Jaysol
Thank you for your time energy consideration and effort
I learned a few tips and corrected a few misconceptions assumed by me or perpetrated at my venue

Will look forward to subsequent installments

Yes, thank you for all the time and effort it took to research and reformat for the community's use

I liked the article very much as is. Please don't change it because certain camouflaging three-apples-tall individuals are inappropriately vocal.

I think the HC Rules Team has been doing a great job with the rulings on the WKES lately- they're explanatory to what I consider the appropriate degree, striking the right balance between ruling on the specific case at hand and helping the reader think about the way the rules of the game work in a more general sense. It's nice to see that good work getting more broadly spread around. Thanks, jaysol.

The only suggestion I would make to it is to continue but include more foul language and racial epithets to spice it up a bit (I know the OP personally; also, this is not serious)

I can find the rulings on the WES but find their interface slow and annoying to navigate

Also, the fact that someone actually asked these means it wasn't clear to someone. I see the "if I don't give a mind controlled character an action, can I keep them under my control" more often than I like and THAT was resolved ages ago

You can't duplicate the same free action.

As someone who basically avoids the Wizkids Rules forum like the plague, I appreciate someone taking the time to synopsize the rulings that've been handed down, most if not all of which I would otherwise be unaware. I agree that maybe not *every* ruling is worthy of inclusion in your article (the length is rather...lengthy), but more info is better than less!

Thanks for your work. I look forward to further articles.

It's great that you have the time to do this and I am not complaining that it's being done, as it's gets the rulings to wider audience by putting them on the front page, but I would like to offer some constructive criticism.

Now normally I disagree with PredatorSmurf on general principle but I must say if I were doing a similar article I would be doing it the way he suggests. A lot of these rulings are straightforward but some of them could probably warrant a little additional discussion as they may be changes to original rulings or highlight clarifications which may have a knock on effect to other characters. If you picked out maybe 3-4 interesting ones each article and went into more detail on them I think it would make a better article and more informative for new and old players.

Rep for the rollup!

But, he already used perplex as a free action to perplex himself. You can't use the exact same free action twice (Perplex) in one turn unless something is allowing you to, and nothing is here, it doesn't say "May use perplex an additional time".

I had no idea about the gambit EE ruling. That to me was worth my time.

A compliment? You don't see that very often here.

I do agree with everything you say though. I guess the OP posting the rulings here does give the site more exposure and that's a good thing. I still think it could be condensed a bit more, but I have to give him credit for all the work he did.

I greatly disagree with your assessment of this thread's value.

1. Your criticism assumes all members of the Realms give the WK Rules Forum and the HCRealms Rules Forum attention equal to the attention they give other parts of the Realms. To put it in an easier way, some folks, like me, spend most of their Realms time in the Upcoming, General, and Comic discussion areas. Folks like me may have missed a lot of these and find it convenient to see them all put in one article.

2. Your criticism assumes players will seek out everything they need, whether they know it or not. Let's say, for example, I knew I was going to play the Brainiac Skull Ship, so I diligently went to the WK Rules Forum and read the relevant sections that were included in this thread, but in their original location. When my game starts, it turns out I ended up playing a team that included Mr. Mxyzptlk, a character I didn't assume would be there. I didn't intentionally seek out questions about his powers because I didn't consider I would be playing against him. I was surprised by him using his powers in the way described in the ruling above, the one I didn't seek out. I argue that putting these all in one post, in one place separate from their original home, improves the chance these rulings will be seen, that attention will be given to them. Improving the overall knowledge of players, not just the ones that haunt rules forums regularly, has enormous value.


EDIT: For what it is worth, I did begin typing all this before your post above mine, which concedes an appreciation for more more exposure. It sounds like we may be on the same page after all (?).

Yes, I agree with everything you say.

One thing I would like is guidelines on how to submit questions in such a way that they are not automatically rejected for whatever reason. My beef with the WK rules forum is that I cannot ask a question because they reject them. Perhaps that could be the OPs next article.