We know that the restrictions of a special power remain in place when using a feat. For example, a figure that can use Regeneration but only in water would only be able to use Auto Regeneration when he occupies water.

SS:I has 2 choices. He can use Perplex normally (in which case, his use of BT would be normal) or he can use it to modify his own combat values by +2 (in which case his use of BT is limited to himself).

You're still not seeing what I'm saying. I'm not saying it's an initial perplex being followed by multiple perplexes. I'm saying that it is one use of perplex, but more than one character can be modified by the triggering of it. It can even be applied in multiple ways (which is partly why [I think] you're able to affect different stats on affected characters with Brilliant Tactician. You can perplex defense on one character, but then attack on another.

That's ridiculous to say that it would be uniformly worded. It's not the same thing. Mr. Fantastic and Question and Batman Beyond are all ruled the same because they only have one way to use the power. Different effects can happen from Mr. Fantastic using the power (the stat bonus being +/-1 or +/-2), but it's still only one way to use perplex. Unlike the others, Super Skrull Illuminati can use perplex in more than one way, he can use it on himself with a +2 bonus or use it normally.

in other words,... he can use BT but everyone including himself gets the +1 perplex.

Thanks norm

+ or - 1. If you want to use BT with him, you have to do it just like anyone with Perplex would do it since he has to use it normally to use BT effectively.

I'm open to continuing this discussion, but I want to make sure we're on the same page and you did see nbperp's post above ruling on the issue.

Well... similarly to with Dr. Strange's ruling on Wand of Watoomb when it initially came out. I still believe I am right in this, and will stick by it. If you go by what's in the players guide (currently), I think my logic is supported.

So I think Brilliant Tactician needs to be changed in the next PG. Or even better, just change the wording of Brilliant Tactician outright. It's in need of a rewrite. It's easily the number one question asked in regards to game questions.

Seriously... if you type in "Miley Cyrus" into Google, and hit 'I'm feeling lucky', it will take you to a page asking a question about how Brilliant Tactician works.



*I retract. I discovered that yes, I was wrong about it. Partially in thanks to Questions.

I would enjoy that (seriously, not being sarcastic). Because I do understand that my logic isn't 100% rock solid... but I do think it's a bit stronger. So I am definitely not beyond convincing. Just given the current logic and wording, I don't feel I'm wrong.

Here goes....

Agreed.

But that is different than Super Skrull: Illuminati using it to both increase his own combat values by +/-2 and use it normally.

I'm not saying it should be uniformly worded (although it wouldn't hurt for the game to use more uniform wording), but it should be uniformly applied. The way that it is applied to Dr. Strange should be the same way that it is applied to Super Skrull: Illuminati.

And while Super Skrull: Illuminati has options on how he can use it, he must pick one of the options. He can either use it normally or he can use it to modify one of his own combat values by +/–2. If he chooses the first option then he cannot also do the second option. If he chooses the second option then he cannot also do the first option.

But doing either one of those precludes doing the other.

I agree with all of those things. I even agree that by intent, it should work the opposite way of what I am arguing for. What I am arguing is that if you go by the current wording in the players guide corrections and clarifications for Brilliant Tactician, it would seem to indicate that there is one initial target of perplex (which can even be an enemy), and then afterwards perplex can be used to affect friendlies (and when I say afterwards, I mean after the initial target is selected... technically it's all happening at once).
I guess my biggest point is that if you currently are able to affect an enemy with perplex to set off the Brilliant Tactician (which falls outside of the shared TA or shared keyword of Brilliant Tactician), why can't you at the same time essentially use the other option of SS: Illuminati's perplex to boost himself by +2 to set off the Brilliant Tactician that affects the other friendlies?



Also: If we were just looking at the straight text of Brilliant Tactician and Strange Magicks, I would conclude that it would have to be one or the other (Perpelx himself by +2 and no one else, or everyone by +1 including himself... not both).

Where my disagreement comes in is that over time my mind has been conditioned to believe that how it is worded on the card is not exactly how it works. If it was worded the way it was on the card... it would be just one perplex with multiple targets. But as indicated by the errata's use of words like "initial target", "after that", and "follow up"... as well as certain things like being able to use perplex on an enemy to trigger Brilliant Tactician.... well going by all that, I don't really think the card works exactly as printed.

You know what. I'm going to try something different. I'm going to stop trying to prove you wrong... and see if I can dig for even one thing that would prove myself wrong. And if that's right, let me know.

*mostly just thinking out loud here*
So if he uses perplex. He can do it one of two ways. So would I be right in saying that to do one... would make the other inaccessible due to the use of the word or? So if he does the +2/-2 on himself. He no longer has access to the other one.

So hypothetically speaking, even if it was multiple uses of perplex (one perplex setting off the ability to use perplex multiple other times)... it wouldn't matter because he is now limited to just that one type, which only targets himself. And he already chose to use that, so he can't use the other?

But even working the way it currently does (that perplexing multiple targets is still just one use of perplex that happens all at once but affects more than one character), which is actually more limiting than the hypothetical way described above, Strange Magicks should technically still work this way when using Brilliant Tactician.

So essentially with the use of "or", once he chooses one, he can't use the other. So he's essentially in the same boat as Question or Batman Beyond?

Reviewing... I think that actually sounds about right. Yeah?

Sounds about right.

Yeah. I figured that was about it.

I'm normally pretty solid with rules, so I spend a lot of time trying to prove "why" to others, and often don't just go back review the basics that actually prove that just 1 "why it won't" shuts down like 28 "why it woulds".