Nombre de message : 62
Dernière visite :
That's a closely-related question, but subtly different. In that thread you said:
"You" (in any sentence of the game) refers only to the active player.
That doesn't seem correct for the case of effects like the ones provided by the skills mentioned in the top post of this thread. "You", in these contexts, seems to refers to the character who has the card in their inventory, regardless of whether they're the active character? According to page 11, the active character is not the one who activates/uses items: each character uses items only from their own inventory. What's not clear, however, is whether the "your cards" in those contexts specifically limits the character to using effects of cards in their own inventory, or whether they may apply those effects to cards in other participating characters' inventories.
Some items, e.g.
Advanced Skill, have features worded like:
Bird Call (A0138)
"You may use cards that have the following icon..."
Does "you" in such cases specifically mean only the character that is using the card which has that text, or does it apply to any character which is taking part in the action?
e.g. in the case of
Advanced Skill, can the Music effects of any participating character's cards be used, or just those belonging to the character who has
Advanced Skill in their inventory?
The a closely-related question applies to the
Advanced Skill (which says:
Protective cover (A0143)
): does its effect protect only items in the inventory of the character who has that card in their inventory, or those of any participating character?
Whenever you are to lower the durability of an Item, you may lower the durability of this item instead.
Firebird a écrit :
You say :
Step 2 explicitly specifies only cost-modifying effects. Quoting page 11:
Each player involved in the action may apply the effects of one or more cards from their hand, of one or more Item cards from their inventory used during step 1 (Item), of one or more Permanent event cards attached to the Terrain card their figure is standing on, and/or of one or more Quest item cards, in order to decrease the number of cards to be drawn
Step 3 says:
Each player involved in the action may apply the effects of one or more cards from their hand, of one or more Item cards from their inventory used during step 1 (Item), of one or more Permanent event cards attached to the Terrain card their figure is standing on, and/or of one or more Quest item cards, in order to obtain additional successes
Bird Call ostensibly allows us to use the effects of other cards in the corresponding steps, depending on whether they're cost-reduction effects or Success-generating effects. Its own other-card-modifying effect, however, is not really covered by any of the action resolution timing rules, which leaves me even less certain of its interpretation than i was initially.
Firebird a écrit :
And I think that you can find other types of effects that relate to other steps (although the rule is not explicit about this).
i can't say for sure :/. The timing of when exactly we activate the card-modifying effect of Bird Call is effectively undefined. i'm ashamed that that disturbs me as much as it does, but that's just how i'm built.
Posté - Edité
This is a re-formulation of a post over on BGG, re-posted here with the hope that we'll get an official answer for this...
Bird Call Advanced Skill (A0138) has a hunting icon which says:
and/or you may use cards that have the following icon (brown Music).
This card's effect is applied during Step 3 (Result) of Action Resolution, whereas Items are "used" in Step 1. That timing implies that Bird Call's effect does not
. However, Bird Call's use of the phrase
reduce the durability of cards with the Music modifier which Bird Call "hijacks"
is the same as the word
"may use cards"
in Step 1's rules ("Lower the durability of each item you use by 1"), which implies that
durability of items activated by Bird Call is reduced because they are "used"
What is the correct official interpretation:
Durability of items triggered by Bird Call ARE NOT reduced.
Durability of items triggered by Bird Call ARE reduced.
Edit: the question, upon closer examination, really boils down to:
At what step(s) of Action Resolution may an Action Modifier be applied if it is neither an Energy modifier nor a Success modifier ?
An answer to that question would, i believe, resolve my uncertainty about this particular card. There appears to be no explicit rules which allow for any type of Action Modifier which is not either an Energy modifier or a Success modifier.
Several cards say "you may take the following action only if you have X", where X is typically something like "a card with keyword Z in your hand."
What's not clear to me is whether all involved characters are required to have X, or if only the active character for that action is required to have X.
In other words: does such a condition prohibit characters from assisting the active character unless each of them meets requirement X?
More generally, my understanding is that only the active character for an action "takes" the action, and any other characters may "assist" in (but do not "take") the action. Is that correct or do all involved characters "take" the action?
Posté - Edité
The card says to
but the card in question
discard all elixirs "you have in hand,"
can only ever be in your inventory, not in hand
Edit: just checked the card.
