You are currently viewing HCRealms.com, The Premier HeroClix Community, as a Guest. If you would like to participate in the community, please Register to join the discussion!
If you are having problems registering to an account, feel free to Contact Us.
PERHAPS BECAUSE HE GIVES ME COURAGE: When Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf the Grey KOs an opposing character and actions resolve, don't give them an action token for this action and modify their defense value by +1 until your next turn.
This is a trait on the dial of the new Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf the Grey duo, from the second Hobbit set.
What happens if the duo happens to KO two or more characters in one action?
Do they get multiple defense modifiers? Or just +1 total for all characters KOed?
Thanks, VanisherPunisher, but what's the reasoning, specifically? I'm thinking the same: basically, the rules are trying to do everything they can when the trigger happens. You can't prevent the placement of multiple tokens, as there's only one to place at all, but nothing seems to be preventing the character from receiving multiple defense bonuses here.
Not to be disagreeable on this lovely holiday but I read it the other way. I see it as not caring how many were ko'd just that a ko happened. I feel like it would use a word like "each" if it was intended to track how many were ko'd.
Its the word WHEN that allows it to be activated more then once. For it to be subject to only activating once the word IF would have been used instead.
Wedded Duo: When a friendly character named Human Torch or Johnny Storm is adjacent to Lyja the Lazerfist, they both modify their attack values by +1 if not already modified by this effect.
This activates each time the criteria are met. Not just once, but as many times as you have a Human Torch (or Johnny Storm) adjacent to Lyja. This is why it has that "if not already modified by the effect" at the end, because if HT #1 was already adjacent to Lyja, and HT #2 became adjacent, the trait would activate a second time for *BOTH* Human Torches and give Lyja and HT #1 a total +2 modifier.
Now look at:
Reign of the Supermen: If a friendly character named Superman has been KO'd this game, modify Superboy's combat values by +1 for the rest of the game.
All this cares about is if a Superman has been KO'd. Doesn't matter if it is 1 Superman or 100 Supermen; if is a simple "yes/no" binary condition.
Assuming the text for the Bilbo/Gandalf trait is correct, it would activate for each character they KO, since it says "When".
Not to get off subject, but this raises an interesting question.
How does this "When" wording compare/contrast with the Gen13 ATA? The last I saw, that ATA, which reads "At the beginning of the game, choose a keyword for all characters using this team ability. All opposing characters with that keyword modify their attack value by -1 when a character using this team ability is targeted," was that the ATA would only trigger once when someone targets two or more characters with the Gen13 ATA.
Is that correct or incorrect?
Situation: Joe Blow targets both Fairchild and Grunge, who have that particular ATA assigned. How many -1s to his attack does Mr. Blow receive?
By implication from this about Gandalf/Bilbo, the answer should be two?
Not to get off subject, but this raises an interesting question.
How does this "When" wording compare/contrast with the Gen13 ATA? The last I saw, that ATA, which reads "At the beginning of the game, choose a keyword for all characters using this team ability. All opposing characters with that keyword modify their attack value by -1 when a character using this team ability is targeted," was that the ATA would only trigger once when someone targets two or more characters with the Gen13 ATA.
Is that correct or incorrect?
Situation: Joe Blow targets both Fairchild and Grunge, who have that particular ATA assigned. How many -1s to his attack does Mr. Blow receive?
By implication from this about Gandalf/Bilbo, the answer should be two?
The answer, as consistently applied, should be that the ATA activates twice (once for each user).
If it was ruled otherwise, that's news to me, but whomever made that ruling might know something I don't.
No, it wasn't a ruling from a rules person; it was a guy in a thread who said otherwise and wasn't corrected, to my knowledge. I didn't read the whole thread. Thank you, Normalview.