Follow up question.

If he has a Relic on his card and then he absorbs an object via his trait does he lose the relic? I believe he does, but I want to be sure.

No, using his Trait to place an object on his card will only remove objects on his card if they were placed there via his Trait.

His trait just says to remove any other objects that are on his card, and does not mention how they got there. If you want to rule it that way, fine, but then get his trait errata'd so that the language matches the ruling.

@Horse85 and anyone else trying to say this stuff would come off of Absorbing Man's card.

Why are people getting confused over relics? The ones people are asking about are not light or heavy objects so in no way would ever have to do with Absorbing Man's powers. Relics are relics, not heavy objects, not light objects, not special objects, they are relics. Nothing in Absorbing Man's power says anything about relics, it only talks about removing objects. If you want to be "that guy" and house rule it that it would take the relic off his card, that's up to you, but your wrong, really wrong and I would venture to say your almost being a dink because of how obvious his power is worded. Stop trying to rules lawyer when the language is plainly laid out. Your looking for a "stick to the guy running the resource because he is playing the game wrong" loophole that's not there and you will never get anyone who actually knows the rules to go along with you.

The bold is wrong. All relics are immobile objects.
From the 2013 core rulebook:

RELICS
Certain immobile objects are listed as a “Relic.” A relic will be listed with a range of numbers. Relics can’t be destroyed.
Once per game per character, if a character occupies the same square as a relic, that character may be given a power action to roll a d6 that can’t be rerolled. This roll is called a relic roll. If the result of that roll is within the indicated range of numbers, the relic is placed on that character’s character card and the character will gain certain abilities, as described on the relic’s card.
When a character with a relic on their character card is defeated, place the relic in the square they last occupied.
At the end of the game, if an opponent’s character has a relic on their card or all of your characters have been defeated, victory points for the relic are scored by your opponent.

Doh, I guess I'll go back and change it... Thanks though, Absorbing Man's power still only talks about light and heavy objects though.

The problem is that Absorbing Man's power makes no such distinction of the type of objects.

All it does it say that any objects on the card are removed. It says nothing about why they are there. All his power really says is that if there is an object on there, then you remove it.
No, they ARE special objects.
It does not need to specify relics as relics are objects.
To make a comparison, JL Joker has the power which counters all powers on a target character. What you are saying would be like saying "Well, it says to counter all powers, but it does not specify Impervious, so it wouldn't be countered."
In this case, though, the language which is clearly laid out results in the removal of the relics.

It is arguable that the intention of what it should do is clear...that it won't remove relics, but the actual language used clearly says to remove relics.
Resources are not relics. Resources are also not objects. That is not what is being questioned.



We have a ruling that the AM should not lose his relics, but I'm with those who say that the language currently used should be updated to support that ruling.

No, it doesn't just talk about light and heavy objects.

ABSORBS ANYTHING: When Absorbing Man is hit with an object or is given a power action when adjacent to a heavy or light object, place that object on his character card and remove any other objects that are on it. When Absorbing Man has a light object on his character card, modify his attack and damage values by +1. When Absorbing Man has a heavy object on his character card, modify his attack and damage values by +2.

The underlined section makes no reference to heavy or light, so the basic reasoning is that since the relics would be placed on Crusher's character card, they would be removed by Absorbs anything. We have clarification that is not the case now, but by a strict reading of the card and rule book it should be the way it works.

I see what our saying here, now that you and Quibbster showed me where the confusion would come from.

However, the last little bit I was talking about the relics in relation to the resources (which is what I thought everyone else was talking about, if not, consider this my apology). It seems like people are asking "if my opponent is playing BOS or PF, and they assign AB a hammer or a fragment, would he clear that after being hit with the object?". I was not talking about just a regular relics, but one assigned via resource. Like is said though, if I miss read it I apologies now.

Don't they (wizkids I mean) name relics if they would be removed and not simply lump them in with other objects? If not, I can see now where some confusion would occur.

A relic is a relic, whether it's assigned by a resource or not.

It makes no difference whether it came from the resource or from a regular relic roll to pick it up off of the map.

If it is a relic on the card...regardless of how it got there...then it is an object on the card and, as Quebbster points out, would technically be removed.
They are objects, plain and simple.

They are a kind of sub-class of objects, but they are objects nonetheless.

It doesn't need to mention relics specifically as it say "any other objects" and relics are objects. Pretty much any power that works on "objects" without closer specification works on relics as well.

Ok, I totally see where you guys are comming from now. Sorry about the confusion everyone, I will shut up now.

Ok, got it now.