Here are some rulings found on the old forum. I hope I have provided enough context, and I'll dig for more rulings as time passes on.
FFG Nate wrote:
Marius wrote:
Shub with a 1000 young says:
Ancient One
Lower the cost for you to play Shub-Niggurath by 5
if you control 4 or more Cultist characters.
Response: after Shub-Niggurath enters play, put into play all characters from all discard piles, exhausted.
So, according to Luke, shub still gets a cost reduction even if the 4 cultist recide in you discard pile...
Thus I conclude that the intention is right, but the wording is a bit off; Cards out of 'Play' are concidered to be owned by their owner. Once they move to play regardless of the reason become controlled by their owner.
Control in an out of play state is essential because of:
(v1.5) Working Effects
In general, Support and Character card effects can only be triggered (or affect the game) when the card is in play. Event cards can be triggered from your hand using an action. In general, card effects on non-event cards in a player’s hand, discard pile, and dead pile are not considered to be actionable unless the card specifically states that it can be triggered while in its out-of-play state.
What keeps you from counting out of play cards would be an inverse application of this rule: card abilities cannot interact with out of play cards unless specifically stated by that ability. (Yes, this can be added to the FAQ.) So in your Shub with 1000 Young example, the ability would not interact with any cards in your hand, deck, or discard pile because they are out of play.
FFG Nate wrote:
Hey Guys,
From the FAQ:
v1.3) Gaining Control
If a card effect allows you to take control of a card, move that card into your playing area. If that card is an attachment, immediately attach it to an eligible card you control. (If you cannot, then you may not take control of the attachment.)
When you have taken control of a card, you are considered to be that card’s controller, but not its owner. When that card leaves play for any reason, or at the end of the game, you must return it to its owner.
Two points from this entry:
1) In an out of play state, cards are controlled by their owner. (“When that card leaves play for any reason, or at the end of the game, you must return it to its owner.�) Not only is ownership the default control for cards that are out of play, this default washes away any “take control� effects that existed while the cards were in play.
(Another reason it is important that control of cards exists while they are in an out of play state can be seen with cards like the Syndicate Troubleshooter:
Response
: after Syndicate Troubleshooter is placed in your discard pile from play, attach it to one of your Domains as a resource.
This response is triggered from an out of play state, but only the controller of a card can trigger an effect from that card. So, even if Chris had taken control of my Syndicate Troubleshooter, control would shift when that card left play (because of the above FAQ entry), and I would be able to trigger the response when the card was placed in my discard pile.)
2) You move an opponent’s card into your playing area “If a card effect allows you to take control of a card.� In the absence of such a card effect, there is no way to move that card into your playing area.
“Put into play under your control� creates a take control effect if the affected card is an out of play card controlled by an opponent. If the affected card is one of your own out of play cards, the “under your control� is redundant.
“Put into play� by itself means that the cards are put into play without any change of control. If they are coming from your hand, deck, or discard pile, they are still under your control when they are put into play. If they are coming from your opponent’s hand, deck, or discard pile, they are still under that opponent’s control.
Hope this helps!
Nate French
Developer
Fantasy Flight Games
FFG Nate wrote:
Hey Guys,
Quick resolution of this scenario, with both players using the same infinite loop to boost a statistic.
Player 1 executes the loop an infinite number of times.
Player 2 executes the loop an infiinite number of times.
With a net gain of infinite occuring on both sides (and cancelling itself out on the other side), resolve the situation as if each player has executed the loop 0 times.
Hope this helps,
Nate French
Developer
Fantasy Flight Games
FFG Nate wrote:
Yes, my example was assuming that the two opposing loops were in conflict with one another, thus creating the state where each time a player states how many times he wants to run his loop, the opponent "one-ups" the number on his own end.
The FAQ ruling on naming a finite value doesn't technically apply to this situation; I'll quote from a PM statement of my own to one of our players:
FFG Nate wrote:
From the rulebook:
"Actions are taken one at a time. After a player has taken and resolved an action, he must allow his opponent the opportunity to take and resolve an action before he can take another, etc."
So, in brief, once an opponent has taken an action, a loop can be resolved again.
The ruling in the FAQ on infiinite loops is there for situations in which an opponent would "pass" between each individual resolution of the loop, to save the time of physically manipulating the cards each time, and having your opponent "pass" each time it is his turn to act.
