You are currently viewing HCRealms.com, The Premier HeroClix Community, as a Guest. If you would like to participate in the community, please Register to join the discussion!
If you are having problems registering to an account, feel free to Contact Us.
Taking a deeper dive into the semantics of all of this nonsense, based on the rule book descriptions of the "base", could you not argue that the extra plastic ATTACHED to the character base of TabApp figs does not fall under the rule book definition of "Character base"?
"BASE: The piece of plastic on which a figure is mounted."
"HeroClix is played using collectible miniature figures standing on a base with a rotating combat dial inside. Together, the figure, base, and combat dial are called a character"
"THE BASE
Each character’s base is printed with important information, as shown in Figure 1."
You sure can and that is the logic that DKJedi and I are using but if you see the previous posts with the rules stating "no alteration form original" and the extra piece is most likely considered original so ipso facto removing it is in some opinions, is a mod. I wish we had an official rule on this.
Technically, it falls under the category of a broken figure, making it not count as a modded figure per the rules team's rulings. Removing non-combat information from a HeroClix game element is perfectly legal as it is considered an understandable accident.
Sun Tzu Clan Leader
Quote : Originally Posted by Uberman
When a game hums along, full of action and excitement, it's a barnburner!
When it trudges forward glacially, bogged down by debates over ridiculous rules minutia, it's a Barnstable!
Just as an update, I just replied in the thread I linked to asking specifically about TabApp figures with the electronic portion removed. Now we just have to wait for a response.
I "accidently" slid a knife under the heroclix base and then the tabapp part "accidently" fell off.
Quote : Originally Posted by Owlman
Accidents happen.
Isn't that the explanation some divorce attorneys use? "The ex-wife tripped and accidentally fell on her co-worker's [EDIT -- rhymes with quick] she did NOT have intercourse."
What a rule is and how/if that rule is followed are two different things.
Would anyone here actually disqualify someone for playing a tabapp figure with the Pain in the arse bottom piece broken off?
Fixed that for you. I had issues where some of my taller ones (Thor, mostly) tipping over on a surface that wasn't perfectly level. I then decided to "fix" all of them. They look a lot better and don't fall over anymore.
Quote : Originally Posted by gatharion
Does anybody here know someone who would?
I don't.
Sadly, I do. I end up self-imposing a lot of restrictions lately because I'd rather play the game at all than wade through some of the stuff other players will throw around about Modded sculpts, complex figures (like Resurrection Man) and such. The last thing I want is to have an issue over TabApp figures. Keep in mind, there's a player at my local venue who believed ATA's were fake for a very long time.
"It is a fool's prerogative to utter truths that no one else will speak." "Prove you have the strength and courage to be free."
MY HATS MAKE ME SUPERIOR: When compared from a common surface; if the highest point of The Mad Hatter's sculpt is above the highest point of the sculpt of any character he targets with an attack, modify Mad Hatter's attack value by +3.
the height of a figure is an atribute that techically matters, so any change that affects the height of a figure i'd techically call a mod.
The tab apps are pretty tall even without the extra base, so i dont think removing the extra base would affect the mad hatters power on most of them. i can't think of a way to abuse mad hatter power with this, but if that was somehow the indent then i'd complain.
ID rings and terrain tokens would also makes a difference in comparing height, unless you're specifically only comparing the sculpts from their contact point on the top of the base.
Quote : Originally Posted by nuco
because of
bctv011 The Mad Hatter
the height of a figure is an atribute that techically matters, so any change that affects the height of a figure i'd techically call a mod.
The tab apps are pretty tall even without the extra base, so i dont think removing the extra base would affect the mad hatters power on most of them. i can't think of a way to abuse mad hatter power with this, but if that was somehow the indent then i'd complain.
if the id ring isn't able to be easily removed i'd call it a mod. has for standing on a token, "When compared from a common surface" takes care of that.
ps. i'm not saying i'm for DQ'ing some that removed the extra base, i'm all for removing it since thor likes to fall down. but techically its a mod. in a game against me I'd only care if the reason for the mod was to exploit a power which wouldn't be possible without the mod, ie giving a extra base to mad hatter or removing it from someone that could be mind controlled by a friendly.
the height of a figure is an atribute that techically matters, so any change that affects the height of a figure i'd techically call a mod.
The tab apps are pretty tall even without the extra base, so i dont think removing the extra base would affect the mad hatters power on most of them. i can't think of a way to abuse mad hatter power with this, but if that was somehow the indent then i'd complain.
It's not technically a mod, rules team has ruled on multiple occasions it is considered broken which doesn't count as modded. Broken sculpts will be shorter than non-broken sculpts, Mad Hatter benefits more from playing against broken sculpts. Mad Hatter is worse when his sculpt is broken. It's perfectly legal and does modify the character's playability. That's just the rules.
Sun Tzu Clan Leader
Quote : Originally Posted by Uberman
When a game hums along, full of action and excitement, it's a barnburner!
When it trudges forward glacially, bogged down by debates over ridiculous rules minutia, it's a Barnstable!
I wish they would have stated it more authoritatively so it looked like an actual ruling and less like a situational ruling. Thanks MC. You don't come across very maniacal. What's up with that?
I wish they would have stated it more authoritatively so it looked like an actual ruling and less like a situational ruling. Thanks MC. You don't come across very maniacal. What's up with that?
I can't be expected to be at 100% output all the time, you know. The avatar is more of a long-term slow burn rather than a sudden explosion of grease-painted lunacy.