The typical word game of Heroclix; Modified Vs. Reduced.
That's why.

No, but I posted a reply saying that object damage and CCE increase damage dealt which means that they rule of three does not apply to them. But almost as soon as I had made the post I re-read the PAC and saw that it has been changed, so I edited my post.

I can but only because I remember (somewhat fogily) the history of how my impression of the meteorite rules was shaped.

As I recall it was originally spoiled by Seth in Supernova with Power Princess back when we were still under the Danger Room rules.

There was a quite a bit of dicussion about it back then. And one of the big things of the day was for a player to confuse Damage DEALT with Damage VALUE.

I distinctly remember discussing this with my player base at the time.

Then when the LoSH rules came out we said we needed to revisit this ruling and see what it means in light of the changes from Damage Value to Damage Dealt. My play group came to the conclusion that the roll was supeflous as a result of the change.

The templating of powers back then was all over the place.

It never occurred to me to think like NBPerp that they might have actually planned to word the power congruently with the future LoSH rulebook.

I was always more thinking what does the new LoSH rulebook change, and not so much what changes did they already plan for.

I even posted such a statement in response to a normalview post back on 06/01/2007....
http://www.hcrealms.com/forum/showpo...5&postcount=19

Bear in mind here this was way before I knew how smart normalview was.

And I called for an eratta post LoSH rules leak on 6/29/2007 that never came....
http://www.hcrealms.com/forum/showpo...1&postcount=63

For me : Old game mecanisms, objects, powers, effects, should be entirely reworded if necessary in order to accurately work under the current rules. That's a lot of work. But that's what the PG is for. That's what this community is for. I say thank you to all of those who point out flaws in the rules, and all those who make it possible to correct them. Now, can we put aside any consideration about old rules, when or why they changed, and have some information on how METEORITE is supposed to work RIGHT NOW ?
Because it's confusing.

What i've understand for now, is that there is a loophole right now that makes this object a constant +3, with some effect on damage dealt that are slightly different than penetrating damage, but still ignore reduction. Is it true ? Is it how it works ? or not ?

They just explained how it works like 5 times...

PS I have no idea why the rule of 3 is constantly explained and re-explained in the PG. It seems pretty clearly laid out in the rulebook to me.

I begin to wonder if the PG is supposed to be the voluminous rulebook and the actual rulebook is just a rarily read players guide.

There's a loophole, but it IS a loophole and definitely NOT the intended use.

Here is how it supposed to work:
If you use it in a close combat attack, roll a die and subtract 2 from the result, minimum 1. Take your unmodified damage and that result.
The target is dealt that much damage. A critical hit doesn't increase it. Toughness won't decrease it. Nothing can move it up or down.
Quite a few entries are holdovers from the old FAQ.
Some things are there from before rules revisions.

When these things are noticed, they are removed.

There are some things, like examples of the rule of 3 being applied, which are not strictly necessary, but it IS a guide. An entry like the one from meteorite is there to add clarity. Would it work the same without that entry? Sure. With it there, can someone confused by the mechanic go in there and get a clear answer? Yes.

If you are pretty certain of that (and you guys would know far better then I)....then tacing "LOCK" onto the end of the meteorite text would be the quickest simplest and most straight forward fix.

I keep assuming that WK is intentfully ignoring me when I say something needs an eratta.

A sudden turn of events.

I know this is an older thread but I stumbled upon it searching for a ruling...I may be wrong but I think in the original ruling by the judge saying you CANNOT use Charge, Super Strength and Exploit Weakness together was correct. The reasoning may be incorrect though.

See I was lead to believe by the 2012 rule book that when a character uses charge it is given a POWER ACTION and then was able to make a close combat attack as a FREE ACTION. So when you look closely at the wording of Exploit Weakness it states that a player must give said character a CLOSE COMBAT ACTION, which in this situation did not happen. Yes you made a close combat attack BUT it was a FREE ACTION you did not give the character a close combat action which means you did not fulfill the requrements of exploit weakness and cannot use it.

It is almost identical to:
"example #1 (page 9 of the rule book) A character, given a power action to use the Hypersonic Speed power, can make a close combat attack as a free action. The character could not use the Quake power when makeing the close combat ATTACK granted by Hypersonic Speed, because a character must be given a close combat ACTION to use Quake."

Read CHARGE again.

Sorry Im looking right at it and im not following you? Please explain.

Post the power and read it CAREFULLY and SLOWLY.

CHARGE: Give this character a power action; halve its speed value for the action. Move this character up to its speed value and then it may be given a close combat action as a free action. A character using this power ignores knock back.

I suggest doing what chrisdosmil said, but above I've highlighted what he wants you to correct.