Golden Rule #1 says when you are going to use the value start from the printed value doing all replacements and then all modifications. And Charge and Running Shot say to halve the speed value, which the rule book says is a replacement. So first halve the value, then add any modifiers: 9 Speed +2 from the Belt becomes 5+2 for 7.

Pulse Wave says you're going to have an Area of Effect which is determined by using half the range value. But it doesn't replace the range value, it's a new thing: Area of Effect. So if the range is 9 and you have +2 from the Belt you get 9+2 for a range of 11. The AoE will be 6. Does that help any?

Thanks Ditoman, I did not see that other thread. Learned something new. It seems we all are since this change of power. I'll be honest, I like the new sets of rulings we've been getting much more, they are far more consistent between all pieces/game elements/"game effects".

This is one of those wording problems with the game that needs to be addressed. It's counterintuitive to use "half" and have it mean two different things.

What if I am using un222 Catwoman.

Although she doesn't have a card, does PW ignore her unstated "mock the person for using this awful figure from an even more awful movie"?

This would mean that, if someone PW'd her, they could not make fun of me for using her for the duration of the action!

Well, the problem isn't that "half" means two different things. The problem is that you aren't doing the same thing with that "half", so different rules apply. I do agree it would be better if the language was clearer, though. The debate on this was lengthy.

Now see I'm still trying to get that figure. While it's a pretty bad movie it's not the worst made, and the dial is actually pretty good. Got one you want to trade?

I'm with Masenko, the rulebook says halving is generally a replacement value in the replace/modify golden rule, so things like PW that create really weird modify then replace exceptions should clarify themselves more explicitly.

If I say a value is halved, that is a replacement.

If I say x = half a value, the value is not halved, it is simply the definition of x. It is no different in heroclix than it is in math.

If you take 2 tests and get an 80 and 100, I can say the total = test1 + test2 so total = 180, average = total / 2, so average = 90. Is total any different than it was after determining the average? No, it is simply the formula used to determine average.

Replacement requires a change in a value. Halving, if it changes a value, is a replacement. In this case the value does not change so no replacement.

So pulse waving GSX Magneto is gonna really suck now?

I don't understand your fancy math, rpgambit. Modifiers change values too, but they are not replacements. So, nothing is actually a modifier? Also, why is half a value than halving the value? This is not how I think of math at all. I think of it as "finding half the value" = "halving the value" and "changing the value" = "changing the value". But maybe I never learned some theorum or proof that explains this in non-Euclidean geometry or in the upper levels of calculus. I don't like math enough to want to learn that stuff. I'm happy stopping at Calculus II.

I get that this is the way PW works now. I accept that. It is how it originally worked in IC, IIRC. I like this return to the golden years. I just don't think the rulebook/pac/player's guide make this clear enough currently and the game may benefit greatly from explicitly explaining this within the three documents somewhere.

No, because Magneto's Magnetic Shield kicks in when he becomes a target, which means when you draw LOF. At that point you're ignoring game effects he's using, including Magnetic Shield.

The only reason you're right is because of game rule nuances. I understand they exist. I'm just of the opinion they shouldn't. The average player doesn't understand the difference between "halve this value" and "use half of this value"
You guys should always be striving to make this game easier to understand, and this is just not easily understandable to many people. Therefore, someone should suggest to whoever writes the rules that this should be worded in the future to be more clear. That's all I'm saying.

We are working on many different areas to increase clarity, and if this turns out to be a major point of misunderstanding, it will be addressed as well.

Let me try two last examples to try and explain without my "boring math" being snipped..

Ex1: Suppose this scenario: There is a pile of coins. You and I will both take some, and the number I take will be half of yours. So my coins = half of your coins. You take $1, so I take half of that, 50c. How much money do you now have? $1

Second scenario: There are a pile of coins. You will take some. You take $1. Now cut the amount you took in half. So halve your coins. How much is left? 50c.

Ex2: If you make a snowball, and I will make one half the size of yours, after I'm done, what size is yours? The same it was before, not replaced.

So if the Area of Effect is half the value of your range, what is your range value now? The same it was before. This is why it is not a replacement. Your range value is not replaced with anything. It stays the same and is only used for reference to determine what Area of Effect equals. Halving a value is only a replacement if the value itself changes.

Setting a value equal to a halved version of itself is a replacement. So saying your range is halved is saying your range is now half of what it was. Only one value remains, the new (replaced) range.

Setting a value equal to half of something else is not a replacement. So saying AoE is equal to half your range leaves two values. AoE which is half of your range, and Range, which stays the same.

I wouldn't call the concept that setting A to a value relative to B doesn't change B in any way "nuance".

Now I get it. Thanks for the continued examples. I will admit, this does feel very non-intuitive when reading just the rulebook, pac, and tournament guide. I think the current wordings would not lead most players to this conclusion (but this thread would), and would recommend adding it to the future entries of the player's guide or updated pac/rule book, but that is just my personal thoughts and should not be taken as an angry demand for you to fix something that is stupid and wrong and broken.

I'm not sure you're understanding my point. It's not that the math is hard (it's definitely not), it's that the wording isn't immediately clear to everyone. In any game, that's a problem.

Again, please understand that while I'm not stupid and I understand what you mean, many players and especially new players are not going to understand the "nuance" between halving and using half. If you're going to fix the wording, great, it's as simple as always using the word replace when you want to replace, and saying something like "Use half of the total value after modifiers" when you don't want to replace. Just make it perfectly crystal clear what is meant from reading the power alone. On a personal level, I understand why one is a replacement and one isn't, but I still just don't like how there's a golden rule that is "replace then modify" when you're using one value and not the other, and that's somehow not replacement, so modifiers happen before. It's weird.

Basically, I don't want to have oranges like the old crew refuse to fix problems with the game just because they have a ruling correct. Rules are great, but any game can be made better; the status quo isn't good enough. I very, very much appreciate statements like "We are working on many different areas to increase clarity." This is one of those areas, so thank you for your work.