Breach Bracers: Flavour Text vs. Power Description

[Alaric_Argent]

So I'm preparing a Genasi Swordmage for a short campaign, and I'm looking at bracers as one of the three magic items the DM is allotting each PC (we're starting at 6th level). The Breach Bracers look interesting, but I wonder about the flavour versus the power text. The flavour text says: "These spiked arm guards render enemies more vulnerable to your attacks." [emphasis mine] The Daily Power text reads: "The target of the attack gains vulnerable 5 against the next attack that hits it before the end of your next turn."

It sounds to me as if the vulnerability applies to any attack made against that foe, so any PC who acts after I activate the bracers (and before the end of my next turn) and hits that target would benefit from the vulnerability. In other words, the power wording trumps the flavour text. Is this correct?

 

[talarei07]

it says melee attack but yeah rules trump flavor text

 

[DracoSuave]

The power does what it says it does; why would they have the power say something it does not do?

That makes no sense.

 

[CapnZapp]

That makes no sense.

He's concerned about how crunch and fluff doesn't match.

 

[Stalker0]

Always go with the rules, the flavor text means nothing except for inspiration.

 

[DracoSuave]

He's concerned about how crunch and fluff doesn't match.

Yeah but they do match.

Item makes the enemy more vulnerable to your melee attacks. Flavor text says your enemy is more vulnerable to your attacks. That's not a mismatch unless you're needlessly pedantic and nitpicky. And even then it's not a mismatch, you have to literally assume 'your attacks' is meant to describe some greater effect than 'your melee attacks.'

We're rules lawyering flavor text now? Is that what this has come to? Common Sense check fail.

Seriously. Makes. No. Sense.

 

[Tony Vargas]

'Your' is indefinite, you're part of a team...

But, yeah, fluff describes how the item looks or works, mechanics describe what it actually does. Sounds like the victim will be vulnerable to the next attack, whether it's yours, an ally's, or someone else's.

 

[CapnZapp]

text

I don't agree, but at least I got you to take the veil off your misgivings.

Mission accomplished.

 

[DracoSuave]

I don't agree, but at least I got you to take the veil off your misgivings.

Mission accomplished.

The other thing is 'your' doesn't always mean 'you' the person who applied the effect, but sometimes 'you' the -people- who are doing bad deeds.

You -can- be plural and refer to the party.

In fact, that's what 'you' originally -always- meant.