View Full Version : Using a feat requires the prereq being visible on the base or dial?
In order to be assigned a feat, a character must meet its prerequisites.
Enter...
or091 U Vandal Savage
Team: Injustice League
Range: 0 :bolt:
Points: 133
Archenemy: Green Lantern (Green)
or091
Vandal Savage qualifies for ...
Brilliant Tactician
Prerequisites: Outwit and Perplex
Choose a character.
Outwit does not need to show in the character's stat slot in order for the character to use this feat.
When the character uses Perplex, the character can affect every target friendly character that shares a team symbol or keyword with it. The character must have a clear line of fire to each target.
However he cannot use Brilliant Tactician on his first click because he does not have Perplex on his first click. However he could use perplex by using:
In Contact With Oracle
Choose two or more characters; Oracle may not be chosen. Chosen characters are Agents.
As long as it is not the target of Mind Control, when an Agent is given an action you may choose to give one of its combat values +1 until the beginning of your next turn.
If Oracle is on your force, you may remove her from the battlefield at the beginning of the game and place her on this card. At the beginning of any of your turns, you may assign a power action to any Agent with zero or one action token and turn Oracle's dial to any click. The Agent given the action may use any power showing on Oracle's dial until any Agent with zero or one action token is given a power action to turn Oracle's dial. If your last Agent is KOd while Oracle is on this card, Oracle is also KOd.
So by turning Oracle's dial to Perplex, Vandal Savage "may use" Perplex! However, this Perplex does not let him use Brilliant Tactician. Why not?
In order for a character to use a feat assigned to it,
all prerequisites for the feat must be printed on the character’s base and/
or visible on its combat dial through the stat slot. If using a feat requires
giving the character an action, then the prerequisites must be present on
the combat dial at the time the player gives the character the action.
Vandal Savage "may use" Perplex. Vandal Savage has Brilliant Tactician. However, Vandal Savage cannot use Brilliant Tactician on his first click because the Perplex that he has is in no way, shape, or form visible on his dial or stat slot. He will be able to use Brilliant Tactician when Perplex shows up on his dial and is visible in his stat slot but until then, the only person that he is perplexing is me.
How am I wrong?
adamkomar
02/19/2010, 20:06
You're wrong.
normalview
02/19/2010, 20:15
For the 4th (5th?) time, ICWO will allow Vandal to use BT even if he doesn't have Perplex naturally on his dial at the time you wish to use it.
Let's try this tact:
From the FF glossary:
possess: To directly have a power, ability, or effect printed on a card or dial—not simply used via another power, ability, or effect.
Then, from the Player's Guide:
Oracle grants the Agent the power that is showing on her dial. The power that the Agent has been granted can be countered. If the Agent is KOd, the effects of the power are lost.
Now Oracle is an old card; the distinctions between possess and use were not really that important when it came out. However, "grants", "have/has", "possess" all mean the same thing in Heroclix-ese these days (unlike "use/to use").
Since Oracle causes the character to possess the ICWO'd power (Perlex in Vandal's case), and given the definition of "possess" from the glossary THE POWER GRANTED VIA ICWO IS INDEED ON THE DIAL. You can't see it, since it was not physically printed there at the factory, but as far as the game is concerned it as much there on Vandal's dial as the Invulnerability is there.
Once last time: ICWO can be used to meet the prerequisites for a feat, providing that the character was able to be assigned the feat on its own during team building.
I'm out now. If this isn't good enough for you, I don't know what is, and it ain't worth wasting my Friday night over...
imaleximsweet
02/19/2010, 22:09
He will be able to use Brilliant Tactician when Perplex shows up on his dial and is visible in his stat slot but until then, the only person that he is perplexing is normalview.
Am I wrong?
unnecessary shot at normalview,
you are wrong. it has been stated many many MANY times that ICWO is the exception to the rule as it says the character "posseses" said power, therefore it is on the dial. (for all intents and purposes)
you are wrong. it has been stated many many MANY times that ICWO is the exception to the rule as it says the character "posseses" said power, therefore it is on the dial. (for all intents and purposes)
To be fair, the card doesn't actually say "possess" on it.
That said, it does grant full possession.
It was written in a time when such a distinction need not be made. Were it written today, it would say "possess" on it. The powers granted by it can be countered with Outwit.
The7ofDiamonds
02/20/2010, 01:59
really? realllllllllllly? I honestly thought Normalview was onto something when he said that you were just joking.... and figured you were still rolling with that joke when you said that "this deserves it's own thread".
Seriously, Brilliant Tactician is like the most discussed feat in heroclix forum history. You could type in "Miley Cyr" into google, and the top 5 auto-complete results would have something to do with Brilliant Tactician.
Captain Krueger
02/20/2010, 06:32
Maybe this should appear as a banner or a pop-up when you comes in this section :
"POSSESS" AND "IS VISIBLE ON THE DIAL" ARE THE SAME FRACKIN' THING !
really? realllllllllllly? I honestly thought Normalview was onto something when he said that you were just joking.... and figured you were still rolling with that joke when you said that "this deserves it's own thread".