It does not have that keyword itself.
Posté - Edité
Lovecraft's Dark Side removes all the curses from the discard. If there's no curses in the discard, it is safe to draw cards from the discard pile on actions -- "Sudden Death mode" can't kill you if there's no curses to draw.
Unless i am very sorely mistaken...
Lovecraft removes the curses from the discards, placing them in the Action deck. You only draw from the discards if the Action deck is empty. i.e. if Lovecraft uses that ability during Sudden Death, it's game over at the next card draw, which is guaranteed to be a Curse.
Edit: that's entirely false. See the next reply for the clarification.
Posté - Edité
Before i go resolving B0992, i'm trying to confirm whether the intent reflects what it actually says:
Eating action, no energy, zero successes: Discard all cards with the keyword elixir you have in hand. Take a 503 card. Banish this.
As written, "all cards..." can mean 0 cards. In my 50+ hours on the Continent, i don't recall ever having seen a card with the given keyword.
My assumption is that the card it asks me to take will say something like:
If you discarded 0 elixir cards, do X. If you discarded 1 elixir card, do Y. ...
no, it doesn't.
But before i go turn over that card, i'd like to know if the intent is that it's legal to use that card when a character has 0 of the thing it mentions.
(FWIW, i would like to wait before using it, but the per-character card limit for a 4-character game is downright punishing and i need to free up inventory space.)
i know this is a bit late, but just wanted to post a couple pics of an assembled Lost & Found set:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/gNVjf1vaTcBCKtWu7 (no spoilers)
i had those printed up at a copy shop last winter but only just got around to completing their construction. Each card is in a thin docsmagic-brand sleeve along with a 75x75mm piece of index card to add a bit of stability. Though i cannot yet comment on their play quality, i'm utterly flabbergasted at their design quality and am looking forward to including them in my next session.
@Dill, one comment, for the off chance that you ever undertake such a task again: having the front and back of the cards on the same sheet of paper, side by side, would have reduced the amount of cutting by (if my math is correct) 1/8th and allowed us to simply fold them in half to get the front/back together. It also would have reduced the odds of a mismatch in matching up the fronts/backs (i mismatched the left/right columns of one sheet, but thankfully caught it in a double-check of the whole deck after it had been assembled).
Thank you for this expansion, Dill!
WithCheese a écrit :
Does the second-most card in the stack automatically get the die placed on it and become the new top card for the combined item?
FWIW, i have yet to see a real citation in this thread, but: way back when i asked that same question and the designer responded with yes, the next card becomes the top one. i don't recall if that was in this forum or BGG, though, and don't have a link to the citation, only my memory of the designer answering it for me.
The corrected PDF is now available for download in the Resources==>Errata section of the site.
JackSpirio a écrit :
but if you could add them, there would be the need for a rule.
Mastery has literally only a single sentence devoted to it in the rules, and that one sentence does not cover all of the possible/reasonable interpretations of how they should be applied. Another example of ambiguity which "really should" have been clarified with one more sentence in the rules, can be found in https://the7thcontinent.seriouspoulp.com/en/forum/topic/4312/.
i have come across white action icons with Mastery icons to their left:
i see two different interpretations for those:
1) The action automatically provides/includes Mastery at the given level.
2) The action cannot be attempted unless at least that many levels of Mastery are provided by a character attempting the action.
Which interpretation is correct?
The rules for Mastery don't address this: when using multiple Mastery effects in a single Action, are the Mastery levels added together or is only the highest one applied?
(FWIW, i assume only the highest is used.)
i'm looking for the pedantic definition of "adjacent" as it regards to Terrain cards. Specifically, i'm using weather effects for the first time, and they rely, in part, in that definition. The definition is normally clear, but there are cases where we need to distinguish between "physical adjacency" and "logical adjacency":
In that photo, the top and bottom cards are logically adjacent but not physically. This is important not just for weather effects, but also for purposes of removing the Paranoid state. It's also not clear whether the distance between those two cards is 1 or 2 (i don't think that actually matters for any case i can think of, but the answer would still be interesting to know).
Opinions are welcomed, but citations for an official ruling are better :).