The power actually looks for a power activated with a power or combat action: a "close combat action as a free action" is, for purposes of this power, still a close combat action. So "tokenable" and "non-free" don't really have an effect.

It doesn't have an effect unless that is the intended effect, which a lot of people seem to believe it was. Literally assessed, I agree with you.

I would say that they would be available since they require a combat action, unlike poison or defend. I do not see much difference in allowing CCE or BCF. Is there a passive benefit granted by any of the powers that require a combat action to activate? (eg: Would the lantern objects benefit Hal if he chooses one of those powers?) I just cannot see anything passive that is granted. How would choosing EE be any different than choosing Psych Blast?

The difference between Psychic Blast or Flurry and Energy Explosion or Blades/Claws Fangs is that you give the character a combat action to activate P/PB or Flurry, and E/E or BCF activate when the character is given a combat action. EE and BCF are, basically, passive effects: you don't give an action to use them, they automatically activate if you give the right kind of action.

The "passive effects" would be meeting prerequisites for feats and for the effects of the lanterns. IE Hal chooses EE and can now use the Recharge feat or Hal chooses P/PB and now gets +1 attack from the Tellow lantern during a close combat action.

The "token-able", "non-free", "attack vs action" arguements are quite weak, since they use logic not employed by the power. I say Hal can use BCF and EE because either would require a combat action to activate, they just trigger differently than most other combat action-based powers.

We ever get a ruling for this? I'd love to know if Hal is creative enough to be able to think up a sword.

My opinion is that he can. Blade and Energy explosion both require a cose and ranged combat action to activate, respectively. You have to give a ranged combat action to use energy explosion and you have to give a close combat action to trigger blades. The only difference between these powers is that he is using the ranged combat action to trigger another power than EE or the CCA to trigger a different power than blades.

Nothing official yet. We are waiting on a response from design for this one.

Thanks for the update rpgambit !!

Still waiting?

I only ask as I have a GL team slated for use next week and three of my mods will be on these bases.

Have we gotten a ruling yet?

It seems pretty straight forward to me. Does the power I want to use require that I Range Combat, Close Combat, or Power Action to use? Then he can use it.

So right here, we've established he MUST be given a RANGED combat action to USE EE. He can't use EE in any other way. It can't be used during a ranged combat ATTACK, for example, if one is granted in some other way. Must be an ACTION.

I'm with Necrodog on this one.

"There are two types of combat actions: close combat actions and ranged combat actions. Each of these action types can be used to activate a game effect that requires the corresponding action, but most of the time they will be used to activate an attack."

- The Book of the Rules for the Players, Section 2, Page 10, first paragraph, first sentences.

Since there's no other way to activate EE or BCF without a Ranged or Close combat action (as appropriate), one could say that they require said actions and are, therefore, in keeping with Green Lantern's Special Power's criteria for power selection.

I'm not arguing I think he should be able to use them as well, but I would like to have an official orange ruling.