Not to throw more fuel on a raging fire, but what about a Rat-thing? We played that for Finn to kill it, he had to discard an item anyway. The Rat-thing says something along the lines that you have to discard an item or automatically fail the combat check. His ability doesn't even fight the inconvenience of a Rat-thing!

flamethrower49 said:

I agree wtih most of the folks I have read that would discard tomes, or other itemslike food, regarding that as discarding by choice because you know you have to do it to get the effect.

OTOH, I would not force him to discard to a rat thing. That seems exactly like what his ability should allow him to avoid. Alas, I have only played him one, I played him totally wrong (it was before KevinW clarified his ability on one of the threads) and he definitely never came across a rat thing.

johnwatersfan said:

That would be fine if there were such a thing as "item costs". However, it is more likely it refers to the actual use of the term "costs" in arkham horror: the use of money to purchase items. Things like food simply tell you to discard it to do something, while tomes tell you to discard them after you use them. In both cases, Finn's abillity currently allows their use without discarding them. (Which is obviously horribly unbalanced - I am just pointing that out. This doesn't change the fact that it is what the rule actually says.)

Basically, we have three categories: Things that activate upon a discard (food, abillity to slay a rat thing), things which are discarded after activation (tomes) and effects which force a discard of something without the discard being tied to a certain effect (Ithaqua's and Cthugha's abillities, but also numerous encounters, unconsciousness and insanity).

It would probably be best if only the third category were to work. This would seem good from a realistic standpoint (he is mostly good at not losing his stuff or taking better care of them, etc. Mostly anyway.), and it should prevent confusion with the other two categories as well as disallowing any abuse of his abillity.

Victimizer said:

I think I like your suggestion, I guess I will adopt it. I'm not sure about the rat-thing, though. While the rules are clear (no attack w/o discarding), I wonder if it really was meant as a sacrifice, or if they didn't like the Elder thing mechanic, where you can succeed and lose nothing, or lose your weapons and go to the hospital. ^^

does any one think that the designers of the game meant for Finn to be able to use tomes over and over again? if you really do fine but come on!! i cant see a good arguement for this!

The first thing my seven year old said when the Rat Thing came out last week was, hey lets send Finn. I love it when she makes connections like that on her own. I usually allow such suggestions in play if they make some kind of sense* (hey I want to encourage her to come up with stuff right?) in this case I think I agreed with her anyway. But I'm willing to be told otherwise.

* my favourite was when the Rat Thing last came out, a true Eureka moment: "Hey dad, lets give him your bank loan!"

I laughed so much that I almost allowed it.

- Marianna the ex-nun cultist

pittplayer said:

Here's one:

They thought that it was fairly unlikely that he'd get into the possession of too many such items, therefore it would be ok for him to have this abillity.

...What? seems silly? Goes against the grain of common sense?

In the end, we cannot look into the minds of the people that have made this game, nor can we rely on something non-existent (that would be common sense).

What we can do is form an opinion on how to alter a game effect, and make the designers aware of the hows and whys of said opinion. We can also play the game however we want and ignore any rules we don't like. But that is all. We cannot presume to be playing by designer's intent or by the intent of some Hegelian concept of 'Volk-Geist' (i.e. common sense).

@Helrazer

The reason I added the rat thing was due to mechanical reasons. Things like the rat-thing I also find perturbing from an "intention" standpoint - it seems to me that his abillity was meant to be used against theft of this sort. However, allowing his use here would mean to make an exhaustive list of exceptions based on subject evaluation of each and every encounter card requiring a discard that worked similarly - hence the three categories of hard-and-fast distinguishable situations which might work all of the time (afaik), so one does not have to decide mid-game how to work out a certain situation (and avoiding the previously mentioned subjective list - the only subjective choice made with the house rule is to which of the three categories Finn's rules apply and to which it doesn't).

Mariana the Ex-Nun Cultist said:

Oh, that goes right up there with Mageith's Emily when she deduced that the players were "not supposed to win."

Some of you guys are so lucky to have such fresh young minds to cooperate with. "New eyes", I think Gallagher used to call it.

Sorry to resurrect this thread, but...

I've played a couple of games with Finn Edwards now, and me and my player group just have no idea how he is meant to work.

Is the "must pay costs as usual" thing intended to cover the money/items you have to lose from the bank loan? So if his money runs out, does he lose his items like anyone else does? Or is it just intended to eat away at the money he starts with?

Does he gain an additional $10 during game setup, when he gains the bank loan? And if not, why not?

And I've read the three preceding pages of posts, but I've still gotta ask: is there any official rule which instils a grain of sanity in the "must pay costs" ability? Right now, it seems to me like the game has no consistent way of distinguishing between 'costs' and 'losses', so we're compelled to judge purely from context on each card. Some items have costs, some tomes have costs, some encounters make you pay costs - but the word 'cost' is almost never used, and there's no 'standard formatting' for a cost on a card.

Depending on how all these questions are answered, Finn is either one of the best investigators ever, or almost useless.