Seriously, Brilliant Tactician is like the most discussed feat in heroclix forum history. You could type in "Miley Cyr" into google, and the top 5 auto-complete results would have something to do with Brilliant Tactician.
NEARLY GREAT MOMENTS IN HISTORY
February 20th, 2010: The7ofDiamonds comes just two letters shy of being the only person in history to use the word "brilliant" in the same sentence as Billy Ray Cyrus' daughter.
adamkomar
02/20/2010, 10:59
NEARLY GREAT MOMENTS IN HISTORY
February 20th, 2010: The7ofDiamonds comes just two letters shy of being the only person in history to use the word "brilliant" in the same sentence as Billy Ray Cyrus' daughter.
I think The7ofDiamonds should get a gold star just for using part of her name in a sentence.
really? realllllllllllly? I honestly thought Normalview was onto something when he said that you were just joking.... and figured you were still rolling with that joke when you said that "this deserves it's own thread".
Sorry for asking a question. wont be making that mistake again any time soon.
normalview
02/20/2010, 11:16
Sorry for asking a question. wont be making that mistake again any time soon.
Ask questions all you want.
But when you get an answer you don't like, please don't keep asking the same question over and over again hoping to get one you do like.
I don't let my daughter get away with the "Mom said 'no', so let's go ask Daddy schtick," so why should we let you?
adamkomar
02/20/2010, 11:21
Edit: Late to the game.
It's that I don't understand the answer. The word 'possess' doesn't appear in the text for ICWO. It says "may use". Your reason for the Alias/Camo ruling was that Alias says "can use". I didn't get this constant reference to "possess". I looked up images for ICWO just to make sure I have the right text(I don't have my clix here) and sure enough it says "may use" and not "possess".
It is this inconsistency that still confuses me. Maybe I'll never understand how ICWO's "may use" the power is any different from Alias' "can use" the power, or where you're getting hung up on this "possess" thing. But you're the orange guy so arguing about it isn't doing anyone any good. ha ha ha :)
normalview
02/20/2010, 11:42
It's that I don't understand the answer. The word 'possess' doesn't appear in the text for ICWO. It says "may use". Your reason for the Alias/Camo ruling was that Alias says "can use". I didn't get this constant reference to "possess". I looked up images for ICWO just to make sure I have the right text(I don't have my clix here) and sure enough it says "may use" and not "possess".
It is this inconsistency that still confuses me. Maybe I'll never understand how ICWO's "may use" the power is any different from Alias' "can use" the power, or where you're getting hung up on this "possess" thing. But you're the orange guy so arguing about it isn't doing anyone any good. ha ha ha :)
Then, from the Player's Guide:
Oracle grants the Agent the power that is showing on her dial. The power that the Agent has been granted can be countered. If the Agent is KOd, the effects of the power are lost.
Now Oracle is an old card; the distinctions between possess and use were not really that important when it came out. However, "grants", "have/has", "possess" all mean the same thing in Heroclix-ese these days (unlike "use/to use").
And that was just from this thread... I am not even going to bother to quote all the times the other thread discussed how ICWO does, in fact, cause the character to possess the power.
So then ICWO grants the power to the character, thus it is "possessed" and can be used as a prerequisite for any feats. Why didn't you say so before? Geez. :rolleyes:
So then ICWO grants the power to the character, thus it is "possessed" and can be used as a prerequisite for any feats. Why didn't you say so before? Geez. :rolleyes:
He did...post #3.
WildTurkey
02/20/2010, 12:59
but the character still has to meet the prerquisite for the feat without the ICWO feat. ppl seem to forget this....
normalview
02/20/2010, 13:13
So then ICWO grants the power to the character, thus it is "possessed" and can be used as a prerequisite for any feats. Why didn't you say so before? Geez. :rolleyes:
:tired::tired::tired:
You are this close to being only the second person I've ever added to my ignore list.
adamkomar
02/20/2010, 13:20
:tired::tired::tired:
You are this close to being only the second person I've ever added to my ignore list.
Was it me? :laugh:
normalview
02/20/2010, 13:22
Was it me? :laugh:
Nope.
The first one I added was years ago. I hate to use "ignore"; even people I don't agree with are welcome to their opinion. I save it for the special occasions ;)
adamkomar
02/20/2010, 13:33
I hope to be special... Some day.
Ignatz_Mouse
02/20/2010, 14:06
So, never thought of this but... if you had BT and had two perplexes (vie ICWO) could you use them both on multiple people, or just one of them?
According to the helpful erreta pointed out by normalview, no.
When an Agent already has a power showing on its dial
that Oracle has, it may not be granted that same power
from Oracle.
So, never thought of this but... if you had BT and had two perplexes (vie ICWO) could you use them both on multiple people, or just one of them?
It depends.
As Sate points out, having a natural Perplex printed on the dial will prevent you from gaining another via ICwO.
