kldonnelly's page

That sounds correct, and I'll use this reasoning with my group. Do you know why cards like Scorching Ray which lists Fire as a trait also lists "with the Fire trait" in the powers box? One of our players used this as an example for why we couldn't use the traits listed on the card, saying "If they meant it to be added, they would have added it like they did for Scorching Ray."

Thanks - now that you say it, it seems obvious. But we were really stuck on that question, and one player was using that to try and convince us that the Siren's check was a combat check (since it was a monster) and so he could use a weapon. We didn't let that fly, but he wasn't satisfied since we couldn't tell him what a combat wisdom check looked like.

Does the card you are using to make your check add all the traits listed on that card even if it is lacking a mention of the trait in the Powers box?

For example,

Noxious Bomb lists Poison as a trait, but does not mention "with the Poison trait" in the description in the Powers box. Does this mean it doesn't use Poison and so is effective against the Undead?

Or, Pistol +1 lists Magic as a trait, but doesn't mention it in the description ("your Dexterity or Ranged skill + 1d6 + 1"). So it doesn't shoot magic bullets and can't kill a Shadow (which needs Magic to be defeated?)

I have been playing that you need the mention of the trait in the description for it to be added, but Noxious Bomb made me wonder.

This is how we have understood it. What we can't get our heads around is how you could have a "combat wisdom" check or a "combat charisma" check. Isn't this impossible and so "non-combat wisdom" is redundant?