K, so it sounds like consensus is that the Koala is unaffected by isolation. What about immobilized, I don't see any resolution to that above. Does it autofail against Adhesive launchers? If immobilized, can it boost?
That depends on whether or not you take the view of "as equipment, all states that say they affect Troopers do nothing to them. Except when we decide otherwise arbitrarily, like with Disconnected." If Immobilized works on them, then they can't Boost, since that isn't one of the things you can do while Immobilized.
I am not sure that is right. Immobilized specifies no short moves except discover, and no BS attacks or other short skills except a handful of defensive options. Boost doesn't interact with those restrictions, given that it is an obligatory ARO, not a short skill or a movement skill.
Considering how lazily Short Skills tend to be defined, I think Boost qualifies as a Short Skill even if it's not explicitly a Short Skill in the skill box.
So by that logic I could declare it active turn, which is definitely not consistent with how I understand koalas to work. I don't think it is a short skill.
No, I'm pretty sure this is one of the cases where the rules authors managed to pull off something clever and take advantage of the fact that most but not all ARO skills are either Short Move or Short skills. Immobilized does, after all, have the three separate bullet point for dealing with Short Movement skills, Movement Skills, and Entire Order skills. Boost is NOT in the prohibited skill list, so Immobilized won't stop it. The Koala won't be going anywhere while in follow-along mode, but Boost isn't going to be stopped.
So I agree with your read that Boost still happens, but I'm still pretty sure that while they can in principle be immobilized, it doesn't do anything because of their being equipment. Perimeter says this: Which means they draw the ARO. This is backed up by the deployable trait of Koalas: So, fine, it sounds like they can be targeted and hit by attacks that induce states. But the effect of the state, such as immobilization, is a different issue. Immobilized-1 says this (it's the same for Immobilized-2): While the Perimeter states the following: Note the declaration here is by the bearer only. This is different than, say, the Ghost:Sync skill, which has this formulation: Based on this, my reading is the following. You can target the Koala with an ADHL. If you hit it, it autofails b/c it has no phys, and would take on the state of Immobilized-2. But, b/c it never declares a move (the move is declared by their bearer, which they perform), they can still move, and boost.
Eh, considering it gets to use Super-Jump and Climbing plus, there's definitely movement going on. By RAW, I guess you could declare stuff like Breakwater as an ARO if you're immobilized? That seems strange.
No, you can't declare breakwater as it is a short skill. That's specifically prohibited by the Immobilized state. Super Jump/Climbing plus are used for purposes of determining trajectory during Boost only, not for purposes of movement. It avoids debates about whether your Koala can reach a target, for instance one that is stuck on the side of the building with climbing plus. It reaches the target always, as long as there is a path to the target, no matter the distance traveled.
But U-turn, Hack Transport, Alert, and Change Facing* on the other hand are ARO skills that does not fall under the list of denied skills with this strict definition. * Yes, Change Facing is not a Short Movement Skills. Immobilized prevents Short Movement Skills, not skills with movement trait.
Seems legit. Alert I knew and seems entirely reasonable to me. ECM would also be another legal and reasonable declaration.
Yeah, and this is also, I guess, when we should have the discussion on whether you're actually declaring a Short Skill when you're declaring Breakwater as an ARO. You aren't allowed to declare Short Skills as AROs, particularly since the "Short Skill/ARO" means "Short Skill or ARO" and the definition of a Short Skill is that "the user must expend one Short Skill" something which you do not get in AROs.
That logic enables BS Attack in ARO from IMM Troopers. I'm behind any logic that is: Alert, ECM = Yes. BS Attack = No.
Yup. I am aware it would, but I'm arguing that it's absurd and that IMM ought to more consistently read (underline is what I added) Troopers in this state cannot declare Attacks nor any Short Skills or ARO other than Alert, Reset, Regeneration, Sensor, AutoMediKit, or those that state so explicitly in their description. I actually don't agree ECM should be allowed, and especially I don't think Change Facing should be allowed.
I don't disagree. But I think that would require an FAQ because while I agree that Change Facing probably shouldn't be allowed, the rules are relatively clear in permitting it. Absent an FAQ or @HellLois ruling disallowing all AROs (unless specified) then it appears that Change Facing, Alert, ECM etc are all legal.
And more... Regeneration ins't an short order, neither an ARO. I think it is allowed, but it is really confuse and I couldn't be sure if it was a mistake in the rule redaction.
It's an Entire Order Skill, true, and it should typographically reside as an exception to Immobilized's next bullet point that forbids Entire Order Skills.
When you declare it as an ARO, it's an ARO. You don't get to use Short Skills in ARO. Same thing with what happens to Jump becoming a Short Skill when you have Super-Jump.
