That's how we rule it round these parts, and that's all I care about.

That's kind of what I was driving at. I thought maybe I was misunderstanding the issue or something.

That would be the sensible way to rule it. I'm sure that was the intent. And as Thrumble Funk said....that's the way it's gonna be, unless nbperp or the RD's say differently. Judging by Quebbster's responses to this thread, my guess is that's not going to happen.

Edit: By "that's not going to happen" I mean "he doesn't appear to disagree". Looking at my post again I realized it could be taken as "they're blowing us off!". Not my intent.

If it's not a serious issue then why is there a conspiracy against VGA d1sc1pL3?

First they move his thread, then ask for some constructive comments instead of just letting him complain! Why can't he just get the recognition he deserves for noticing this? WHY? WHYYYYYYYYY?

Kind of their jobs to answer rule questions isn't it? Seems to me instead of antagonizing the OP you could have just said the matter is being discussed and we will get back to you, or the matter is being discussed and we would like input from others on it, or we don't see it as a problem and it should be ruled as written.

We don't need a ruling for this on this forum, it is to be ruled as you have correctly described it, but an acknowledgment from the RA that this either will or won't be addressed in the next PG update might be in order. Intent Rulings on this site are meaningless until those intents are reflected as changes in the official documents (rulebook, PAC, PG, etc.) Players can't be expected to search through forum threads and posts for the rules of Heroclix. The rules are to be interpreted as they are written in the official docs. Rule loopholes are often discovered in this games complex rules, and some are fixed in subsequent PG updates or rulebooks, and some are not.

By the way, good catch... I didn't realize that "loophole" until you brought it up.

Quebbster, this would have been fine for you tell me this in the beginning, instead of basically trolling me, telling me it doesn't matter, moving my post from the appropriate forum to here.

As a rules sheriff, a "I don't know, I'll look into it," would have been fine with me, and I would have patiently awaited a reply.

I posted this way back when the Fantastic Four Rulebook was posted, and was treated the same way. I know you can't stand me, but I treat you with respect, and I respect your authority here whether you believe me or not. But it's a two-way street.

True, but this loophole was in the Fantastic Four Rulebook as well, and I brought it up then, and it was blown off then as well.

Thruble Funk, you are right on the money, and this is how I've been ruling it. But since the rules don't say it, my player's have a good argument against that ruling.

It's ok bro, I got a laugh from your post. But watch out, Big Brother is watching us, and those black helicopters are circling my house.

Thank you. But it seems that Quebbster loves to antagonize me. See his replies to me in the Boneyard's WotSM list thread. He seems to enjoy it.

But it is what it is, and my trolling and flaming days are long behind me.

Thanks a bunch for the reply. I agree with you. I found the same loophole in the Fantastic Four Rulebook, and brought it up then, and I was blown off then too.

No, seems like you're doing pretty good at trolling. I don't see anything wrong with what Quebbster's done here and you taking an offensive stance against him as soon as he popped up was pretty flamey.

If you're the judge and you're ruling it as you say you are, your players need to shut up and respect your ruling. They don't like it, they can judge so you can play the game.

At my venue if a player loses a feat card, it's points are awarded to the opponent. Of course we never play a battle royal when prizes are being awarded, just for fun.

Bottom line: too much reading into the rules and lawyering it up. Why not just go, "ah, that wasn't the intent" and award the player 8 points for burning the Protected?

Way less aspirin used.

This.

It's obvious what the spirit and intent of the situation is, why not just do what is obvious, instead of nit-picking?

... because nit-picking is the only way some people have to feel alive!

This is the mans 1st post in this thread.

How is this anthying other than someone being helpful?

From all suggestions posted so far, IMO the simplest in wording and closest to "intent".

Has the added bonus of avoiding wording referring to damaged/eliminated/other corner condition nonsense, which frankly should never factor into disposable feat victory point assignment (only the removal of the feat, and when, should be considered).

Tell the truth my friend. This is such a non-issue that the question should never have been proposed. And I don't think calling the mod useless is being respectful. Oh, and he should stop being paranoid. Its creepy.

My thoughts exactly.