Um, yea....

Maybe you could take a "be nice" pill and then re-read this:

And,

This.

It's funny that you knock people for not reading the article when it seems you didn't either. Here's a quote directly from the article.

The only open question I can see:

figure A is equipped by/with figure B during force construction

during the game, using the BotS, you drop a hammer into A's square and automatically succeed in making the relic roll --- "equipping" the hammer to A. Is that the same "equip" as this term, i.e., do you immediately KO figure B?

none of the other resources (that I have seen, in my admittedly brief search) use the word "equip" to describe how the resource element is used/assigned/etc to the figure(s) - other than the BotS.

So, did they intend to implicate BotS in this, or are they planning to somehow carve it out?

Note that this use of "equip" permits use by non-standard characters, so you could "equip" a hammer to the Batman/Superman Robot if you were so inclined, but not Jocasta.

Once again, I think there's too much overcomplicating things. The article is only talking about stuff that says something like this-

If it's not worded like that then the article isn't referring to it.

It seems people aren't taking a pretty self-explanatory article at face value and instead are trying to read too much into wording and apply them to things that the article makes no mention of or even addresses.

That will be interesting to see "multiple" of the same entity in a game if that is true. Silver ring means "unique". However I see that ID cards are considered unique. Usually Unique was meant for characters before, I can probably guess that "unique" can be changing from "characters" to "game elements" like how sideline limit rules were changed from "characters" to "game elements".

I'm just trying to make sure there aren't consequences beyond the ones we know of.

I actually like what they're now doing to entities - the first wave of errata fixed them to a degree - this fixes them further. But using word "equip" when it's been used in other places is a bit dangerous.

Let's wait a few days and then someone needs to summon the WORF oracle and ask the question.

In general, a game element that is equipped to another character is still whatever the game element normally is (Relic, Resource Attachment, Special Object, etc.).

= = = =

AND

Most importantly, by default, a character can only be equipped with one item at a time (unless a specific game effect says otherwise). During force construction, a character can’t be equipped with more than one game element. During the game, if a character is equipped with a second item, the previously equipped item will be KO’d and scored for your opponent if appropriate.




How does this Equip change interact with Special Objects? Relics? Resource attachments like the Constructs? Do Resources like the Penguin count as being Equipped, now?

:|

Thanks, WizKids.

For now? It doesn't.

They've errataed possessors in the errata forum. It's unlikely we'll see anything else change until the new rulebook comes out (if then).

But if a new resource comes out with the equip term...

And to clarify, apparently they dumped a bunch of general errata at some point (by editing, so it doesn't show up as a new post; I try to keep an eye on that area):

"[C]Only game elements that specify they are "equipped" and have an EFFECT listing are considered equipped items."

http://www.wizkidseventsystem.com/bb...hp?f=29&t=4676

So, unless something says it is equipped AND has an "Effect" it's not equipment. I still asked about the BoTS but as of right now, it is not equipment because it lacks any effect language.

I actually like them doing errata like this, I just wish there was some way for them to notate it...

Well done! Rep to you.

And ... very important detail, s aren't standard characters.

Unique is unique. It's not a game term that is restricted to characters.

That is a very good question.
Here's what the article says: "Using Eclipso again as an example, if you choose to pay his 25 point cost during construction to equip him to a standard character on your force, he would not count as a character for any other parts of force construction, or later for any game effect that affects “friendly characters”, etc. This means his keywords would not apply to Themed Teams, he could not be assigned ATA’s, he would not count towards your initiative roll, etc."

Since the rules on uniques (and primes) could be considered another part of force construction, and that clearly says that it isn't a character for any other part of force construction, then technically the rules would allow multiples of uniques and primes.

I doubt that will be the final ruling on it if asked on WES, but that's what the current wording does say.


The one thing I am personally curious to know is what happens if a character's attributes change such that it would no longer qualify as one to whom things could be equipped.
If Ms. Marvel has Ion equipped to her and chooses to possess one of these symbols, does it become unequipped?

My gut tells me that would be the ruling.

If that's the case, though, then Pym Particles is up there among the more useless game elements.
It is obvious how this is intended to work, but (assuming that my gut feeling above is correct) a strict reading of the rules would mean that the moment it is equipped you would unequip it due to no longer being qualified.
Again assuming that my gut is correct I would not imagine that would be how the PPs would be ruled, but I'd be interested to know if the PPs will get a specific errata to let them work as intended or if there will be general ruling stating that the effects of an equipped item cannot cause the character to become unqualified. I would expect the latter.

I the rulebook the term is only used for characters. Saying that Special objects and stuff are "unique" is just player lingo or shorthand ways of saying that you cannot play multiples.

The only use of the word in relation to anything else is not using it as the game term.
Again, I doubt the final ruling on the matter will be to allow them, but at this time, based on the information we have, it looks like this does allow multiples.

From any ID card:
"Setup - At the beginning of the game, choose a character on your sideline with a name or real name matching this ID Card and turn it to a starting line. This character is called an ID Character. You can't have more ID characters on your force than you have characters placed on the map at the beginning of the game. This card is Unique."

So there is precedent that non-characters can be officially Unique.

The way I read it, possessors at 25 are no longer characters because of their specific language saying so, but nothing says they're no longer Unique.