Dracula got staked at the end of Dracula.

Tried searching, all I found was one video that was recorded via HCRealms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2u9UfZqchkg

I personally faced sentroid in my qualifier for semis. My team was stranger w ig, leech, dinah soar. Utterly destroyed him, he made 1 attack the entire game. My friend, against two different players, beat a sentroid both times with cyborg superman w full ig, scarlet witch, miranda tate. Also its worth noting that the utility belt takes him down many pegs with the ability to turn off his power cosmic.

Yea, I know you aren't picking on it, just trying to get the verbiage right. I think all the logic is there and it just needs tweaking of a few words here and there. However, I don't think it needs to include anything about symbols, abilities should be sufficient. In your example, yes flight and carry are granted by a wing symbol, but any power which would enhance those combat abilities would be worded "When this character uses carry..." etc, which would be covered by what I wrote. There are no instances I can think of where the symbol is used in the card text when modifying how the power is used, and if there is no modifier the rule doesn't need to apply. All it does is keep any modifiers to only modifying the ability when its used via that card. Team abilities could be a good point, I have to think about whether or not that would ever matter, and if they did how they should be approached. As it stands now, I can't think of any outside sources which enhance team abilities but who knows what the future holds.

Afterthought: Maybe change the last three words to "via that card" rather than "on that card" to make it more clear?

Got it.

I think what was throwing me was the phrase "the figure the card is assigned to" I keep wanting to read it as only applying to the character's card and not any relic/resource cards. I was considering those cards as being assigned to the appropriate relic/resource and its the relic/resource itself (not their cards) that are assigned to a character.

It's actually funny you say that because when I wrote it I thought people might think the opposite. Relics specifically say to "assign" the relic to a figure, so I thought that'd be clear, but character cards are just the cards that go with the character and don't say assign, though I think we could say that a character card is assigned to the character it pertains to. Not sure if that would require extra language or if its implied.

So, vlad, since youve been popping in this thread, would you care to add your 2 cents regarding why the rule is that you only use the dial power if 2 overlap rather than making a rule against comboing powers and allow choice? I get that it has no effect on the rule, I'm just curious if there's any insight on the rationale. Even if the rule's I've suggested aren't perfect, I think they show that such a rule could be succinctly written, so is there a reason other than "{they just didnt" to not do it that way?

I think it had to do with characters that have a version of a power with a drawback, but i'm not 100% certain. I think the idea was that wk didn't want those characters to be able to use a version of the same power without a drawback.

Gotcha. I get that rationale, not for characters like dark phoenix or metron, since getting to use the power in restricted fashion is better than not having it at all, but rather for the possibility of future characters that have restricted access to a better version of the power. I could see a character in the future with "When this fig uses support, don't subtract from the roll. This figure can only use support on a figure if that figure has taken damage from an attack since your last turn". You wouldn't want support gained from another source gaining the no-subtract benefit without the restriction. Ah well, i feel better about arguing against things i don't agree with, even if it is utterly impotent. At least I said it for the record.