Elite League Assassins

[Tornado]

Yea
Should DF have an adjacent clause?

[Karat]

Originally Posted by Tornado

Yea
Should DF have an adjacent clause?

Nope we changed the name so it worked for both ranged and adjacent attacks since it was basically the same power with 2 different names in 1.0 (Deadly Strike & Deadly Shot).

[japes]

Originally Posted by Tornado

Yea
Should DF have an adjacent clause?

I also asked and was told this is what we want unless someone wants to make a new power that's more restricted.

I took it from the Katana that's on deck.

[japes]

244

[Ronin]

Two quick thoughts on Vanish here, while we have these guys On Deck. Got thinking about this because I have a write-up sitting around with Vanish on it that actually predates these guys and I had a tweak I wanted to make to that ability.

Sorry for not being checked into this one while it happened!

Specifically I wanted to frame the movement requirement more like:

Before an Elite League Assassin defends, roll a d20. On an 11+, that Elite League Assassin may maneuver up to 4 spaces. Then, if it is unengaged, it avoids the attack.

The advantage here mostly being to get the same effect (ELA has to get unengaged to avoid the attack) but phrasing it in a way where it's clear how things work if something happens during the move that prevents it from getting unengaged.

It's especially helpful with something like Captain Cold's Flash Freeze or (in 1.0) Polaris' Reactive Toss that might stop movement unexpectedly, but I think it's clearer even with stuff like Blob where movement can be guaranteed denied.

We might also want to switch "unengaged" to "not adjacent to any enemies" if we want them to have to get away from enemy vehicles. That feels like it makes sense to me.

[IAmBatman]

Works for me

[Yodaking]

[japes]

Makes sense.

OP and Cards Updated