Erm, exactly how does that make sense in the same context as an argument that the Gauntlet (a PARTICIPATION PRIZE) is one of the most the broken elements in the game?

Incidentally, is there an actual rules question in this thread, or is it just a discussion about how people want certain rules to work? I skimmed a bit, but I didn't see any outstanding questions.

No rules content whatsoever.

Should prob'ly be in Dear WK.

yeah this point while not 100% invalid is pretty close. simplest way to demonstrate this is to think back to the ig series. when everyone was playing chanos whowas about $70 at the time and sentroid who was even higher on average the silver bullet to these 2 top tier teams was a little $3-5 rare called "the unspoken" and to further prove my point the unspoken is still affordable and still a viable team. the only money issue in htis game is the pace of release and more importantly the carelessness with which these hasty releases are pumped out.

I don't know if I like the "On the card" wording. It may be clear to experienced rules junkies, but it isn't exactly intuitive to someone that if a character has trait that gives them +1 to their attack when they make a ranged attack that they do not get it when they use Psychic Blast from the gauntlet.

No, it should probably be moved to another forum.

No rules questions, I sent a message to moderators when the thread first started and no one moved it... Yet!

Which rule justifies every Batman being better than every Spider-Man?

Happy?

No. The OP clearly put it in the wrong forum. What an idiot.

I think this won't look as easy if you try to write it yourself.

Not to pick on you, but do you really consider that easy to comprehend?


See below:

The biggest problem with trying to rewrite this is, as has been mentioned earlier, we're working with some game terms that aren't that well defined. EFFECT is the biggest culprit.

I'll stick with my previous example, since that means I don't have to do any more research.

VIBRO SHOCK GAUNTLETS: Shocker can use Penetrating/Psychic Blast. When he does and targets only one character, a hit character is also given an action token.

Picks up the

Scorpio Key
Immobile, Can't Be Destroyed Once per game per character, give a character occupying Scorpio Key's square a power action and roll a d6 that can't be rerolled. On a roll of 5 or 6, place this object on that character's card. Modify that character's range value by +2 and that character can use Penetrating/Psychic Blast. When that character is defeated, place this object in the square that character last occupied. At the end of the game, if an opponent controls this or you control no characters, your opponent scores this object.

With the new rule suggestion, I think the intent would be that Shocker can either use his Power to P/PB and potentially give an action token OR can use the Relic to P/PB with a +2 range.

How do you rewrite that rule so you know what parts of each description are the "effect" you get to chose?
Because the Key grants a +2 range AND P/PB, is +2 range one effect with P/PB a different effect, or is the entire wording the "effect"?

How do you rewrite the rule so you know that the Vibro Shock Gauntlets bonus of granting an action token only works with P/PB when granted from the VSG?

The last 20 posts or so show that it's not going to be that simple, because there are so many different Special Powers, and most of them don't share similar wording and phrasing.

If WK decides to do this, it can be done, but it won't be quick, it won't be pretty, and there will be a lot of questions and a lot or eratta.

Actually yes it is easy for me to understand and might be for you if you realized the post you quoted was only half of the rule rewrite I did. I was rewritting a section because someone mentioned the way it was written caused problems for figures like Robin.

Here is the complete rewrite I did.

If a game effect grants a character an effect it can already use, the character may choose which of the duplicate effects it will use, but only one of the effects may be chosen each turn. The choice of which effect to use does not need to be made until the character is given an action to use the effect or another game effect would trigger one of the effects.

If an effect alters how a character uses another effect, the alteration only applies when the effect being altered is activated as a result of the same effect imposing the alteration unless that effect does not itself grant the effect being altered.

Agreed. Sounds like childbirth. But like labor pains, the payoff is (usually) worth it.

I knew that, and this line is still relevant:
How do you rewrite that rule so you know what parts of each description are the "effect" you get to chose?

Which is why I didn't have kids.... Because I don't see how they will improve my gameplay.

Isn't the description of the rules forum "discussions and questions of heroclix rules"? No, there is no real question, other than why this bad rule is here, but it certainly seems to fall under a discussion of a rule, no?

Well if you re-read my last rule posting, the one you quoted, it would prevent the token if you used the PB by scorpio key, but not the +2 range. Then again I think you are reading scorpio key wrong...you get the +2 range regardless of what you are doing with it...barrier, smoke cloud, whatever. The text my rule covers is text that says "When this character uses <power> x happens" and my rule would limit it to x only happening when <power> comes from the same card that text comes from, that's all. As for not understanding what cards are...that's just part of the game now. Lots of things reference cards. I also never use the word effect in mine either. In your Scorpio key example, if the text was "When this character uses PB, they get +2 range" then according to my rule you would choose the range or the token for shocker, but since its an "and" the +2 and PB are separate.

That interpretation was not clear to me from what you had written.

Would you be including a clarification of "effect" that clearly stated "effects" including an "and" are to be considered two seperate "effects" and not a single "effect"? That was one of the clarifications of the term that I was saying would need to be made.