Ignore my superman enemy post duhhh. I thought I stopped it in time but I see I didnt becuase you cant use superman team ability with outwit. I copied and pasted the wrong section.

I will blame it on I was half awake. Ya thats it.

Too many people are confused about what a "close-combat action" is. A close combat action is one of the three actions a figure can be given.

1.) Move Action
2.) Close-Combat Action
3.) Ranged-Combat Action

This is in the rule-book. Anyway, Outwit, for instance, is not an action. you cannot use it as a "close-combat action." Outwit is a Super-Power that requires no action.

Outwit states that LOS is required to use it. There is no "close-combat action" logic that could ever possibly get around it.

Please, stop confusing people by trying to equate actions with Outwit. They are not the same.

edit: oops Manchine had caught his mistake and I was too dumb to "turn the page" to see

I haven't seen anything really concerning Superman Ally and Outwit in the FAQ's yet, so there's a good candidate for a needed ruling. I wouldn't consider Outwit either movement or combat, so I'm not sure which way to go here. I'd say Superman Ally should be able to be used, but the wording does appear to prove otherwise.

Not that I am aware of. If you have Dr Doom teamed with R Steel then Ole Doc can Outwit V Nightwing all game long...that is if Doom is on his outwit click.

Arkangel wrote:
>>So is the consensus of the judges that characters cannot outwit any power of a stealthed character, regardless of whether or not they are base to base because outwit requires a line of fire, that the stealth blocks????>>

It isn't really a matter of consensus. It is a matter of it being the rules. The FAQ specifically states that a Stealthed character in hindering terrain cannot be outwitted, either by an adjacent opponent or a non adjacent opponent.

>>My argument is that outwit specifically states (as Manchine was so kind to point out) that it requires a line of fire (it nowhere mentions that it can be used as a close combat action, specifically understood as being b2b and not requiring LOS),>>

Outwit doesn't require an action of any kind, close combat or no. It simply requires clear LOF. As you cannot draw a clear LOF to a Stealthy character in hindering terrain, you cannot use Outwit on them.

As making a close combat attack does not require clear LOF, you can make a close combat attack against a Stealthy character in hindering terrain. But again, using Outwit is not a close combat attack, so it doesn't get this exemption.

>>I am not particularly concerned with the way people play it, but with an official ruling from judges........Thanks guys!!!>>

The official rules are in the FAQ. Always check the FAQ. It isn't just a good idea. It is the law.

-Peter

It was ruled quite some time ago that Superman Ally did NOT allow a figure to use outwit in any way against a stealthed figure in/behind hindering terrain. Outwit is NOT a combat action (nor a movement one) so SupesAlly does not apply.

If you destroy the object underneath a stealthed figure, you replace the object with a rubble marker, making it permanent hindering terrain, so I would advise against that maneuver.

If a Stealth figure is standing IN hindering terrain, there is NO WAY to use Outwit against them. NONE. NOT POSSIBLE AT ALL.

You have to remove the object via TK or SuperStrength, or Force Blast the figure off the object before you can use Outwit. While he's standing on it, he's immune.

I have to disagree with the consensus...A line of fire is not required in b2b combat unless useing a ranged attack, and the rule book specifically states that "It is not, however, a ranged attack action and therefore is not subject to restrictions specific to ranged attacks."
I also disagree that a clear LOF cannot be drawn to a stealthed character in hindering terrain. If this were the case then even a close combat attack against a stealted character would increase their defense +1, but that only occurs when useing a ranged attack. Therefore, if one is in b2b contact and uses outwit as a close combat action the stealth character may be outwitted.
That is the logic I have always used, and I see the points raised by others, I am still not convinced as to thier conclusions.

disregard my last post, I am now a believer.

Thanks for clearing that up Manchine. Kinda sucks to know that I've been playing that wrong, but at least I know now, and knowing is half the battle.

Anyone else have any opinions on this matter, NOT dealing with the Superman ally ability????? I do realize that outwit is not an action (close combat or otherwise), but those who were arguing against me at my venue were using the argument that if close combat works against a stealthy character, then b2b outwit will work......I countered that they are two different things, outwit specifically stating that it requires a LOS, while close combat merely requires b2b.....I used the example that if I had a Taskmaster sitting on an object, and my opponent brought his Firelord b2b to attack, he could not make a ranged attack for 5 since he does not have a LOS, but would instead have to hit for 3 in a close combat attack......Any other opinions????

All you have to do is point to the FAQ.... how can they argue with this?

"A character with outwit cannot cancel any powers of a character that is in hindering terrain and has stealth"

?!?!?

Line of Fire (LOF) nees to be drawn from the Outwitter to the potential Outwittee. Since a figure in hindering terrain with stealth cannot have a clear LOF drawn to it, it cannot be outwitted. Even b2b a LOF cannot be drawn because of stealth. You can, however, attack with close-combat actions.

Yeah, Meatloafx, I thought it was pretty clear in the FAQ too, and when I pointed this out, they argued that it doesn't count for an outwitter in b2b with a stealthy character.....Clearly, however, the consensus (and the rules) are on my side.....Thanks to all of you for responding, and anyone else feel free!!!

Anything else???

Arkangel wrote:
>>Anyone else have any opinions on this matter, NOT dealing with the Superman ally ability?????>>

I'm really unclear on why you need opinions on this. The FAQ (i.e. the rules) is very clear--you cannot Outwit a Stealthy character in hindering terrain. No room for opinions. Very cut and dry.

>>I do realize that outwit is not an action (close combat or otherwise), but those who were arguing against me at my venue were using the argument that if close combat works against a stealthy character, then b2b outwit will work>>

See:

A) The FAQ says you can't do this. They can argue all they want, but the rules say otherwise.

B) You don't need a clear LOS to make a close combat attack. If you needed clear LOS to make a close combat attack, you could not make a close combat attack against a Stealthy character in hindering terrain either. Close combat does not require LOS. Outwit does require clear LOS. As you cannot draw clear LOS to a Stealthy character in hindering terrain, you cannot use Outwit on them. Where the Outwitting character happens to be standing is irrelevant.

>>......I countered that they are two different things, outwit specifically stating that it requires a LOS, while close combat merely requires b2b>>

See the problem you are having is not that the rules are vague here. The problem is that you are playing with folks who don't like what the rules say.

Again, the rules (as clarified in the FAQ) are *very* clear on this subject. As long as you are playing by the rules, then a Stealthy character in hindering terrain cannot be Outwitted by any means.

>>.....I used the example that if I had a Taskmaster sitting on an object, and my opponent brought his Firelord b2b to attack, he could not make a ranged attack for 5 since he does not have a LOS, but would instead have to hit for 3 in a close combat attack>>

Correct.

>>......Any other opinions????>>

The most important opinion is that of the rules. The rules say that you can't do this (i.e. Outwit a Stealthy character in hindering terrain) under any circumstances. All the opinions in the world will not change this, until the FAQ says otherwise.

-Peter