| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Once you've registered and completed email validation, you'll need to reply to the thread in The Welcome mat before you gain full access to the site. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Power-Up; UDE's Documents contradictions | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 16 2009, 04:14 PM (293 Views) | |
| Shadowtrooper | May 16 2009, 04:14 PM Post #1 |
![]()
I Hate Rebel Scum!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I was recently looking through the Games rules ver. 2.7 and through the Summary of FAQ Terms document. I found this on Power-Ups based on discarding character cards.
Then on the rules document it states:
Out of curiosity I decided to check the Hellboy rules and it states the same as the Summary of FAQ Terms, saying that the character card discarded must have the same name. I no longer have the rules that came with the starters (MOR, MSM, DBM, MFF, MXS) and if anyone still has them I would like to know what they state according to power-ups. Just to kill my curiosity. So the Questions are: When there is a small contradiction like this what document has the higher authority? Now I always go by the rules, but how much validity do the other documents like the Summary of FAQ Terms and the FAQ for each set really have? Was there a rule change regarding power-ups somewhere between the Hellboy and the release of ver. 2.7 of the rules that I just don't recall (perhaps the change came before)? If so can anyone tell me why this change was made? If there wasn't a change then why do these other documents state something different than the rules? |
![]() |
|
| Melonball | May 16 2009, 04:24 PM Post #2 |
![]()
Regular
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The difference between the two rules that in the second option you can power someone up that has an identity that is the same as another characters name (using Azrreal <>Batman to power up Batman), where as the first makes it sound like it has to specifically be the same name, right? I just looked this up recently when I was making a multiple man deck, and i was surprised to notice this too. I dont suppose anyone could try to quickly check this on the Vs DS game, that usually has the comprehensive rules figured in... |
![]() |
|
| Shadowtrooper | May 16 2009, 04:35 PM Post #3 |
![]()
I Hate Rebel Scum!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm sorry to say that you can't power-up characters based on identities Melonball. There is a distinct difference between NAMES and IDENTITIES.
This one doesn't have to do anything with power-ups but it does use the Batman example you gave. I posted it to make clear the difference between names and identities.
Just like for equipments like Batarang, Cutting Edge and cards that look for specific names power-ups do the same thing. Identities or versions do not count for power-ups, only names. |
![]() |
|
| bkwrds | May 16 2009, 05:05 PM Post #4 |
![]()
is a Gypsy Doom
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The summary is intended to uh... summarize in plain english. I would go with what the CRD states, especially since it matches my current understanding of the rules. I checked my Hellboy Rulebook and it had the "same name" text you described from the summary. I know there is a distinction between "sharing a name" and "having the same name" but it would be lost on just about anybody looking at a summary of terms in an FAQ. I think it is likely that the CRD changed as of... MUN? When Carrying the Torch and The Captain came around. Until then names were not as fluid. Cards like the Mystique 1-drop added to the mix once the floodgates had opened. It is most likely that the CRD was changed to its current text at that point, so that the rules matched what players would intuitively assume was correct. Edited by bkwrds, May 16 2009, 05:07 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| vs_savant2 | May 16 2009, 06:13 PM Post #5 |
![]()
Zen Master of the Versus Arts
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The Consolidated rules form Hellboy have a few inconsistencies. If I remember correctly someone from UDE stated that the rules form the FAQ's should be followed because the rules from HEllboy were vague or inconsistant. |
![]() |
|
| bkwrds | May 16 2009, 06:43 PM Post #6 |
![]()
is a Gypsy Doom
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well that too. That said, I can't think of any instances pre-MUN where characters would have more than one name. Am I missing anything? |
![]() |
|
| Canadian Bacon | May 16 2009, 07:24 PM Post #7 |
![]()
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
ST, I'm sorry to say but the issue is pretty self explanatory. The Comprehensive Rules Document is the last word in all rules questions (hence why HC quotes it exclusively). In the Introduction of the CRD it even says:
But even if that weren't the case, the Summary of Terms FAQ was added in February 2008 while the latest CRD was released in December 2008. Since the latest CRD was updated 11 months after the latest Summary of Terms, it stands to reason it has the correct wording. |
![]() |
|
| bkwrds | May 16 2009, 08:46 PM Post #8 |
![]()
is a Gypsy Doom
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Bacon wins the thread. |
![]() |
|
| Shadowtrooper | May 16 2009, 08:58 PM Post #9 |
![]()
I Hate Rebel Scum!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Bacon, I never said that the rules aren't the authority I was just asking what document(s) have the highest authority. As I stated I follow the rules but I do like to read the other documents too, and it just really bothers me that UDE didn't take the time to update or revise all other documents. Guess I didn't read the rules that well cause I missed the whole quote you posted. So question #1 was answered and the highest authority belongs to the CRD. I guess all other questions are pretty much explained with that but do anyone knows for sure when the change occurred in the rules? Was it done exclusively for the fact that characters can gain names, or was there another reason? Edited by Shadowtrooper, May 16 2009, 08:59 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| HeroComplex | May 17 2009, 12:56 AM Post #10 |
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Early 2006 and 2007 CRDs already use that same "shares a name" wording as the CRD uses today, so I don't think this rule was ever changed. Rather, this just reflects that the SoFT has always been a more casual introduction to keywords and such. Plus, for the majority of the life of the game, there was no functional difference between two cards sharing or having the same name---with double-naming impossible, the difference in phrasings was insubstantial and fairly involved. In an introductory document, wouldn't really be any need to preemptively delve into weird naming issues that couldn't happen anyway. All told, not really much to it. A new-player-focused document uses the wrong wording, but at a time before the issue could come up. The CRD, on the other hand, has always given a clear answer, even before the issue could arise. Like the FAQs, SoFT has never been able to overrule the CRD, it just tries to explain what's already in the CRD. Here, SoFT has just lagged behind a bit due to lack of updates. |
![]() |
|
| bkwrds | May 17 2009, 01:30 AM Post #11 |
![]()
is a Gypsy Doom
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
HC comes in like a 9-drop. Game over. |
![]() |
|
| Shadowtrooper | May 17 2009, 12:41 PM Post #12 |
![]()
I Hate Rebel Scum!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thanks a million buddy. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Rules · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)







8:52 AM Jul 11