Can you use Bollix [tha] as defense against long range strike?

XZealot wrote:

There is no such ruling for short range strikes being used at long range.

Err, what?

Rulebook, wrote:

Unless the strike is identified as ranged or does "R" damage (or is a defensive strike such as dodge or combat ends), it is only effective at close range.

Close range strike, only effective when used at close range. Not effective at long range.

XZealot wrote:

It is actually on you to prove that the defensive part of the card is negated by being at long range, which it is not.

That's already been proved by the Dodge ruling.

A dodge will protect from the opponent the anti-weapon text of Soul Burn (and by extension, Bollix). That only happens if it's an effect being launched at the opponent. Thus, not defensive.

I know a dodge will protect someone from Bollix.

What are you talking about?

I am saying that the anti-weapon part of Bollix is still effective at long range. Is that what you are saying?

XZealot wrote:

I am saying that the anti-weapon part of Bollix is still effective at long range. Is that what you are saying?

No, that's not what I'm saying, because it's not effective at long range.

1) The anti-weapon text is an offensive part of the strike. We know this because it can be dodged. That is why the dodge ruling is still relevant. It is not a defensive strike. It may have an outcome that 'protects' you from damage you don't want, but the same would true of a Destroy Equipment With First Strike (or Steal Equipment With First Strike) card, and those aren't defensive either - even though the end result might be that you end up not taking the damage from a gun.

2) Strikes that aren't defensive strikes (like Dodge and S:CE) are ineffective at long range by default. This can be overcome by card text, such as "ranged" or "usable at long range" or "1R damage" etc. Bollix lacks this text, so by default its abilities are only effective at close range.


Thus, neither part of Bollix takes effect at long range - the hand strike isn't ranged damage, and the anti-weapon effect isn't a ranged effect.

Sorry, I had forgotten to comment.

Thank you, jamesatzephyr.
And I thank you too, XZealot.

Zombie posts rising again?
Ugh ...