Yes, but we're not actually talking about those powers (which is my point). We were talking about creating a new effect named "Widget Abilities," but then defining that effect as a power or type of terrain, or something.

So, imagine reading a rule book that said, "squares with a silver border are Widget Abilities squares. When characters occupy these squares, lines of fire cannot be drawn to them."

Sure, it could be done and all of that is technically accurate. But if they were to do that, it would be very counterintuitive.

None of which actually matters to the original point. But we see how quickly the telephone games makes a simple rules discussion complicated...

I think where he was going with that is something like this:



So then how does Banshee interact with that special power called Invincible?

I would think that's an unfortunate name for a power that had it's name used again later. As printed, I believe Banshee should affect Invincible just like Invincible.

But if I'm using this:

I'm not using "Invicible" as I'm using a special power with flavor text of Invincible.

You are using Invincible.

Powers, traits, abilities, etc. are all identified by name. The only "flavor" text in this game are the names for named powers. Like when Blades/Claws/Fangs is called "Adamantium Claws".

That's the point Harpua was making, more or less. Names matter. And if we call something by a name which has a specific meaning, and this new thing doesn't have the same meaning, it leads to confusion.

Here's a really good example of why names matter:



Scheme allows him to counter the same power on different characters. Now look at:



And



Both have the power Smash. Smash does different things for each guy, but Skrull Emperor's Scheme doesn't care about that. he can counter both versions of Smash.

I understand his point. But Banshee interacting with golden age special powers isn't counter-intuitive. It's odd, it's a corner case, and it's not something most people would think of.

But it's not counter intuitive. Which was what I was speaking to.

That's the point I'm making, actually.