I don't think it has to be all-or-nothing.

In that case, if no distinction is being made between the PAC and character cards, I can see a player debating that you could mastermind mindcontrol feedback and mystics damage. That would, of course, make unavoidable damage useless, unless it was made into the sixth golden rule.

Also, don't get me wrong; I think the ruling is fine. But without the ruling having been made by normalview, I could see the arguement being made, possibly appropriately. It seems like there have been many, many issues that have to do with how special powers are being worded, and it may begin to affect characters in a manner that could cause them not to work as intended (although, I'm not saying that's the case here; I'm thinking about how KC Magog works).

This is what I was working towards: Who gets to say "when"? How much is too much, and how much is not enough?

I like that WK seems to be moving towards a more structured naming convention with how the Powers/Traits work, even though this is putting more reliance on knowing the Core Rulebook/PAC. And while it looks like a good start, they still have a way to go. Threads like this, while frustrating at times for both sides of these arguments, are helping to get the game terminology where it needs to be.

So, I see discussions like this as growing pains on the way to a more uniform way of presenting game mechanics and how they interact. But the best part is still, if you don't like a rule, House Rule it so everyone is happy. (Just be ready with the Official stuff if you go Tourney.)

Same here. Good post.



I still don't think in this instance it would be too much to add the disclaimer, if that is indeed what the designers had in mind. Especially because it says "ignores all damage" and then it actually states the exceptions. And unavoidable damage is not included in the exceptions. It seems to me that if unavoidable damage was intended to affect this character, it would have not been left out of the exceptions, especially now that Previously Banned has brought up the point of the rules printed on "individual cards" trump the rule book. Why go out of the way to include some exceptions but leave out other exceptions, if they were intended to actually be exceptions?

So what your saying is that pulsewave will kill him then?

Cause that is what pulsewave does it ignores all game effects.

See how it goes around in circles. It does not have to list Unavoidable damage because the rule book by itself stars how to treat unavoidable damage. Same with pushing damage.

Cap wins!!!

Why? Because IK's SP is neither a wall nor indoor blocking terrain.

Nope, damage from pulsewave is also included in the concept of "all damage"------

And to Harupa: Does Cap win? To me its questionable because they are conflicting. Just like Hulk's deal is conflicting.

I already know how the Hulk situation is explained, but who wins out on the IK vs. Cap? Persoanlly I don't mix universes so it would never come up for me, but I'm curious to know.

Once again, I agree with this. If the designers intended for Invisible Kid's SP to prevent Cap, then they would have used language similar to Secret Invasion's Invisible woman:

INVISIBLE: Any character that is 7 or more squares from the Invisible Woman can't draw a line of fire to her.

No, because Hulk's SP also indicates that the power can't be countered or ignored; in this case, pulsewave (which ignores game effects) would have no effect because the SP can't be countered or ignored.

Exactly, well unavoidable damage can not be ignored as well.

Yes but since the concept of "cannot be ignored" vs "ignores everything" cannot be grasped, then Pulsewave would ignore Hulk's power.

You cannot have it one way without it going another.

Unless you factor in that rules per character cards supersede the rules as normal.

This debate comes down to what the game designers intended "all" to represent; all as in every form of damage including unavoidable damage (which is somewaht supported by listing the clear exceptions to what can injure Hulk) or all as in per normal rules, which wouldn't include unavoidable damage (which is somewhat supported by there never having been a SP that ignored unavoidable damage). This raises questions over the syntax of game effects, and may have far reaching effects.

Regardless of the question raised, we have an official ruling (i.e., unavoidable damage will KO Hulk). While I recognize that, I believe challenging the thought behind the decision is productive, as it might result in clarrified syntax for other powers or adjust how we parse out text of SPs.

Actually, you can have it one way without the other, depending on how the syntax of powers are parsed. Hulk's power says it can't be countered or ignored, thus superseding PW. Why could it be argued that Hulk could ignore unavoidable damage then? Because page 6 of the rule book indicates that game effects may break rules listed in the rule book (such as unavoidable damage) unless the rule is one of the golden rules.

That's the thing, its does not supersede the rule book. If it did it would mention unavoidable damage and pushing damage specifically to ignore it, per the rule book they would need to be mentioned.

I love the good discussion on powers.

What Previously Banned said.....
Except to add: I think instead of needing to mention those damage types specifically to be able to avoid them, it already says "all" so it would need to mention those damage types specifically in order not to ignore them

How specific a SP needs to be to supersede a "normal" rule is an interesting point. The rule book doesn't actually specify that each game element needs to be specified by name. As such, it's possible that by stating "unless it is dealt by an attack and the attack roll is doubles" is sufficient to supercede unavoidable damage, as unavoidable damage does not necessarily come from "an attack and the attack roll is doubles." However, an attack that hit and was doubles (other than snake eyes) that deals unavoidable damage greater than 0 would, without any question (God, I hope), result in damage, regardless of toughness.

For instance, Cap's Deflection Trajectory doesn't say that it can ignore stealth, but it does (because it indicates the only conditions that his LOF is blocked by).

On the other hand, no trait, team ability, power, or game effect has ever prevented unavoidable damage (at least as far as I know).

So that's another question for the game designer: How specific does a SP need to be to override a normal rule? The level of specificity required may be the tipping point for the debate.

LIMITLESS RAGE: Hulk can use Toughness. Hulk ignores all damage dealt to him unless it is dealt by an attack and the attack roll is doubles, but not a critical miss. Friendly characters cannot use Probability Control during an attack that targets Hulk. This power can't be countered or ignored.