If it was a person like Mr. Fantastic who gains the use of Perplex through a special power, then it can work.
Mr. Fantastic possesses Inventive Genius. This allows him to use, but not possess, Perplex, so he could gain a second Perplex from ICwO and also use it with BT.
It is important to note some things, though.
"INVENTIVE GENIUS: Mr. Fantastic can use Perplex, but he can modify the target's combat values by +2 or -2 if he is targeting himself of another character with which he shares a keyword."
Reed's power is worded such that the +/- 2 is only happening when he uses the Perplex from Inventive Genius. The result is that the Perplex from ICwO will be the normal +/- 1.
Compare that to Dr. Strange.
"Wand of Watoomb: Dr. Strange can use Perplex. When Dr. Strange uses Perplex, you can roll a d6; on a result of 5 or 6, you can modify the target’s chosen combat value by up to +2 or –2."
This is worded in such a way that a Perplex gained from ICwO will also fall into the effect of the special power.
It depends.
As Sate points out, having a natural Perplex printed on the dial will prevent you from gaining another via ICwO.
If it was a person like Mr. Fantastic who gains the use of Perplex through a special power, then it can work.
Mr. Fantastic possesses Inventive Genius. This allows him to use, but not possess, Perplex, so he could gain a second Perplex from ICwO and also use it with BT.
It is important to note some things, though.
"INVENTIVE GENIUS: Mr. Fantastic can use Perplex, but he can modify the target's combat values by +2 or -2 if he is targeting himself of another character with which he shares a keyword."
Reed's power is worded such that the +/- 2 is only happening when he uses the Perplex from Inventive Genius. The result is that the Perplex from ICwO will be the normal +/- 1.
Compare that to Dr. Strange.
"Wand of Watoomb: Dr. Strange can use Perplex. When Dr. Strange uses Perplex, you can roll a d6; on a result of 5 or 6, you can modify the target’s chosen combat value by up to +2 or –2."
This is worded in such a way that a Perplex gained from ICwO will also fall into the effect of the special power.
So Prof X with Cerebro SP using perplex, BT triggering off of Cerebro AND off of an Oracle-granted Perplex, Prof X can perplex all the x-men 3 times?
So Prof X with Cerebro SP using perplex, BT triggering off of Cerebro AND off of an Oracle-granted Perplex, Prof X can perplex all the x-men 3 times?
Not quite.
"Cerebro: Professor X can use Perplex. When Professor X uses Perplex, he can use it normally or choose a single keyword and affect every target friendly character 10 or fewer squares from Professor X that possess that keyword, (including himself, if he possesses the keyword) and to which Professor X has a clear line of fire."
BT would not allow a double Perplex on the figures with the chosen keyword, but it would work twice. ("it" being the Perplexing of all the guys with the chosen keyword.)
Ok, so
Prof X w/ BT:
He can perplex everyone with the X-Men keyword(for instance) once for the SP and once for the BT.
Prof X w/ ICWO-granted perplex can use perplex from the SP and is granted perplex from ICWO. So he can Cerebro-plex the x-men and then use ICWO perplex seperately.
Prof X w/ ICWO-granted perplex AND BT can:
- Cerebro-plex the x-men,
- BT-plex the x-men triggered off of the cerebro-plex, and
- THEN BT the x-men triggered off of the ICWO-plex.
Which of these is wrong and why?
Ok, so
Prof X w/ BT:
He can perplex everyone with the X-Men keyword(for instance) once for the SP and once for the BT.
Nope.
With BT, he really doesn't get much use out of the special part of his SP.
He still can only Perplex each person one time.
Prof X w/ ICWO-granted perplex can use perplex from the SP and is granted perplex from ICWO. So he can Cerebro-plex the x-men and then use ICWO perplex seperately.
Yes, and when he uses the ICwO Perplex, the "when he uses Perplex..." part of his SP kicks in again to let him Perplex all of the X-Men again.
Prof X w/ ICWO-granted perplex AND BT can:
- Cerebro-plex the x-men,
- BT-plex the x-men triggered off of the cerebro-plex, and
- THEN BT the x-men triggered off of the ICWO-plex.
Nope.
Again, he can only affect a person once with each use of Perplex.
Which of these is wrong and why?
See the Player's Guide: "* Perplex can only be used once on each character by the Brilliant Tactician. A target cannot be chosen for the initial perplex as well as the follow up perplex (if the team symbol or keyword was shared)"
You don't get nearly as much bang for your buck putting BT on Professor X. It does make his Perplex slightly more useful, but it doesn't add as much oomph as it does to a regular Perplexer.
Nope.
With BT, he really doesn't get much use out of the special part of his SP.
He still can only Perplex each person one time.
See the Player's Guide: "* Perplex can only be used once on each character by the Brilliant Tactician. A target cannot be chosen for the initial perplex as well as the follow up perplex (if the team symbol or keyword was shared)"
I see, so in using his SP he is choosing all of the x-men as the initial perplex, and thus cannot perplex them via BT. That makes sense, thanks.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.