Avatar
User
NB Posts : 45
Created :
Last visit :
Posted - Edited
Any :icon_curse: Curse card (when you draw from the Discard Pile). If it is "Death is lurking" or one of the curse-specific cards does not matter. See the bottom right column of page 17 in the rule book and top right column of page 22.

YOU LOSE…
The game ends immediately and players lose collectively if one of the following occurs:
  • a player reveals a :icon_curse: Curse card drawn or revealed from the Discard Pile while the Action Deck is empty;
  • the applicable consequence of an action all characters are involved in states “Your adventure is over”.
Posted
Vardamir wrote:
Also how about combining items? As the rules point out, you can increase the item durability if the newly crafted item has one of the keywords from the item already in play. But what if there are multiple stacking with different keyword?

For example if the first item has skill - stamina, and then the second has skill - stealth. The second item is valid to combine.
But if the third item has a stealth keyword without skill keyword. Is this item still possible to combine?



  1. You can always combine item cards with existing items (as long as the stacking limit isn't exceeded).
  2. But the durability increase is only when there is a shared keyword between the newly added item card and the first/top item card.


The latter also quite clear from the rules page 20 I think, see the part I bolded:
If the newly combined Item card shares at least one keyword with the Item card the die is resting on (at the top of the column), its durability value is added to the value of that die to a maximum of 6).
Posted - Edited
Front:
Thunderstorms, blizzards, tornadoes...
Brave the elements and hope
that you can survive their fury!


Back:
Facing the Elements

The cards of this mini-expansion each have a unique ID number, going from G1311 to G1350.

You may prepare them in the game box before you start your game, following the same guidelines as with cards from the base game and making sure that for each number, green Adventure cards are placed before any gold Adventure cards.

This mini-expansion introduces a new mechanism - (*) Weather cards.

A Weather card is put into play next to the "Satchel & Journal" card and its effects impact the entire board as long as it remains in play (there may only be one Weather card in play at any given time).

When you must return all the cards on the Board, also return the Weather card that is in play and remove the corresponding figure from the Board.


(*) = an icon showing a thundercloud
Posted
SaturnNitrik wrote:
Since I had not the associeted ID, I managed to link them to the french version.
Yet, I need your help for these 2, can you give their ID ?
- Fire-making kit
- Friction fire


A0051 Friction fire
A0054 Fire-making kit
Posted
:O Wow. Impressive! It looks great. And bilingual! :thumb_up:

You must have put quite a lot of work into this. :action_think:

I think if I ever want to do multiple saves, I will be very thankful. :action_pray:

:icon_succes::icon_succes::icon_succes::icon_succes::icon_succes::icon_succes::icon_succes::icon_succes::icon_succes::icon_succes:
Posted
Silf, I certainly agree about the comments section on http://kickstarter.com. My link was to the "2nd Kickstarter Campaign" forum area here on http://seriouspoulp.com, not so chaotic! :)
Posted - Edited
I think we are many who would agree with Marcel in this.

But perhaps it would be better to voice it in the 2nd kickstarter campaign forum area.
Posted
I think this was officially answered somewhere, and that the answer was that the full modifier had to be used (not "up to").
But I have searched and can't find it now, sorry. Maybe someone else will have a better answer for you.
Posted
Note that it says on the lower left of the same side of the player aid that
:icon_locked::action_fight:Players must draw
the exact number of cards
indicated by the action,
unless they choose to apply
card effects from their hands
and/or inventories.


But I guess it could be made even clearer!
Posted
Two questions in one:
1. Is it generally allowed to lower the card cost of an action below zero? If that is the case, is then a negative card cost number just treated as zero or is it handled in some other way?
2. Is it specifically allowed to use the group action cost/success modifying mechanism (for non-:icon_locked: actions) even when that would lower the action card cost below zero?

Specific context:
There is at least one possible "exploit" of a 0:card_blue:/0:icon_succes: card that (if it is possible) uses the group action mechanism to make that -1:card_blue:/1:icon_succes: in order to fail something that isn't supposed to be able to fail.

My personal ruling is that the group action mechanism can not be used to change cost/success when cost would be lowered below zero, but it is not really clearly stated in the rules.

Full spoiler is in this post (in a very spoilery discussion!): https://the7thcontinent.seriouspoulp.com/en/forum/topic/648/fully-leveled-up-exploit-lovecraft/page/1/273296/#273296
Posted
It is quite clear from the rules on page 11 I think:
Each player involved in the action may use one or more items from their inventory, by removing 1 pip from the value of the die resting on each used item (no matter how many Item cards the item consists of). If that value reaches zero, the die is removed. For each item used this way, the player will be able to apply – at most once during the action – some or all of the effects of one or more Item cards it consists of, provided a :action_condition: icon associated with the effect matches the :action_empty: current action.
Posted
I haven't checked all the cards yet either, but I guess they have not added this rule for no reason. :)
Posted
Perhaps this FAQ response is of help? Note "effect(s)"!

My own interpretation (that I think is the official one):
When you use an item (stack) it always costs just one durability pip and you can apply any of the applicable effects (involving any number of item cards in the stack) that you wish.
Posted
pikiou wrote:
There is another exploit to get all cards from the Discard back into the Action Deck with the use of card 608 (D1183) and the Gourmet card from Ferdinand. You basically fail at doing the action (-1 card, +1 star as a group), get rid of the Paranoid cards by moving towards some fire, and do it again.
This is pointless I'd never use this exploit, but it was fun to find out ^^


Ah, that is a strong combo indeed!

It seems that there are quite some rule problems emanating from situations where you want to fail at an action and make arrangements to do this.

I am not sure if I would interpret the rules to allow this mechanism though, is lowering the card cost below zero really possible?
If more than one player is involved in the action, they may decide to lower the cost of the action by any number (-X cards to draw) and, on the other hand, increase the difficulty of the action by the same amount (+X required successes).
- Rulebook page 11

When a cost of "-1" can't even be paid, can it even be called to "lower"? I think this could open up to a lot of rules troubles. Maybe rules could be made clear(er) on this.

If the mechanism is allowed to be used to lower below zero, then I guess the D1183 card could be changed to "fix" it.
Posted
There are important benefits to saving too. The punishment is not great, especially if you choose wisely where/when to save.
Posted
Sorry! I somehow strangely missed that it was pinged just before, that was unintentionally rude (or rather, blind) of me! I saw only the time stamp of the post above dated about 24 days ago. Will pay more attention to the hidden numbers both in and out of the game from now on! :)
Posted
Sorry, but PING again.
Posted
Skylla wrote:
2) No. This is also mentioned in the FAQ:
https://the7thcontinent.seriouspoulp.com/en/resources/faqs#rules

quote:
"You cannot choose the black frame by yourself after a success. You can choose to pick the less possible cards to increase chance of failing, but a success is a success (white effect), a fail is a fail (black effect)."


I don't have an opinion about the yes/no here, but I don't think the rules text you quote necessarily implies a "no" to the question asked.
The rules text talks about "after a success", but the act of combining stars is *before* you have a success, it is done in order to create a success.

I find a difference in the meaning of the text as written
You may freely combine any half-stars visible on the revealed cards as long as both their cards are facing the same way, in order to construct full gold stars.

and this example of alternative text (minimally edited by me to show my point)
Any half-stars visible on the revealed cards are combined as long as both their cards are facing the same way, in order to construct full gold stars.


The phrasing of the former certainly implies a choice. If this is the intention, only the creators could say.
Posted
All clear to me now, thanks for helping me out!
Posted
I am happy to have an answer, and also that my intuition was right. Thanks!