Movement powers that break (and do not break) engagement

[Captain Stupendous]

I think it's worth noting that RotV Drake's Grapple Gun is not a "place" power, as it specifically lets him "move one space." That leaves Glacier Traverse as the only "placement" power that is both subject to leaving engagement attacks and does not include the phrase "If figure is engaged when figure starts to [Tunnel, Shadow Dance, etc.], figure will take any leaving engagement attacks." In my mind this just seems like a case of poor wording in the case of the Dzu-Teh that was subsequently fixed in every other "placement" power subject to leaving engagement attacks.

You mention that the FAQ specifically notes that Flying causes a break in engagement at the moment of activation but does not make a similar clarification for "placement" powers. In my opinion I don't think this necessarily means that "placement" does not also cause a break in engagement. I think the FAQ exists to cover questions that arise relatively often based on a reading of the card. Because the vast majority of "placement" powers aren't subject to leaving engagement attacks anyway, for most placement powers the question of whether engagement is broken just by activating the power is completely irrelevant (outside of extreme edge cases with engagement strikers). For this reason I'm not surprised that the FAQ doesn't specifically highlight that "placement" powers also cause a break in engagement, just like Flying.

I was also able to find a fairly extensive discussion on this exact issue in the book of Nakita Agents. The discussion starts with this post made seven years ago: https://www.heroscapers.com/communit...&postcount=167

At the time it seemed like opinion was relatively split regarding whether or not a figure placed next to a Nakita it was previously adjacent to would trigger Engagement Strike. Ultimately it doesn't seem like a consensus was reached regarding "placement" powers and engagement strike, with @dok , @The B.I.V. , and @Lyrgard arguing that placement does not cause a break in engagement, while @Scytale , @Aldin , and @Yodaking thought that the similarity of the wording at the end of Flying and at the end of the placement powers that are subject to leaving engagment attacks was enough to suggest that both Flying and "placement" powers cause an automatic break in engagement as soon as they are declared to be used (I apologize if I misrepresented the positions of anyone I tagged; if so please let me know and I'll edit accordingly!).

All that being said, most of the time it's a fairly irrelevant distinction anyway. The primary reason it's even being brought up again now is in the context of Motley Max. I also hope I'm not being annoying by continuing this discussion! I find rules questions like this very interesting and appreciate the dialogue, but I'll be happy to play with this whatever way the C3V rules team decides to follow (and if that consensus has already been reached by C3V, I'll stop bringing up counterpoints ).