So this came up during TILE WARS at GenCon

If you have a YV Seer and Shedao Shai, does he get Melee reach 3?

I wouldn't think so. It's not a ranged special ability, is it?

True. I just didn't read it that way. I had read it as targeting yourself and changing the definition of adjacent: "When making an attack on its own turn, this character treats all characters within 2 squares as adjacent for all purposes." And then "2 squares" is just explaining the new definition of adjacent - not a range on the ability and so not extended by the Seer. But I can see how it could be read the other way, too.

I'm just one more opinion. I'm sure an official ruling will appear soon enough.

If only it were that simple, but it isn't. 'Within x squares' is well-established as range in WotC. You can look at the glossary of Booming Voice for an example. Also, you have to consider the specific wording carefully. As you noted, 'within x squares' can be a condition that must be met rather than a range, therefore who is affected is also important.

I'm not answering the OP question yet because I am taking time to look at the SAs that may be involved.

another wacky SA......
where do these ideas come from

What is? Disruptive 8 would be wicked.
DarkDracul's post makes sense.

Well, given that Melee Reach has the word "within" x; and it is not affected, wouldn't it stand to reason that all other "within" abilities also don't get this extra 2.
Seems like something that we shouldn't make too complex.(yeah, close the barn door after the horse is long gone)

I totally get that it is confusing. WotC was inconsistent with how range was expressed, and the way Melee Reach works was changed at least once during WotC days. What is most important is who/what is affected by the ability as worded.

It's a fine line, but Melee Reach applies to 'this character'. The only range a character has to itself is 'touch'. The 'condition' is that the enemy character can't be more than 2/3 squares away.

If it said "Enemies within 2/3 squares count as adjacent for all purposes when this character attacks on its turn" it would be directly affecting the enemy character.

For another example, let's look at Synergy:

+4 Attack while an ally whose name contains XYZ is within 6 squares

vs 'reverse' synergy

An ally whose name contains XYZ gets +4 Attack while within 6 squares of this character

The first affects the character with the ability (so not a range, the other characters proximity is a condition, same as with GOWK's CE, or 3 same-named characters for Squad abilities), while the 'reversed' version is affecting another character within range.

So, to summarize, if the ability says 'range; x' or affects other characters or terrain with x squares, it can be extended. If it affects the character with the ability, no.


Lastly, I'm still looking at Disruptive...

Are you a Necromancer?

Um, I'll have to revisit this, as there are some new CE suppression examples to compare it with.
Hopefully they will help clarify the situation.