness in rules, at the cost of completely ignoring what -- up to then -- Dark Curse's ability has represented.

All of the sudden, literally out of nowhere, Dark Curse's ability didn't stop the enhancement of an attack ... it stopped the attack period. Think about it: you can't shoot at him blind, you can't just squeeze off shots hoping for a lucky hit ... you literally cannot activate your turret. (Well, unless it's got an Ion Cannon, but you know, whatever.) Practically, it's only one card (so far); but conceptually, that's a huge counter-intuitive change.

And it's not just bad because it break with the thematic ideas behind Dark Curse's ability, it's also bad because it means that from now on, every time they want to design a card that uses a focus token as a resource, if it's involved in attacking at all they have to evaluate what it does in relation to Dark Curse. That's not a huge thing, but it's one more design check on top of however many more, it's restrictive, and it was totally unnecessary.

Now, for those of you who like the ruling, why? Aside from adherence to "absolute letter of the rules," how does the ruling fit in with how Dark Curse worked before? Does Dark Curse make turrets malfunction? (If so, it sure doesn't seem to work on Ion Cannon Turrets.)

It's a terrible ruling, with only one benefit: it doesn't require an erratum. (For some people, that's a good enough reason, and I can even understand that. Errata is a pain in the ass. But that fact doesn't keep it -- and Night Beast's ruling, too, BTW -- from being terrible.)


So what about Carnor Jax? If you really think this was an oversight, why release a new pilot who does the same thing (but stronger) and worded in the same way? If this was an unintended result of not planning how the rules would evolve, wouldn't Jax get worded differently?
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kristofer Bengtsson
Sweden
Kävlinge
flag msg tools
designer
War of the Ring: Official FAQ Master! Webmaster of www.warofthering.eu Author of the War of the Ring Companion
badge
- This is My Hour!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dr Lucky wrote:
So what about Carnor Jax? If you really think this was an oversight, why release a new pilot who does the same thing (but stronger) and worded in the same way? If this was an unintended result of not planning how the rules would evolve, wouldn't Jax get worded differently?


True. Jax could follow a HWK around and force it use its primary weapon only.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
tom brown
United Kingdom
Stanley
Co. Durham
flag msg tools
CROM THE INVINCIBLE, SAVIOR OF THE GRUNGE MASTERS DAUGHTER
badge
HE JUST CANT BE KILLED, OR CAN HE???
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Is just have to say that it is good they didn t nerf dark curse in this situation. He doesn't stop a hwk from being able to attack, he stops a hwk from using only 1 upgrade card. If you play with blaster turrets and don't factor in a counter strategy for dark curse then you are making serious strategic mistakes.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Creed Buhallin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
J2B1 wrote:
With all due respect, could those of you who think this is a bad ruling, please elaborate on why?

Lots of people don't like that it makes Curse completely immune to a weapon. For me, it's because it creates a paradox in the rules. Trying to elaborate without going into too much detail:

Dark Curse's ability only works when he's a defender. He's only a defender after he's been selected as a target. With the turret, you have to activate the weapon and pay the cost (focus token) before you can select him as the target.

So, turrets and Dark Curse become contradictory. If you take the timing on Curse's ruling, turrets don't work at all. If you take a functional timing on turrets, the Dark Curse ruling is just wrong.

Several of us harassed FFG personnel during Gencon last year, and the answer we got was: Yes, secondary weapon timing is completely broken. Just play it like they should work.

So, we play them like they should work no matter what the rules actually say.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Brown
United States
Fort Wayne
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
There is no reason to have two A's at the beginning of aardvark. I simply won't do it.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Buhallin wrote:
J2B1 wrote:
With all due respect, could those of you who think this is a bad ruling, please elaborate on why?

Lots of people don't like that it makes Curse completely immune to a weapon. For me, it's because it creates a paradox in the rules. Trying to elaborate without going into too much detail:

Dark Curse's ability only works when he's a defender. He's only a defender after he's been selected as a target. With the turret, you have to activate the weapon and pay the cost (focus token) before you can select him as the target.