Kevin Wilson clarified that the bank loan is already taken out, reflected in his starting equipment. He also stated that he never has to lose the money or the items as a result of his bank loan.

The problem with this is, these seem like costs. It can be really hard to distinguish what he does and doesn't have to lose. And no, I see no sense in the "still has to pay costs" line. It makes sense that he has to discard his whiskey if he uses it. It doesn't make any sense if he can retain the King in Yellow after reading it. That's how I play it. He still has to discard items after using them, in my opinion.

So, what is his ability good for? Well, Cthugha and Ithaqua, for starters, although that seems strange, too. As written into the ability, lessening the penalty for going insane or unconcious, which is nice. And protecting himself from encounters that steal stuff.

Except not Rat-things, apparently.

I thought Kevin meant that he does get the 10 bucks. I mean what does "he's already taken the bank loan out" mean?

Or did he clarify this matter more correctly? I only saw one post of him about this, and might have misread it.

It's a simple matter of looking at his starting equipment. He has so much more than anyone else. Look at his possessions in comparison to Bob Jenkins. They both start with two common items, two unique items, and eight dollars (Finn having a Whiskey instead of Bob's extra dollar). Pretty much the same, except Finn has an extra skill.

If you're familiar with the Strange Eons program, you know that various things have a value attached to them in terms of starting equipment, something along the lines of:

Common Item: $3

Unique Item: $5

Spell: $4

And the like. For the most part, almost all of the investigators follow this pattern. You can add up their belongings and come out with the same total. (If I recall, only Wendy and Lily defied this, to some extent.)

Skills came out as $10. Whether you think this is overpriced or not, that's the same value as a bank loan, showing that he starts with that much more.

I'm familiar with strange eons. I also remember that strange eons had to take a few changes into acount when Kingsport Horror characters started to break the rules.

So a new character breaking rules from eons (or being otherwise totally ludicrous) isn't really a good argument.

I'm not trying to be needlessly obtuse, it's just that I felt, if I recall Kevin's answer correctly, that he didn't clarify that at all.

I thought it was pretty clear in the message that i read from Kevin that the $10 was already figured into the possions listed on Finn's card.

Not sure if I read exactly the same message as Victimizer, but I remember thinking this was quite clearly Kevin's point.

To be honest reading Finn's sheet otherwise strikes me as wishfull thinking, he clearly has too much equioment for anything like a normal invetsigator budget and has obviously paid for it somehow.

- Mariana the ex-nun cultist

I'm with our favourite ex-nun cultist on this one.
Kevins exact words were:

"Finn has already taken out the loan. The extra money is represented in his stats and starting items, etc."

Seems pretty clear to me that he doesn't get $10 extra, since he already spend it on... things and education.

It's strange that he starts at the bank, as if he's just taken out the loan, but he's already bought items with the money. Maybe he bought them on Amazon and requested expedited shipping.

"Already taken out" the bank loan?

...

OH! I get it! You only get the $10 when you take out the bank loan! Since Finn has already taken out the loan, that means you don't get the $10 along with the loan during setup!

avec said:

He just took it out, according to his story. The easiest way to explain that, I think, is to say that he just took out eight dollars. Some sort of long term loan, with an extended payment plan, perhaps.

In olden days, the interest was often charged up front.

http://www.businessfinance.com/discount-loan.htm

The interest on an Arkham loan, assuming each turn is a day is 150% ($15 dollars interest on a $10 dollar loan) per month. I think the Sheldon gang owns the bank. Over a year's time that's $180. I'm surprised everyone doesn't default! Again, not so long ago, a financial year only had 360 days.

Ok, that seems to be what he meant - i.e. I'm convinced. Thanks for the correction everyone.

flamethrower49 said:

What I mean is, how has he managed to go shopping if he hasn't even left the bank yet?

Well, my point is, he hasn't gone shopping yet. He already hoarded up his starting possessions, and now he got some money with the loan.

Sorry to dig up an old thread...

... but to me it seems that "Finn never has to discard items or lose money" means that he is never forced to discard an item.

However using items like Whiskey will only activate on discarding. Finn isn't forced to discard the item, but unless he does discard the whiskey, the ability of the whiskey won't activate. The rat thing seems the same to me - Finn wouldn't be forced to discard an item, but if he didn't discard one, he'd still automatically fail the combat check.

At least that's how I see it...

noth1ng said:

I fully agree here, and I think most other players here do. However, the problem is that some items are discarded after using them, like tomes, dynamite or even those items you discard after placing 3 markers on them (e.g. to avoid stamina or sanity losses). The rules seem to imply that he can keep those items after using them, but it seems ridiculous to me, so I house rule that he cannot keep items that are discarded as a result of using them.

Heh, yes - those are a little more difficult - in those case, I actually think those items have lost their 'charges' - aka all interesting pages in a tome have been read/used/...

So, I wouldn't force to discard the tome, but it would just be useless junk, I think. I'd look at the enforced discard only from the point of dropping unconscious or otherwise having to discard things, but... that's all stuff Finn is immune to entirely...

Hmm. On the other hand, a used-up tome could be fed to the Rat-Thing... Hmm...