My 2 cents. If a power is intended to last the full game there should be an indication.

Even better:

MORTAL WOUND: When a character takes 3 or more damage from Sabretooth's attack, that character can't heal for the rest of the game.

Period. Full stop. I mean, sure, you'd still be in this quagmire of needing to define things because we're all drunk on believing things don't really work how they read, but at least the basic power itself wouldn't be wasting words that still need clarification anyways.

Sabretooth is part of the problem. Because his power says for the rest of the game, and even if the power is countered or lost, we have precedent that being KO'd is the same thing as having a power countered or lost. That is the implication that has been inferred. When a figure is KO'd, are their powers countered or lost? I would say most certainly, but they are also KO'd, which should be different (i.e. a step further) if you ask me.

ugh, my head hurts...

Reason his actually spells it out was because he was made right before the Rulebook came out that added that line into it.

I agree with Gideonan and Uberman : powers that are supposed to create a permanent, KO-enduring effect should jus be writtent to say so. As for the rest, as soon as the character is out, they should stop (even if they have no duration per se). Loosing or countering a power should be different than KOing the guy who has the power.

And then the Wolverine from 1 set ago has the same wording. I'm familiar with the situation of when Sabretooth was and when the line was added to the rulebook. My point is, would a figure being KO'd be treated the exact same as having a power countered or lost if Sabretooth's power was not worded like that?

Once this game took the "do what the card says" approach, but did not create a standardized lexicon and left it to people who did not make the game to rule on what powers did and did not do, we ended up on a road that would inevitably lead to things like this.

I appreciate all the rule's deputies do. However, when things like this come up I know they are put in a difficult position. Every single post they make can be considered a ruling (per the comprehensive tournament rules). If they don't know, or cannot infer, a ruling, it is hardly beneficial for them to publicly muse back and forth.

I guess I am just trying to clarify that my frustration is not aimed at them, at all.

This came up in another thread.

No expiration.

Does this mean that if he ever makes a leadership roll that all adjacent characters get a +1 to attack and range for the rest of the game?

If he makes multiple successful leadership roll, do these modifiers stack?

The power itself could have used a little clarification beforehand (is the bonus granted to characters adjacent when Tasky makes the leadership roll, and becomes portable after that, or is it a case of Tasky making the roll and then whoever he is adjacent to after that getting the bonus?), but with infinite durations coming into play (it never says 'until the end of the turn' or 'until the beginning of your next turn', so it lasts forever, right?), it requires even more.

This one has already been clarified : Taskmaster power is triggered by the Leadership roll, so if during your turn no succesful Leadership roll has been made, the power doesn't have any effect.

I'm really surprised a rules deputy hasn't popped his head into this thread. What's up with that?

I imagine they are working on answers to all our questions right now. But since the rules don't support the rulings they would give yet, it would be better for them to say nothing than to say technically we could do these clearly broken things.

I get that. It's just odd to see a thread go six pages deep without a "we're talking about it, we'll let you know" post.

EDIT: They did make some comments on page four. KOing a figure = making them lose their powers. KOing Dormammu = negating his empowerment to his minion. So they've actually said quite a bit. Seems to me they are setting a precedent. Now they just need to come in and lay the hammer down on all these lingering squabbles. I'll be happy to lend them my hammer.

Did they? I thought they said three power was definitely lost. But since the power continues when lost out countered... otherwise dormammus power wouldn't work when he wasn't in those clicks even because the power would be lost the same as outwit is lost when you aren't on those clicks. So if that's what you're referring to, I read it to mean the power s effects would persist. Though I could be wrong.

I interpreted his comment to mean that the Empower a Minion power works as long as Dormammu is on the map, but is gone once he is KOed.

Maybe I interpreted his reply incorrectly though.

But if I interpreted correctly, wouldn't that mean that Galactus' Herald buffs would end upon Galactus being KOed?

I read Harpua's post that he ruled the effect ended when Dormammu was KO'd when he was at an event. But we have a post from (I think) Quebbster in a different thread that it lasts basically forever, although he said it was under discussion. And no actual updated ruling posted here. Hopefully that means theyare discussing this and we're going to get a clear ruling sometime in the future.

If you look, by the way, the various threads on topics like resources and relics on figures involved in split/merge as well as a few other things aren't getting "we're looking at that" posts: the Rules Dudes aren't posting in those threads, either.