No what Iam referring to is that if she chooses to use FB she only gets to roll a d6 because that is what FB allows you to do. Now her FB doesn't allow you to make an attack but natural FB with an attack would kick in with the second part of FB.

I totally agree with you on this, but what I see is that she can't make an attack in the first place and she can only roll a d6 as FB allows.

What about the ability makes you think this?

1. She can make an attack and then use FB as a free action.
2. She can use FB as a fee action and then make an attack.
3. She can't make an attack using FB as a free action.

I hope I am understanding it correctly, not trying to argue just trying to understand correctly.

That's all correct. But the new FB has two abilities. The first one is an activated ability which Batgirl can activate as a Free Action (normally it's a Power Action) and the second ability is a passive ability that is always on with every single attack you make.

Batgirl becomes signification better with this new change to FB

I see what your saying but my question here is since it doesn't say can use but it says may use FB or INCAP. as a free action would these powers be active all the time that her SP is showing or only active when she chooses to use the power as a free action. If it said she can use FB then I wouldn't be questioning it, but is there a difference between may/can use as for when powers are active or not.

That's a good question. I think this is a case of bad wording. The "may" should be a "can" since any activated ability is always a choice and never forced. If I'm in correct, maybe someone can point me towards the rules or rulings where a "may" like this has a particular application?

The "May" is inconsequential.

Once per turn, Batgirl may use Force Blast or Incapacitate as a free action.

This tells you several things.

1) She is a character that can use Force Blast and Incapacitate.
2) If she is given an action to use one, she can only do it once per turn and as a Free Action.
3) "May" allows all parts of the powers to be optional.

I'm not sure I understand the 3rd point. Are you saying that if I use Incap with her I can do so just to burn an action without actually applying tokens to hit characters?

I guess I worded that funny. No, if you use Incapacitate then you are using its effect. Unlike with the new Force Blast that has 2 different effects.

But I still think the "may" was just poor wording and in no way changes how her SP would function if it instead used the correct "can" term.

Unless there is a benefit to having it as an option. I honestly cannot think of one off the top of my head.

But that's what I mean. How does "may" at all change how her SP would work instead of using the word "can" following the current or updated rules? I can't think of a single example (of course that doesn't mean there isn't one).

I agree. The can and may are basically interchangeable. Like you said in a previous post, the activation of force blast or incap as a free action is optional by definition. The use of may is redundant but implies all the same things "can use" would.

Well, your opponent could say that you didn't declare your Batgirl was using Force Blast prior to making the attack so you don't have a choice of dealing knock back because you didn't roll doubles.

So in this case, the "may" would carry a negative burden on the Batgirl user.

I'd argue that the 'may' is there for game balance purposes because Batgirl got a huge boost and requiring the explicit statement to use FB is a drawback that is a drawback to using Batgirl, it seems like a really weak and nonsensical argument.

I will say that it could have been worded better, but the current wording is fine in terms defining what the power does and doesn't allow.