FT question

[thetrooper27]

Does KL ever remove hits from permanent record or hits to current battle???!!!!

What about EB specials?  Can I move attacks made on Cyclops to an EB special after an FT?

[gameplan.exe]

Does KL ever remove hits from permanent record or hits to current battle???!!!!

What about EB specials?  Can I move attacks made on Cyclops to an EB special after an FT?

yes, a KL removes all of them, regardless of where try are played, as long as they have the words indicated. Permanent Record, Hits To Current Battle, or in play on, in front, or next to a character or Location.

no on the EB. for an attack to go there, it's being "Shifted" which is considered defending the original target.

[thetrooper27]

So KL just got better.  So if I land a successful attack and it generates an effect that lasts for remainder of battle, then two turns later I play KL, it removes that hit simply because it has the words "remainder of battle" on it?

[gameplan.exe]

So KL just got better.  So if I land a successful attack and it generates an effect that lasts for remainder of battle, then two turns later I play KL, it removes that hit simply because it has the words "remainder of battle" on it?

it DOES remove the hit, but it does NOT always remove the effect.
e.g., it will remove the effect of a BJ, so Gambit could then be attacked.
it will NOT remove the effect of an AS, so Banshee would still be unable to attack after playing Super Scream.

[thetrooper27]

How come?  Why does it not work in both cases?  Don't get me wrong.  I dont' really want Banshee attacking me after I remove his hit in my permanent record so I'll take it.

So if my opponent plays a KL to remove the Cyclops FT hit in his character's permanent record, Cyclops still can't be defended for remainder of game?

This is the stuff that gets me confused when playing OP.  Trying to figure all this technical stuff out.  Intuitively, I wouldn't think KL would remove hits in the permanent record at all.  It seems to want to remove cards that generate an effect for remainder of battle or remainder of game, as played for that reason.  Numerical attacks in the permanent record don't seem to be "in play" as something like "Slugfest" or "Charm" and effects generated would seem to last their duration as a consequence (Banshee's 11E or Cyclops FT) or reward (Black Widow's 7F OPD)... just from an intuitive standpoint. 

Intuition is something lost even in the world.  People will twist anything to their favor.  You guys wouldn't believe what I heard on the radio the other day. 

[gameplan.exe]

it IS confusing. it's the secondary effects that take place as the card is played - those are the effects that seem to remain. so, the "may not attack for remainder of Battle" takes effect as soon as the Special is played, regardless of the success of the attack.

this is what I learned about when to negate. I guess if you negate that Super Scream defensively, it negates the whole thing, including the secondary effect. but, if you let the hit land, and then on your turn, negate the card offensively, it will remove the hit but Banshee will still be restricted.

I guess 

[thetrooper27]

So in conclusion, KL can remove hits in current battle, and permanent record as long the words "for remainder of battle/game" are printed on the card, but if a secondary effect was generated by the numerical attack, the effect still remains.

[gameplan.exe]

So in conclusion, KL can remove hits in current battle, and permanent record as long the words "for remainder of battle/game" are printed on the card, but if a secondary effect was generated by the numerical attack, the effect still remains.

correct.

[thetrooper27]

I think I just got my OverPower Elementary School diploma.

[Hotobu]

... and the CD from Beast, which can be played offensively for Cyke and Thor...

Are you sure about that? This doesn't seem right to me. Even though you play it on your turn the special is still serving a defensive purpose. I'd agree that they'd still be in effect if played before those specials, but not after.

[thetrooper27]

I don't think the CD is defending so much as it's preventing attacks being made to Cyke or Thor.  A defense is an immediate response to an attack, where the CD kind of sets up a wall, so to speak, that the opponent would have to get around to make an offensive action that couldn't be prevented because of the previously played FT.  That's my take...  I'm not sure how it would officially break down, but someone will fill us in on the technicalities.

[gameplan.exe]

I don't think the CD is defending so much as it's preventing attacks being made to Cyke or Thor.  A defense is an immediate response to an attack, where the CD kind of sets up a wall, so to speak, that the opponent would have to get around to make an offensive action that couldn't be prevented because of the previously played FT.  That's my take...  I'm not sure how it would officially break down, but someone will fill us in on the technicalities.

You pretty much nailed that one on the head. The DZ Specials, and how they are played, gives all the definition you need on this one. The errata that eliminated their defensive use, clearly separates the ideas of "defending" and "protecting" on this. Offensively played, a BJ, or AH, or CD "protects" while defensively it would "defend" the character.

[Demacus]

it IS confusing. it's the secondary effects that take place as the card is played - those are the effects that seem to remain. so, the "may not attack for remainder of Battle" takes effect as soon as the Special is played, regardless of the success of the attack.

this is what I learned about when to negate. I guess if you negate that Super Scream defensively, it negates the whole thing, including the secondary effect. but, if you let the hit land, and then on your turn, negate the card offensively, it will remove the hit but Banshee will still be restricted.

I guess 

I always assumed that if you negated a special, it negates the entire special, where as, if you let the Super Scream hit, then on your next offensive action you played the EE that removes special card hits, the hit would leave, but the negative effect on Banshee would stay.  Negating offensively after the fact SHOULD still removed the second effect that the card created, as a negate essentially makes it as if the card in question was never played.

[thetrooper27]

That's OverPower for ya.   I stay lost like I was in a plane crash and woke up on an island next to a guy named Hurley.

[gameplan.exe]

I always assumed that if you negated a special, it negates the entire special, where as, if you let the Super Scream hit, then on your next offensive action you played the EE that removes special card hits, the hit would leave, but the negative effect on Banshee would stay.  Negating offensively after the fact SHOULD still removed the second effect that the card created, as a negate essentially makes it as if the card in question was never played.

I am not opposed to this, and it makes more sense to me, but it's not how I was told it works. I'm more in favor of the Negate being a ret-con. i.e. Banshee never Super-Screamed.

If anyone else wants to weigh in to support that, I'll get behind it. It's just not what I was told (don't remember by whom).