I'll give you something firm and definitive.

No. That doesn't work either.

How do you know it applies to those you left in my post and not those you removed from my post?

Also, if you start going the other direction, you end up with giving one free action during the game, which appears to then be limited.

I might agree to that if the trait's actual wording wasn't, "As long as a friendly Alyosha Kraven is on the map, Gulyadkin the Lion can be given one action as a free action."

I read "one free action" as something that happens once a game. (Given that's what one means)

That's what I get for posting from the thread instead of the source.

From the PG:

Unless otherwise noted, game effects only occur once each time they would apply.

The time when you can give a character free actions occurs during each of your turns.

Beginning, middle, and end of your turn is all a continues time during which you can give a character a free action. The once restriction wouldn't be reset during that time.

However, I'm not going to argue that they shouldn't have put a "once during your turn" in the trait.

As long as Alyosha Kraven is on the map, Gulyadkin the Lion can be given one action as a free action."

Based on that PG entry and the text above, is Alyosha being on the map a once a game thing or does it happen multiple times? I would think him being on the map is one continual event per game therefore the one action as a free action can only be applied once per game "AS WRITTEN".

It's been a while and A LOT was said in that thread, but wasn't Geo-Force eventually ruled differently than he was initially? Most of us 'knew' how it SHOULD work. However, the wording did not necessarily make it clear. And I think that's the issue with a lot of these powers.

It's not even necessarily any of us wanting the power to be a certain way or trying to find ways to break the game or make cheesy strategies. We just want the wording of powers to be tightened up, so that there either is no ambiguity and everyone can pretty much be on the same page regarding the power, or we don't want other people abusing the power against us.

And I do have to say, one thing that has bugged me since I've started playing is the lack of consistency in regards to how things are worded.

And one example (there are many) is that some powers are used once per turn and explicitly state that fact. Other powers are used once per turn, but don't state that. The lack of consistency was a huge stumbling block to me learning the game, because when I saw power A say "once per turn", yet power B not say that, I assumed power B wasn't necessarily limited the same way.

It is obvious to a lot of us now how something is "supposed" to work, but for newbies it's tough, and we are always beaten into submission about the fact that we don't use common sense and logic in this game, but by how something is literally worded. So I find it disingenuous sometimes when people just say, "well it's obvious it's supposed to work that way. It's just common sense." If we played based on common sense, this game would be remarkably different. Jm2c.

Hi OP! How's it hangin' dude?

There are two things that need to be in effect for Gulyadkin to be given one action as a free action.

Alyosha is on the map
Gulyadkin can be given an action

Each time both of those apply, one action as a free action can occur once.

I might actually argue carrying Alyosha, which removes him from the map then puts him back on it, allows for another action to be given to Gulyadkin as a free action.

I would prefer the trait just said, "once during your turn."

I think that is basically all the OP wanted, an admission from normalview that the wording was lacking in clarity instead of the way it was answered.

If normalview had just said "I agree the wording for the trait is not very good I'll send it up and see if we can get an errata for it to be more clear, in the meantime this is how I would rule it." this thread would be a lot shorter.

QFT. Got it in one.

No, shoot the lion! Shoot the lion!

Pretty good. Was that "and then I saw post #1" a shot at me? I couldn't decide. If so, why the animosity? If not, how are you doing?