Can you quote the CE and the FAQ link your speaking of?

^thanks for the quotes

The reason Bail's CE will work on himself is because of how the CE is worded.

While Bail cannot be his own ally (The glossary definition defines an ally as another character in your or a teammate's squad), he is the Trooper's ally and the trooper is his ally. So, when either of them combine fire with the other, all conditions of the CE are met (An Alderaan Trooper combining fire with an allied Alderaan Trooper), and so, the attacker gets a +10 damage bonus.

Keep in mind that Bail's CE's wording is a rather uncommon one and shouldn't be used to measure other CEs. If a Commander has a Commander Effect that they are affected by themselves, the CE will instead use the phrase "In your squad" which will be accompanied by an "(Including this character)".

Ah ok, I think I get what you mean. Basically, what you’re saying is, the word “ally” in this CE means ally to the alderaan trooper, not ally to Bail. I always thought ally was always in reference to an ally of the commander in a CE. If that were the case, commanders could gain their own CEs if it applies to ally’s. What you’re saying is allies in this commander effect just means an troopers that are allies to each other. However, I’m still not entirely convinced that the wording is enough to justify that, considering it just says ally’s. Idk man, it’s confusing.

But the attacker can only be an ally- that's how the CE works. The first trooper can only combine fire with another ally whose name contains Alderaan Trooper. This would only allow Bail get the damage boost if the attacker had to be an ally of the trooper combining fire, not an ally of Bail. And even that wouldn't allow Bail to combine fire with a trooper and grant them bonus damage- the character combining fire has to be his ally. This would make sense when you look at the FAQ which says that Bail can get the bonus damage, but doesn't say that he can combine fire to grant it.

The way I’m thinking about it:

If an allied trooper has Bail combine with him:
Is an ally of Bail combining fire? Yes
Is this ally combining fire with another ally of Bail? No it’s combining with Bail himself.
If commanders don’t count as their own allies, Bail shouldn’t get +10 in this scenario.

If what you are saying is one of the “allies” in the commander effect just has to be an ally of the first ally, and not an ally of Bail, then what you are saying makes sense. If both allies have to be allies of Bail and not of the other trooper, then the only way Bail can get the plus 10 is if commanders count as allies.. Like I said I’m not sure the wording justifies the first interpretation.

Scenario 2: Bail combines fire with a trooper
Is an ally of Bailr combining fire? No, Bail himself is.
Is this ally combining fire with an allied trooper? Yes.
Still shouldn’t get +10 damage.

Unless allies in this sentence somewhere means ally of the trooper instead of ally of Bail both times, neither scenario should work. Unless of course, commanders can get their own commander effects when it says allies.

Yes. This is exactly what I am saying. The Commander Effect is talking about an ally of an ally, not two allies of Bail.

Think about General Obi-Wan Kenobi's Commander Effect for a second. A character can gain the bonus while only Kenobi is within 6 squares of them because Kenobi is an ally within 6 squares; it's not referring to a 2nd allied character besides Kenobi and the follower.

SWM in a nutshell!

Well my question was not about Bail specifically, I was more worried about the implications for commanders being able to receive their own affects when it says allies. The way the FAQ words the answer is kind of misleading, as it only talks about being enelligable when it says followers, but makes no mention of when it says ally’s. Then it picks this nutty example to explain, without clarification. Crazy.