Unless otherwise stated, an attack roll is only made when an attack is happening.

Support states otherwise.
If the bold part wasn't there, Support would be an attack.

Could you show me where this is stated in the rules or explain how you got to this conclusion?

Also, because it has been stated that Boomerang's Path is not a ranged combat attack or a close combat attack, it seems to me that it is otherwise stated that you make an attack roll without an attack.

Can you show me single other instance in this game where there are game effects without the "this is not an attack" caveat of Support and the like, that make you make an attack roll and the effect generating it ISN'T an attack?

If an attack roll is made, it is an attack unless you are specifically told otherwise. This special power does not tell you otherwise.

No, all that means is it isn't a close or ranged combat attack; not that it isn't an attack. For some reason, not sure why because I am not a mind reader, GD wanted a "featureless" attack. And so here it is, not containing any of the specific characteristics of close or ranged combat, but an attack none the less.

Can you show me single other instance where an attack is happening without it being spelled out as an attack?

Could you please explain to me where this is said in the rules or how you got to this conclusion.

This is actually the fact that is bothering me here. That they have basically created a third attack for the game when there was only two before. Quite a lot of the game is based on there being two types of attack. A third being created just for this one power is completely illogical when this power could fit in the game without having to be an attack.

Page 9:
There's no mention of an attack roll applying to anything else but an attack.

Regardless of who it bothers or what-not, it would appear that GD wanted the SP to function this way. It is an attack that is not considered, specifically, a ranged or close attack.

That said, the answer's been given and the rest is just debating semantics IMHO.

All of them, with the obvious exceptions of Support and its like, of course.



We have. Obviously that's not good enough for you, though, so should we just play the "I said so" card? I doubt that will satisfy you, but I don't honestly know what else to tell you that wouldn't just be repeating what has come before.



You'd have to take up your dislike of a third option with GD, then. They're the ones who designed it. Dislike or no, it is what it is: a different kind of attack.

So:

Boomer (10 Att) is surrounded by a Gotham group. Robin has Boomer based (Def 16 / 18 with CR), next to Robin (one Square back and to the left) is Batgirl (Def 17 SS), next to Batgirl is Nightwing (Def 17 / 19 with ES/D and CR), and finally Az-Bat (18 Tough) is also basing Boomer


OOObOO
OONORO
OOOABO

O = Open Area
b = Batgirl
N = Nightwing
R = Robin
B = Captain Boomerang

So, by what is being said, Boomer is given a Power Action. He picks all the squares occupied by the Bats. He rolls a single attack roll and gets an 8. Comparing it to each figure on the path, he hits them all. With it not being a close or ranged attack, it does not activate the ES/D of Nightwing or the CR of Nightwing and Robin. So all involved take 2 damage. Batgirl makes her SS roll, avoiding the attack, and Az-BAt takes 1 due to Toughness.

That sound right?

Here's the thing. How do we know that the GD wanted it to be an attack? It doesn't say anything about being an attack in the power. People are just assuming that it is an attack because it has the words "attack roll" there. If it said "roll two dice, add this characters attack value to the result and compare it with the defense value of characters in the chosen squares" (or something like that), would you still call it an attack?

What if GD wanted it to NOT be an attack and that is why it doesn't say that it is an attack.

Umm... Every single thing in this game that is an attack says something like "makes a close/ranged combat attack" or "give this character a close/ranged combat action". And we know that all combat actions lead to attacks.

Well, Harpua just quoted the rules bit that covers this area. Before that you were all just calling it an attack without anything to back up it being an attack. So basically, you have been playing "I said so"-card from the beginning. I was just trying to figure out how you came to the conclusion of Boomerang's Path being an attack.

Looks exactly right.

As I understand it, the Deputies are in frequent contact with Norm. Norm is in frequent conversation with GD. Ergo...

Regardless, as Norm has not stepped in to say otherwise on the topic, I am led to believe that Normalview's and Harpua's conclusions are correct. Otherwise, we're just debating "intent" which, really, no one can win.


That said, you are welcome to house rule this any way you want in your games. The caveat being, of course, to expect it to be ruled otherwise at other Venues/large events.

Really, you're just going around and around the issue here looking for an answer or justification that is clearly not coming. I think it's time to move on.

Just my $.02.

We can't read their minds. So we go with what is printed. And its printed to say "attack roll".



Yes, and all close or ranged combat attacks then go on to make attack rolls... forgive me for not connecting ALL the dots for you



Your referenced your old posts and, unless I am completely mistaken, that section Harpua quoted had been mentioned in the old posts. So, yeah, it had already been brought up. Again, forgive me for not spoon feeding it to you; since you'd gone to the trouble to refer to your old argument, I figured you'd recall the other points brought up in that same thread.



We get it: you don't like this not being defined as close or ranged combat. Unfortunately, your dislike of the situation doesn't change the situation itself. This is an attack, period.

I agree:

MINION:WE FOLLOW THE STRONGEST:: When a friendly character named Ulik is within 8 squares,Rock Troll can use Charge and modifies it's attack value by +1

How do we know they wanted this to just be a +1 for the Rock Troll?

And Big figure:

TAKE A DIVE FOR ME: When Big Figure uses Mastermind, he can deal the damage to an adjacent friendly character with a point value of 100 or less. This damage cannot later be dealt to Big Figure.

Im sure they meant that he could use masterming to characters with a point value over 100.

OMG. Can open...WORMS EVERYWHERE!!!

This isn't how it should work at all. This is a game based on rules. We should be able to use those rules to reach rulings. Just because the deputies have posted on a thread doesn't mean everything in the thread is correct. I can think of some instances where the deputies have posted and nbperp came in much later and gave a different answer. Now I'm not saying nbperp is required to step in on every thread and respond. I'm also not saying the deputies don't do a good job. The deputies do a great job of answering questions and keeping this forum moving. I'm saying that there should be rules to back up the rulings. Now in this case, Harpua has provided a rule to support his position. That's what we should be looking for in rulings.

When there is no basis in the rules to support a position (and again, Harpua has provided one here), the issue should be addressed in the Player's Guide. (Which isn't necessary here since the rules do support the position.)