Encounter query

By Lee418, in Arkham Horror Second Edition

A River Docks encounter reads:

You open some crates on the dock. Inside you find some useful things. Draw 2 Common Items. Next, make a Luck (-1) check . If you pass, you get away without being seen. If you fail, you are arrested and taken to the Police Station.

Question : If you fail the Luck check and get arrested, do you still get to keep the two common item cards?

If you fail the check, you simply follow the rules for being arrested, as described in the core game rulebook, nothing more and nothing less.

Generally, read the cards and follow them in order. Clearly you draw the 2 items first, then test Luck and follow the instructions. Nothing says you have to give up the items if you fail, and there is nothing in the rules that say you lose any items if you are jailed.

That's the way I played it too. But even though it was strictly 'by the book', it still felt like a bit of a fudge. I mean, where else can you get caught in the act of stealing, get arrested for it, and then still get to keep the stolen goods?

In actual fact that failed encounter was a real stroke of luck. Poor old "Ashcan" Pete was trapped at the River Docks with no way out. But after a bit of sloppy thievery and a free teleport to the Police Station, he walked away scott-free with a brand new .38 and an Old Journal. What more could you ask for? :lol:

Don't ask where he stashed the goods when he was arrested...

That's the way I played it too. But even though it was strictly 'by the book', it still felt like a bit of a fudge. I mean, where else can you get caught in the act of stealing, get arrested for it, and then still get to keep the stolen goods?

Any civilized country (mine included) if your investigator is a politician?

(I sense what you're meaning, but the problem is that writing specific rules for one single card or using twenty lines to describe an encounter is technically impossible to do. But I agree, the encounter per se is not the best one in the deck in terms of consistency, for sure)