COMBAT VALUES: The four numbers visible through the stat slot on a character’s combat dial, and the number next to the lightning bolt(s) on a character’s base.

The powers definition does not make this distinction.

So you're saying powers aren't visible through the stat slot?

Nope I'm saying according to the definition they are only combat values when they are visible.

The Powers definition just says they are on the combat dial, visible or not.

I agree with what you are trying to say, I just keep finding conflicting or incomplete definitions.

We can only strengthen the rule by first trying to break it.

Outwit During your turn, give this character a free action to counter a power of a combat ability possessed by a single target opposing character until the beginning of your next turn.

So, if you're saying that a character possesses any power printed on its dial, even though it's not currently showing through its stat slot, it would be possible to also outwit any power on its dial, even if it isn't currently showing on its stat slot.

I'm with Galactus, a character only possesses those powers currently showing, and as indicated by a trait, which is always showing.

The very first sentence under "Powers and Abilities" p16:

Powers are always printed on a combat dial, are visible through the stat slot, and are either standard powers or special powers.

If it's not visible, it's currently not a power.

so far there seems to be no answer to the original question: does a power have to be showing on the dial to be copied as the power only says possessed not showing on the dial.

Bleh. I don't care anymore. I'll just go with how it's supposed to work until we're told otherwise.

Only if you go by the definitions of possessed in the current rulebook. Which clearly need to be amended.

See my amended post, powers, as defined in the very first sentence under "Powers and Abilities" must be showing through the stat slot.

As ever, the glossary is a rough guide, but don't rely on it 100%.

Sort of. They aren't possessed until visible through the dial window. If it isn't in the dial window, maybe a character will get the power later, maybe it won't... don't know for sure until it appears.

This is why you can't say, "I am going to use Outwit to counter that Regeneration Wolverine eventually gets near the end of the dial," when Wolverine is on click 1. Sure, he *might* get Regeneration eventually... but he doesn't possess it right now, and Outwit can only counter possessed powers.

What is to figure? Traits either say "use" or "possess"... no more, no less.

From the rulebook:
A character possesses a power or ability if that power is printed on their dial in the form of a white or colored square, or if an icon granting that ability is printed on their base.

I thought it was they can't use a power they possessed until it appears in the window.

Good enough for me.

Yay to no loopholes!

Yes. It has to be showing on the dial.

UTILITY BELT: At the beginning of the game, choose a standard attack or damage power that Batman does not possess somewhere on his dial; Batman can use that power this game.

Are the powers not visible on Batman's dial possessed or not? Sure it says "somewhere on his dial", but if possessed means visible then they are technically not really there. If the powers on his dial are possessed then it means powers anywhere on any character's dial are possessed.

No, Galactus. That's not how it works.

The reason Batman's power is different is because of that phrase that you cite: 'does not posssess somewhere on his dial'. Otherwise, the character does not posses the power until it shows up through the stat window.

Specific trumps general, and the general rule is that the power has to be visable in the stat window while the Batman's rule specifies throughout the dial.

If it just said:

UTILITY BELT: At the beginning of the game, choose a standard attack or damage power that Batman does not possess; Batman can use that power this game.

You would only be limited by the ones on his first click. So, you kind of disproved your point by trying to prove it.

and yes, it could be worded better.