With all due respect (and yes, I do respect your opinion) I see that, for now, we will have to agree to disagree until some point when (if) we ever get an official answer on this.


I'm not going to hold my breath. I'm still waiting for an official opinion on my RCE question that I have been asking since the Indy rulebook was released. The confusing wording still exists in the Universe rulebook...

Reducing movement when a figure begins the action in hindering terrain is not subject to the Rule of 3.

And Psylockeslover is right on the other. (Even if the rules aren't worded as clearly as you may like.)

All right. I'm not a judge, God knows, but I have had an extended three-hour argument about this Mind Control "Free Action" thing which raged in my brain for days afterwards.

I think the heart of the debate (and I happen to agree with Psylockeslover) comes with the difficulty in interpreting why WizKids would assign "any action" as a "free action". As far as I can tell, that wording was put in to help make it clear that the action you assign them does not give them a token, as per the modified ruling, but is NOT meant to preclude you from using the Free Actions that would normally be available to you. There's no limit to the amount of Free Actions you can take in a turn, as it sayeth in the Holy Writ:

- Universe handbook, pg. 27

So you could, in fact, Mind Control, let's say, some hypothetical Superman Enemy with Flight, HSS and Outwit (let's call him Cyborg Superman). And suppose on your force, you had an E Lobster Johnson who was adjacent to Cyborg Superman. You Mind Control the big guy and you're allowed to allot him one action, which counts as a Free Action (again, mostly for purposes of accounting tokens). He can scoop up Lobster, temporarily his ally, and HSS-move however many squares, take the attack which comes as a bonus Free Action with a HSS action, combine his Superman Enemy TA with Lobster's wildcarded TA to Outwit someone, AND then use his own Outwit. then end his movement and set Lobster down. It's all Free Actions, which you can have as much of as you want. And then you've assigned your allotted one action, the Mind Control ends, and Cyborg Superman returns to his senses, next to Lobster Johnson, who will probably want to use his own Outwit and pray to whatever God WWII-era pulp fiction ghosts pray to.

That's how I see it, at any rate.

Two major problems that I can see here:

1. Outwit cannot be used in the middle of another action, so your Cyborg Supes could not use his Outwit in the middle of his HSS action.

2. MC also has this line in it's description:
To me, this means that, upon resolving an action, control reverts to it's owner. We also understand that actions that are part of a larger action (such as with HSS and RS/Charge) do not count because they are not fully resolved until the larger action is resolved.

However, with Outwit, the action to use Outwit is resolved when the target Power is countered. Since the action of Outwit is resolved, control would revert to its owner at that point.

It is my contention that picking up a figure is a part of a larger action (Move or Power Action), and would be treated the same as actions provided by the above mentioned powers.





On a personal note, I feel that you should be able to use a power like Outwit and still use an Action as normal (a Move, Combat, or Power Action), but that is not in the rules as they stand now.

I didn't think you could carry another figure while making a HSS attack? Is this a change to an old rule, or am I just way off?

Two other off topic problems:

1) Cyborg Superman would only have one Outwit. A figure that already has Outwit cannot gain a second Outwit through the Superman Enemy TA.

And even if he could...he can only use Outwit once per turn.

2) At the time you tried to use the Superman Enemy Outwit, Lobster Johnson wasn't on the board. He was being carried by Cyborg Superman. So you couldn't use any powers/abilities possessed by Lobster Johnson or which would have required Lobster Johnson to be adjacent to Cyborg Superman.

It's been allowed since Indy came out.

HSS(1) is a Move Action, and the character actually moves. If that HSS figure is a flyer, then yes, they can carry other figures.

Bah! I knew I forgot something...

Yeah, there's that too...

Oh, for the love of Ghede.

Perhaps the part where I said I wasn't a judge needed to be made clearer.

Next time I'll just use all hypothetical powers and characters, you nitpicking blackguards.

So when Character 1 uses Mind Control on Character A, Character A will use Ability B which includes one or two Free Actions (C1-C2), and can also use Ability D which counts as a Free Action (E), and then use Team Ability F, also a Free Action (G).