So, turrets and Dark Curse become contradictory. If you take the timing on Curse's ruling, turrets don't work at all. If you take a functional timing on turrets, the Dark Curse ruling is just wrong.

Several of us harassed FFG personnel during Gencon last year, and the answer we got was: Yes, secondary weapon timing is completely broken. Just play it like they should work.

So, we play them like they should work no matter what the rules actually say.
I agree with you here, but I think Jax is going to stop it without the contradiction. He doesn't have to be the target for that one.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
West Palm Beach
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
The world is what we make of it. So why not make it a better place?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah... This is been discussed many times. And on other boards sometimes it deteriorated into personal attacks.

However it is only one ship (two now?) so I'm generally good with it. It doesn't break the game and there are plenty of specific builds that directly counter other specific builds. But with so many ships it is still fun and has plenty of variety.

As far as thematic? For what ever reason the Blaster Turret takes more concentration (more focus) than an ION turret. And whether is the dark side of the force or his piloting ability focusing on Dark Curse is something that isn't going to work. Maybe you get a massive headache so Target Lock (i.e. a computer) is the only way.

Either way, there are plenty of ships with plenty of upgrades.

I'm good.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Brown
United States
Fort Wayne
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
There is no reason to have two A's at the beginning of aardvark. I simply won't do it.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Solution: Don't use blaster turret. It's awful anyways.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Raz
United States
Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jeff Wilder wrote:

Now, for those of you who like the ruling, why? Aside from adherence to "absolute letter of the rules," how does the ruling fit in with how Dark Curse worked before? Does Dark Curse make turrets malfunction? (If so, it sure doesn't seem to work on Ion Cannon Turrets.)



I don't look at it that way at all. The blaster turret is a low tech weapon that requires the pilot's ability (spend focus) as opposed to the ships technology to fire. Otherwise why make the pilot spend focus to shoot it. It makes perfect sense that you wouldn't be able to hit Dark Curse with it. This is more then just a game mechanic ruling, its actually thematically valid.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Raz
United States
Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jeff Wilder wrote:
J2B1 wrote:
Using the turret requires a pilot to divide his attention between maneuvering his ship, and trying to aim at an enemy outside of his forward firing arc, therefore it requires complete focus.

Oh ... except for the Ion Cannon Turret, right?



Right actually. Why make the pilot spend focus to use it and not the ion turret? Because the blaster turret is a lower tech weapon. There is a thematic element to the blaster turret and having to spend focus.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Wilder

Daly City
California
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
edrazpgh wrote:
Right actually. Why make the pilot spend focus to use it and not the ion turret? Because the blaster turret is a lower tech weapon.

What's your source for this, that the turret housing a blaster is "lower tech" than the turret housing an ion cannon?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Dickson
United States
Orlando
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, Obi-Wan does call blasters "clumsy" and "random"...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jade Youngblood
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Source material? Really? The rules are official that's enough for me.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Justin Bitton
United States
California
flag msg tools
Wow! Touchy subject.

I do see both sides of the argument, but I still think the ruling has thematic validity, and I also don't view it as contradictory to the intended rules of the game. Certain pilot abilities or upgrades may allow you to spend focus tokens on things other than changing eyeballs to hits, but thematically, they all represent one thing: the pilot's focus.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Raz
United States
Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jeff Wilder wrote:
edrazpgh wrote:
Right actually. Why make the pilot spend focus to use it and not the ion turret? Because the blaster turret is a lower tech weapon.

What's your source for this, that the turret housing a blaster is "lower tech" than the turret housing an ion cannon?


Source? Just the fact that you have to use focus tokens to use it.


*Edit*
Ion you don't need focus for, Falcon turret you don't need focus for. Blaster turret you do. Conclusion is that it requires more Pilot concentration to use. Thus it must be more human controlled then machine controlled. The whole concept of focus in the game is that there is a human element.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.