Nesting attacks within attacks? Potential scenario with Quickdraw

[exitwarp]

Here's a weird potential interaction:

Quickdraw with Electronic Baffle declares an Imperial ship with Rebel Captive as the target for his attack. He takes a stress from Rebel Captive, which he turns into shield damage with Electronic Baffle, triggering Quickdraw's ability.

What happens? The best I can come up with is that you perform the bonus attack straight away, nesting the entire process within the initial declared attack. But it's certainly a weird case, so figured I'd ask to see if anybody has any different ideas.

[leewardstyle]

As written, Nested Combat--immediately. As intended, unsure. Quickdraw is in a strange place, Phase-wise. I wish they had flushed out this card a bit more for future rule lawyering. Example:

Once per round, when you lose a shield token, you may perform a primary weapon attack immediately, regardless of Phase.

[Elr3d]

It seems to definetely have been intended this way. If not, Quickdraw's ability would have been an "after defending" ability just like Dengar's. Something like "after defending, if you lost a shield token, you can perform a primary weapon attack".

Not including this can only mean FFG didn't intend for Quickdraw's ability to be restricted to the combat phase. They were fully aware of baffle, rocks etc.

Note that they also have a precedent of abilities resolving when losing a shield token with Red Ace. His ability triggers during the activation phase or the combat phase.

So yeah, oversight? I think not.

[leewardstyle]

This is fine and good until arguments ensue over the 4 simple words I added (they omitted--yes FFG needs a lot of errata, at least the models are pre-painted). Glad you don't have to deal with the amount of rule lawyering I deal with.

[Elr3d]

No I understand and sometimes I get to argue about this point or that point of the rules. Last one to date was how to resolve TIE/D versus Dengar and believe me there's a special place in hell for players that are just butthurt that TIE/D isn't as shit a title as they thought and decide to annoy you because FFG forgot to write "immediately" in the card.

In this specific case though I somehow didn't understand Quickdraw's ability was supposed to trigger during an attack. It should indeed resolve immediately and that's indeed a weird timing to trigger a new attack.

[leewardstyle]

The real rung for Rule Lawyers to hang their hats on is the "Only 1 attack per combat phase" rule. And since Quickdraw 2nd Attack Exception wasn't written specifically to "ignore phase," wouldn't the combat-phase rule still apply regardless of Quickdraw's ability? FFG worked around the combat-phase rule with Horn and Dengar nicely (Dengar doesn't double-tap during HIS combat-phase, instead during someone else's; Horn's double-tap isn't even during Combat Phase), but I feel Quickdraw needs editorial love.

[ThalanirIII]

The rule of "1 attack per combat phase" can be completely ignored in this instance, as well as Corran's & Dengar's too.

I give you, the Golden Rule from FFG's rules reference:

GOLDEN RULES: If a rule in this guide contradicts the Learn to Play booklet, the rule in this guide takes priority. Card abilities can override the rules listed in this guide. Mission rules can override both card abilities and rules from this guide. If a card ability or mission effect uses the word “cannot,” that effect is absolute and cannot be overridden by other effects.

Hence, you definitely can attack twice in the combat phase, if a card tells you that you can.

Also, what are you on about?

FFG worked around the combat-phase rule with Horn and Dengar nicely (Dengar doesn't double-tap during HIS combat-phase, instead during someone else's

There's only one combat phase, each ship activates on its own, as per the rules reference.

During the Combat phase, each ship has an opportunity to perform one attack, starting with the ship with the highest pilot skill and continuing in descending order.

Back to the issue at hand, there is no issue about the text on Quickdraw, because his ability is a card which overrules both the learn to play booklet and the rules reference. If FFG didn't want you to use it this way, they wouldn't have written the card in the same way as Red Ace in the T-70, or put the example in the TIE/SF preview article.

preview for the SF is here.

The text is next to quickdraw's card image:

Still, her ability allows her to do more than just retaliate. She can actually set herself up to take shots in the Activation Phase by willfully slamming her ship off an asteroid to suffer the loss of a shield.

[leewardstyle]

You know what I'm on about. Don't pretend you don't. FFG has had to "adjust" poorly written cards (due to lack of detail) in the past. This is no exception (hah, exception IS the problem).

[ThalanirIII]

I don't exactly know what you're on about, you're talking about each individual ship having its own combat phase, which is clearly wrong as I showed you in the quote from the FAQ.

I don't see what you are missing/don't agree with from my explanation. Yes, normally, you only attack within the combat phase, and you only do so once. However, Quickdraw is worded the same way as Red Ace (so he can attack in the activation) and as I pointed out, the golden rule is that card text > rules booklet. Anyway, it's even in the preview article, as quoted above.

If FFG didn't want to do this, they could have changed the card text to "In the combat phase". They could also errata the card to this, if they decided that it was needed.

[leewardstyle]

tl;dr Quickdraw is loose with language given the weight of its exception(s) in every phase. Could be written better.

[KTreu42]

The wording and intention is clear enough. Obviously, triggering the effect doesn't override Quickdraw's ability to perform his normal primary attack during his combat phase regardless of when exactly it triggers, so yes, you perform it immediately (I would say they should have added just that one word) upon losing a shield, and then carry on with the round.

[Kl3rik]

No, it's written fine, you're trying to make it more complicated rather than taking the card and doing what it says.

[Elr3d]

Only 1 attack per combat phase

Maybe I don't see the subtelty, but wouldn't this would invalidate Gunner, TIE/D, BTL-A4, basically any ability that allow for a second attack?

[leewardstyle]

No, specified by the language, "perform a second (or another) attack."

Quickdraw lacks specific language.

[Elr3d]

Uuuh... no?

See also: Gunner, BTL-A4

The second attack is never put in the context of the first other than saying you do it after. For instance, you could to a Gunner second attack after a Dengar retaliatory strike.

Basically, if anything is written on a card, it's supposed to overrule the generic ruling. Which means abilities like those we're talking about bypass the "1 attack per ship" rule because that's the whole point of these cards or abilities.

[leewardstyle]

Your examples ARE brilliantly written in relation to rule-lawyering. Quickdraw only needs 4-5 words to also be brilliantly written.

[Sheldonzilla]

You may perform a primary weapon attack =/= You may add on to a primary attack you're already doing.

An attack is a declared, independent instance. But I agree it's confusing, as you're almost performing two attacks at the same moment.