I was just trying to demonstrate what I saw as the allowable use of Free Actions, and those were the only ones I could think of within the two minutes it took to rap that out that might've been used in conjunction. So they can't be used in conjunction. That's not the point.

I still fail to see why assigning any one action as a Free Action precludes the use of Free Actions, and describing for me what Outwit as an ability does falls short in assuaging this disparity of vision. You say "The action to use Outwit", but it's not really an action. in the pure sense of the word. It's a Free Action, which I think is inherently different.

In my opinion, the whole point of the strange phrasing is to make it clear that the single regular, tokenable action you may assign the character as part of Mind Control is, in this instance, not a regular tokenable action, but a Free Action. Nothing in the wording indicates to me that you are precluded from using other Free Actions, so long as the Mind Control action ends as soon as the tokenable action has been resolved.

But, it's hard to say for sure. I blame it all on modernity and syntax.

But that's where you're wrong. Outwit is an action. Just because it is a free action doesn't mean it isn't an action. It is just as much an action as Charge is an action. And when you assign Outwit to the MCed figure, that is "any action" and at the completion of that action, the MCed figure immediately return's to its owner's control per the PAC. You can't do anything with that figure now, including assigning the figure another free action, because the figure has returned to its owner's control.

If they had wanted to do what you are trying to do, they would have left the wording the same as it was under Indy with the phrasing: "Each successfully hit target may be assigned a power, action, move action, close combat action, or ranged combat action as a free action." The change in the wording reflects the change in WK's intention for the MC assigned action.

Well, yes and no. MC has seen several overhauls since the Indy rules came out because they were trying to get the wording down so it's effects would be what the designers wanted, but they kept falling short.

Orriginally (in the Indy PAC), MC was worded similar to what it is now. YOu get 1 free action to use. This meant that powers like Outwit ended the MC action.

Then it was changed to state that you could give the target a Move, Combat, or Power Action as a free action. This meant that you couldn't use powers that were a Free Action (such as Outwit) at all.

Then, with Universe, they went back to something like the orriginal Indy wording (I deleted my Indy PAC, so I can't compare to see if the wording is exactly the same or not), with the orriginal interpretation.

It is my belief that the designer's intent was that you could use a power like Outwit, then use a normal (Move, Combat, or Power) action as normal, they just simply never got the wording quite right.




Though I suppose it makes sense in a 'comic realism' sense that a controlled character would not have access to the parts of thier personality that manifests in the game as Outwit or Perplex, but that is a different discussion altogether...

I'm all about that "designer's intent" theory. And I think it works fairly well from a "comic realism" perspective. Better with some characters than with others; like, when Eclipso seizes the mind of Batman, the now-evil Dark Knight still has the capability to throw down some debilitating item from his utility belt prior to hurling a Batarang.

I dunno. It seems reasonable enough to me that someone can take as complete a set of actions while Mind Controlled as they could on their own within the course of a single turn.

You are right that the intent of the original Indy was probably closer to what we have now: "Assign each target one free action." The problem was that the sentence was unclear and made some players think that only a free action Outwit/Perplex) could be assigned...so it was changed.

Then it was changed to that text. Although, and I know you don't like the forum rulings, DrGandalf ruled that other free actions (Outwit/Perplex) could be used assuming you used them before the MC assigned action.

I have no idea what their intent is. But if they did want to go that way...they could have easily worded it better. (Sticking closer to the post Indy language and including a line allowing Outwit/Perplex or FAQing that you could use Outwit/Perplex too.) Obviously, though, they haven't changed it to something like that.

Yes, it was very unclear and very much needed changing...

Hey, a ruling that I actually like! Too bad...

I forgot to add something like: "and they just gave up the whole thing and went back to this wording." I think (and, as before, this is just an opinion) that they decided it was too much trouble to try and figure out a way to allow Outwit and Perplex during a MC action, so they went with simply disallowing these 2 powers to keep it simpler. Just my humble opinion...

If we are talking about the current rules, not disallowing so much as just lumping them in there.

(And if they want ideas to do it the other way...allow Outwit/Perplex and then a close combat, range combat, power, or move action I know many people who can help them word it. )