Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

Blank Attachment

Best Answer dbmeboy , 01 May 2015 - 04:48 PM
Response from Erik:
In the case of Cularin Cultist, what defines an eligible unit for an enhancement?
#21
Posted 02 May 2015 - 02:01 AM

#22
Posted 02 May 2015 - 02:24 AM

So it's not quite clear, is Erik saying that Luke et al will automatically get discarded after being put on a non fighter speeder (say Home One) after being put there via Stay on Target? Or that they will get discarded if they lose the pilot trait via some method (after being attached via SoT)?
They will be discarded immediately if they are placed on a non-Fighter/Speeder Vehicle via Stay On Target. They will also be discarded immediately if they are on a Fighter/Speeder but then have their gametext blanked (eg via IE Tarkin).
#23
Posted 02 May 2015 - 03:48 AM

Example. Tarkin blanks Luke's Saber I can just use its action to put it back out?
#24
Posted 02 May 2015 - 06:13 AM

Okay, so Wedge, Luke and BSP have limitations on where you can put them. But Baron Fel can still go on any vehicle he wants and only provide benefits if he's on a Fighter, correct?
#25
Posted 02 May 2015 - 07:35 AM

#26
Posted 02 May 2015 - 12:42 PM

#27
Posted 02 May 2015 - 01:20 PM

They will be discarded immediately if they are placed on a non-Fighter/Speeder Vehicle via Stay On Target. They will also be discarded immediately if they are on a Fighter/Speeder but then have their gametext blanked (eg via IE Tarkin).
But this goes directly against what Erik said earlier in the post that the pilot keyword had the intrinsic text:this unit may be attached as an enhancement to a vehicle unit.
He seems to contradict himself in his post and I'm wondering if he left out a key word or two in writing such a long one. Human error and all....
#28
Posted 02 May 2015 - 01:20 PM

#29
Posted 02 May 2015 - 01:59 PM

But this goes directly against what Erik said earlier in the post that the pilot keyword had the intrinsic text:this unit may be attached as an enhancement to a vehicle unit.
He seems to contradict himself in his post and I'm wondering if he left out a key word or two in writing such a long one. Human error and all....
Luke, Wedge and BSP do not have the Pilot keyword, only their own text (which does limit what kind of units they can be attached to).
And when a unit does have the Pilot keyword, it can be taken away by Tarkin, making the attachment status illegal.
#30
Posted 02 May 2015 - 02:19 PM

I think we need another errata. I want rookie pilot to have a pilot cost. Although I guess its akin to the logistics officer not being an officer
As much as I'd love for that to happen, it's not going to for the same reason Luke/Wedge/BSP weren't changed to have the Pilot keyword. That would add a new keyword into the core set and the Hoth cycle, requiring future printings of the Core set to either squeeze the keyword into the rulebook or include an extra rules insert and future printings of the relevant Hoth packs to include a rules insert. Look at it this way: it's a slight nerf to Desperation by removing a couple of ways that you could keep an important vehicle alive. Should make the people claiming that Called to Arms was too powerful happy.
@doctormungmung: TheNameWasTaken has it right. While Luke/Wedge/BSP function almost like units with the Pilot keyword, they don't actually have it themselves.
#31
Posted 02 May 2015 - 02:55 PM

The Rookie Pilot can never pilot anything.
If Tarkin blanks any enhancement attached to anything it will fall off.
If he blanks an enhancement just on the table it stays.
If the Cultist moves Wedge/Luke/BSP it has to be to another Fighter or Fighter/Speeder.
None of those units can ever been attached to something other then what thier text allows.
Anything else?
- darthbs likes this
#32
Posted 02 May 2015 - 03:21 PM

Oh! If Tarkin blanks Dengar's text, what happens to any cards captured on him? Purely academic and only tangentially related... Erik is going to just start ignoring questions from me at this rate...
#33
Posted 02 May 2015 - 03:22 PM

#34
Posted 02 May 2015 - 03:25 PM

This ruling isn't really that complicated, especially since Tarkin doesn't exist yet. The only functional change is that we can't use Stay On Target to put Rookie Pilot out on anything (or Luke/Wedge/BSP onto a vehicle where they would've had no text anyways).
#35
Posted 02 May 2015 - 03:26 PM

Seriously. I made a post to our local group since this thread might not be seen by mostGood luck to all the TOs this weekend and next!
#36
Posted 02 May 2015 - 04:53 PM

#37
Posted 02 May 2015 - 05:05 PM

Well that's what we get for asking difficult questions... Erik realizing that there was an inconsistent ruling and taking our fun toys away from us.
#38
Posted 02 May 2015 - 05:08 PM

Oh! If Tarkin blanks Dengar's text, what happens to any cards captured on him? Purely academic and only tangentially related... Erik is going to just start ignoring questions from me at this rate...
The ruling has to be that those cards go away. Facedown cards are the same as rookie pilot - they have no text that allows them to be used as enhancements, and they only stay on Dengar because of Dengar's own text. Once you take Dengar's text away, there's nothing to ensure legitimate attachment state.
#39
Posted 02 May 2015 - 06:04 PM

But they're not enhancements, they're captured cards. Does Dengar need his text to keep cards captured at himself, or only to get them there in the first place?
#40
Posted 04 May 2015 - 04:07 PM
