I understand your argument, but there is game balance that needs to be taken into consideration.

If characters could use there Team Abilities or Team Symbols to grant them feats based on the 'use' of a power, the game would be greatly imbalanced. Those feats would become way more expensive than they are now. And my idea of Feats are that they are used as point fillers (as the 10% feat cap shows).

If Batman could use his TA to use a feat that has a prerequisite of Stealth, he'd never lose the feat. There is no game balance or pros or cons for the feat.

Except for the overcosted Dissent and the few who can outwit TAs... but I completely agree with you about the ramifications of TAs meeting pre-reqs.

Yeah, starting to realize that TA's do not qualify for Feats.

Thanks.

What I don't understand about this whole thing is this: where does it state that only powers that the target possesses can be countered? Outwit has that limitation, but that's specifically in the power's description and is not a general rule. Someone's going to have to point out something in the rules to clear this up for me.

not sure what you are asking here?

how can they outwit something that they don't possess?

He's asking why Ambush applied to Stealth "use" is not countered versus why Ambush applied to Stealth "possession" is countered.

It's because only possessed powers can be countered, not powers that can be used, but you can counter the SP granting the usage.

That's as far as I understand it.

So....in all this....I can get +2 to my attack value but keep my stealth? Joy!

This is correct.

This argument begins to fall apart now that powers from traits can be used as a pre-req for feats.

Batman's stealth is more vulnerable then Venom's Leap Climb.

No problem, glad to help.

The general rule is the Outwit's description on the PAC states that you can counter a power 'possessed' by another character, not a power that another character can 'use'. But you can also counter abilities via Outwit. Now if the description of Outwit stated that you could counter a power that is 'possessed' or 'used' by another character, you would be able to counter powers that can be used, but not necessarily possessed by a character. But it's a non-issue, because you can just counter the Special Power that grants the 'use' of standard powers.

I would disagree. Both Team Abilities and Traits are figured in the point total of the figure by the game designer. If all of a sudden there is a house rule that allowed you to use your Team Abilities that grant the 'use' of certain standard powers to meet prerequisites for feats, you are now unbalancing the game and thwarting the game designers intention. So the whole Trait issue is asinine, since it is figured in the point cost of the character.

Your argument was that since batman's stealth can't be countered/doesn't ever go away, granting access to feats based on that stealth would be unbalancing. Traits do the same thing.

Batman's team ability is factored into his point total just as much as a trait would be.

I don't believe for a second that "access to feats" is included in the point cost of traits/powers or team abilities. They can't be. Wizkids has always claimed that the point formula hasn't changed since its inception. Since both the Batman team ability and most of the powers have existed since the beginning of the game, they can't have had concepts that didn't exist back then factored into their point total.

But we're not talking about Outwit, we're talking about the Ambush feat card...he brought up Outwit ONLY to say that the wording does not allow you to Outwit a power unless they "posess" that power...

In the previous wording of the Batman Ally TA, I'd agree, becaus it had wording similar to the wording of Stealth, but it was not Stealth...now, IMMEDIATELY after they rule that Special Powers that allow figures the "use" of a power, can be assigned feats that require that power as a prerequisite, they change the wording of the Batman Ally TA to say that it can "use" Stealth.

Until there is an eratta or a specific ruling on this (or possibly a rule that we've missed?), I'd say that Batman Allies can be assigned feats that have Stealth as a prerequisite.

Can we get some orange to comment on the Batman Ally part of this debate, please?

Just on the point that WizKids states that they use the same point formula has been proven extremely false. Just compare any of the first sets with the characters from the first sets, point for point, power for power, and that argument gets sunk faster than the Bismarck.

I've ran many of the IC, CT, and Xplosion figures through the old point calculator, and of the figures are only a couple or few points discrepancy, and many of them are right on. As the sets got newer, the point discrepancy got farther and farther apart.

A great example is the HoT Venom. Compare him to characters with the same point total from Xplosion, and it's no comparison.

But that is a whole different thread in a whole different forum.

Just to clarify a point :
The reason why Batman Allies can't be assigned feats based on Stealth is because the Player's Guide corrects the rules for assigning a feat to a character : to be assigned a feat you need to either possess said power or ability, or be able to use it via a Special Power or a Trait (and not an ability, like it is written in the F4 rulebook). Batman allies use Stealth through an ability ( ateam ability) so they can't be assigned Ambush.
What you can do with the Bat Allies TA is using it with a joker who can use Ambush (because he has Stealth among his own powers) - like Taskmaster for example - to keep using Stealth after it was countered by Ambush.
That's completly legal, but it won't allows you to use Ambush again before the "real" Stealth comes back.

No erratum needed:

From the Fantastic Four Rulebook: