Bugger! He was meant to be in R7.

D'oh. Stupid stupid stupid. That's the one drawback of playing Online.

My first thought was that the splash wouldn't hit her, but I checked and even elevated it's still counted as adjacent, and I saw no FAQ that said elevated adjacent was different in anyway for the effect. Is there something I'm missing?

If it won't splash I can redo with a normal attack, no biggie.

But they are not adjacent. They couldn't touch each other, use a close combat attack on each other, use the Hyda TA if they had it for each other....ect. The only time figures on different elevations are considered adjacent is the top of stairs and the next space towards the bottom. For example on the Map you are playing on P-2 is considered elevated, P-3 is not. But two characters on those spaces would be adjacent.

Here's Psylockslover mentioning the adjacent part for a different reason in post #2, about Destiny/Blizzard

It's not in the FAQ, it's in the normal rule book. Where it talks about Elevated terrain.

Man I completely forgot about the Top Cow TA as well when I made my turn. Ugh! That's what I get for rushing it I suppose.

The rulebook says that characters that are adjacent but at different elevations can not attack each other in close combat. It also has an example with Sabretooth and Spider-Man where it says:

Even though they are adjacent to each other, Sabretooth can not attack Spiderman because Spiderman is on elevated terrain. Spider-man can attack Sabretooth using a ranged combat attack.

So the rulebook calls them adjacent, the power affects adjacent characters. Without a FAQ, where is the reason it does not splash?

Well the thread says it's not adjacent, so I will change my move.

Look again at the rules though, it TWICE describes people next to each other at different elevations as adjacent, and never mentions them not being classed as adjacent for the sake of powers. So it is not in the rulebook at all.

X-Factor turn 2

Psylocke moves to N16.

Bishop outwits the ESD on the Roman Centurion armor.

Phoenix pushes to attack the Roman Centurian armor. AV11 vs DV15. Roll is 2+3(5), hit for 6 damage and the KO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Recap

Animated Armour
LE Witchblade(#221) (Samurai Armour) 7/7 O2
Exp Darkness (Viking Raider) 6/6 V2
LE Sister Magdalena (Shao-tzung Warrior) 5/5 Q8 @
Vet Ian Nottingham (Roman Centurion) *KO*
Rk Ashleish (Norman Soldier) 4/4 N2
Rk Ashleish (Saxon Crusader) 4/4 Q1

X-Factor team

()E Havok N15 (6/6)
()R Bishop M15 (6/6)
(4)U Ult Phoenix O15@@ (6/7)
(4)R Psylocke N16@ (5/5)


HO: I3, I8, D9
LO: I18, Q8, P9

Wierd.

I'll definitely check it out when I get home. I have a FAQ right here, and all I can see in that is where it talk about the stairs; the top square being adjacent to the next one even though they are on different elevations which implies that the normal rule is that squares on different elevations are not adjacent.

Perhaps everyone has just assumed this all along, and you've just found a rules loophole?

Awesome...I mis-type one movement placement, and the figure gets KOed in one hit.

Oh well, at least you pushed to do it.

I think they mean Adjacent as in "Adjacent by logic" not game rules adjacent. For example the eratta for stairs is...

"the top square of a staircase is the last square of a staircase and is considered elevated terrain and is adjacent to the second to last square, even though the terrain exisists on two diffrent levels"

Well then it's one of those things you learn from playing, which I just did. The problem is they don't differentiate very well in the rulebook. If they say adjacent then how would I know they mean 'adjacent by logic'?

About a rules loophole, maybe it is? I mean everyone KNOWS it doesn't count, but has anyone see it written in anything official?

Anyway, on with the fun!

Actually it does directly say it.

In the Indy Rulebook atleast

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache...hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Page 4.

On a side note, I see you used the assist rule to give some IAP to Psylocke. But none for poor Bishop. You should probably make a note in your action description when you use it, just to make it clearer for whoever checks your IAP.

Hmmm...that gives me an idea...