Yeah...a looooong time before they went kaput. Those were extinct months before that happened. They were replaced by the player's guide.
In my book, the player's guide is still applicable.

Playing by a strict interpretation of the rules is certainly fair as both players are being held to the exact same standards.

I don't really think that the spirit of the rules indicate anything like allowing take-backs.

Is there a rule stating that one can or can't spray his opponent's figures with lighter fluid and ignite them?

If I wanted to do so, would tell me to have a roll-off?

This situation may not be explicitly written out, but you have many a good precedent like the WC rule I stated earlier.

Wait, is this no longer a valid strategy?

Next you'll tell me there's a no-jackhammer-to-opponents-pieces rule. This game has too many rules.

I totally agree, well said.

I think it depends on the place and the opponent.

At home with your wife or SO, you'd be sleeping on the couch.

At World's (hopefully next year?!!) in the championship game, you'd do well to cross your LOF and dot your pokerchips.

There is a time and place for everything. I don't mind playing by the rules. But, hopefully your venue is a bit more relaxed during casual play, and with no new prize on the line.

In that example, the player is no longer discussing. He finished up declaring his Perplex. He was now on to declaring his attack.

Yeah, but the initial post clear that the guy was past the Perplex and had moved on to declaring the next action.

If you are declaring a new action, anything declared before that has clearly been resolved.

Page 7: "If you have more than one action available, you must resolve one action before initiating the next action."

So...if the guy is not declaring (ie, initiating) the next action, that Perplex (or whatever) has o have been resolved.

So long as the other player is still trying to act in a timely manner, I've got no real problem with minor takebacks so long as nothing signficant has happened. If he makes an attack and then realizes he forgot to use Perplex, then he's stuck, but if he hasn't started the attack yet then there's no harm in it.

Then again, I've been the beneficiary of such courtesy in the past. Any player who claims they've never at least asked for such courtesy is probably lying. It's one of those things that comes up from time to time, when you realize you made the wrong choice, and within limits it's better yo just let them correct themselves.

Think of it this way: Would you rather win because you wouldn't allow your opponent to correct a mistake, or know that your opponent played to the best of his ability? It's one thing for your opponent to make a bonehead move without realizing it, it's quite another to refuse him the chance to correct that move in a reasonable fashion.

Now if this other player's actions are really slowing down the game, then you need to get the Judge involved to talk to him about it. If it's a serious problem, then maybe it is reasonable to tell him he has to fully commit to one action before moving on to another.

But in general... let it go. You'll both have a better time of it.

-J

"Situations that these rules don't cover might occur, and even after consulting the rules players might disagree about how to resolve those situations when the game has no official judge or arbitrator. In all such instances roll a d6. On a result of 1-3, the action is not allowed; on a result of 4-6, the action is allowed."

There are no official judges or arbitrators for HeroClix, so this rule applies.

It depends on how you are defining "official" here. There's no WizKids, but there are still judges running events. If you are participating in an event and that event has someone judging, then that guy IS an official judge.

If both players agree to submit to the rulings of a third party, that's fine, doesn't matter who it is.

Otherwise, roll a die.

You also only roll a die when the rules aren't clear.

The rules are clear here.

If the player is declaring the next action, the action was resolved.

Ergo, the etiquette rule is not applicable.

"Situations that these rules don't cover might occur, and even after consulting the rules players might disagree about how to resolve those situations when the game has no official judge or arbitrator. In all such instances roll a d6. On a result of 1-3, the action is not allowed; on a result of 4-6, the action is allowed."

Just cos you say they are clear doesn't make them clear.

And you didn't prob his attack roll you (expletive) Hmm from a rules standpoint I belive you're right as soon as that punctuation crosses his lips action is declared action resolves. I never care if the character is new or nothing is on the line. I'm only nice when it doesnt benefit me? Also if someone is backtracting hardcore and trying to hugely manipulate the game then i say nay

What if they were declaring an illegal action?

Here's my problem. Perplex is an action which is stated. It's hard to figure out when that action resolves unless you have someway of making it clear, such as asking "is that your final answer". Acting with a character is something where what happens on the board changes.

It's hard to prove when some actions begin and when they end, and with stated actions I think the only way to concretely confirm when a piece has taken a free action that doesn't have a physical notation is when another non-free action has concretely begun.

Heres the concrete Issue
In this situation Major Damage has not actually done anything, his name has been stated, but he has not actually been given an action. Now let's replace the above with

This is actually a totally different situation, because there is concrete proof that Mjr Damage has been given an action - he's moved. In this situation shifting the perplex should be considered illegal.

I think that if this was any store tournament, I would probably let it go once or twice, but if it happens more than that I would say to the person, "Think more carefully about your actions because the next time I will not allow you to take back anything."

If the person said they wanted to (free action) this character, then realized they ,made a mistake and before declaring any other action ask to (free action) something else, I would be more lenient. Like I said before, if this becomes a habit I will stop allowing it.

Once the player declares he is making an attack on your Iron Man, then he has no right to go back and change an action, free or otherwise, to benifit himself. Once an attack is declared anything declared before then is done and over, so you are totally 100% in your right to call him out on it. That's the bottem line. I know some people are a little more relaxed in playing the game but you are in the right in enforcing the original outwit.