The "each player has two Cronies" situation is technically not a situation in which the FAQ entry on resolving such an infinite loop is applied.
What happens when each player has two Cronies is this:
Player 1 takes the action once, gaining an icon.
Player 2 takes the action once, gaining an icon.
Player 1 takes the action once, gaining an icon.
Player 2 takes the action once, gaining an icon.
And so on.
You're not going to reach the point where your opponent is going to "repeatedly pass" and have you name how many times you want to execute the loop.
Instead, the game has reached a stalemate, and to resolve this stalemate you ascertain that each player will add an infinite number of icons to their side (if each player says they will never give in and "pass" when it is their turn to act). With the two infinites cancelling each other out, you can proceed as if they do not exist.
So, when the two loops are not in direct conflict, you can apply the "finite value" FAQ rule to each individual loop, and proceed with the game.
When the two loops are in direct conflict, you can each name the value of infinite and proceed as if they cancel each other out.
Nate
FFG Nate wrote:
cannon wrote:
Bernado wrote:
I'm a new player and maybe I was mistaken so I sent a mail to FFG and received an answer from Nate French stating that destroying zero cards wasn't destroying 'all' cards and that at least 1 card must be destroyed to trigger the effect after the then.
Nate is wrong here. "All" can be 0 to many. It has always been that way.
If precedent/common operating procedure in this game is that "all" can equal zero, it was not my intent to change it in answering this question.
With apologies to Bernardo for mis-explaining the situation in the e-mail, I have to stand on the side of the way the game is commonly played and understood.
Sorry for any confusion.
Nate
FFG Nate wrote:
xedric wrote:
Marius wrote:
Anyhow, I would interprete "return to play" as "put into play" in this case. -or- there must be a clause like "entered a discard pile from play this turn."
Exactly.
Since it dont say "entered a discard pile from play this turn" then it dont matter how it got there. All that matters is that it entered discard this phase. It can come from hand, from play, from deck or from a domain.
Play it under the "put into play" understanding, and don't put any special significance on the "return."
FFG Nate wrote:
There is a rule in the Tourney Rules document (see the support page) handling card interpretation conflicts between players. The TO also has the authority to over-rule the FAQ when and if, in that TO's opinion, an error has been discovered.
If a TO made a ruling at a tournament, even if I were there and disagreed with that ruling on the spot, I would not overrule (or even have the authority to overrule) that TO. They are the ultimate "law in the land" at any given Tournament.
That said, we do trust that our TOs will make fair rulings, with the best interest of the game and its players in mind. Mistakes or oversites are one thing, but abuse of the TO power are grounds for dismissal of the TO.
Which isn't to say that any of our judges would ever even think of abusing their power.
Below is the clip from the tourney rules document:
100. Card Interpretation and Rules
Sanctioned tourneys are played using the most
recent rules set and the most updated version of
the official FAQ document, both downloadable
from the CoC website at any time. Cards are
interpreted using the appropriate card rulings on
the most updated FAQ found on the Call of
Cthulhu web site. During sanctioned competition,
players must refer to this version of a card
to settle disputes concerning the interpretation of
a card's wording or powers. Card abilities are
based on card text, not artwork or card titles.
The head judge is the final authority for all card
interpretations, and he or she may overrule the
FAQ when, in his or her opinion, a mistake or
error is discovered.
cannon wrote:
Some of you may know that there's been a ruling in place for quite some time that basically says that the only keyword which is cumulative is Toughness.
The extension to this ruling is that if you gain something like Fast or Willpower from multiple sources, and you also lose it, its still gone. As an example it worked like this:
You have Undercover Security in play (which has Willpower) and your opponent has Temple of Haon-Dor (which takes it away). You play Legacy of Akhnaton (which gives a character Willpower) on the Security, but it doesn't matter, because they still "lose" it.
Essentially, 1+1 = 1 - 1 = 0
So that's the way things stood, and it caused some definite confusion for people, and understandably so. However, that has changed. Nate emailed me and said:
Casey was wrong.
The relevant FAQ entry for this kind of situation is: (any effect that grants or removes a keyword is a lasting effect)
(v.1) Multiple Lasting Effects
Even if not triggered at the same time, multiple lasting effects may affect the same card at the same time. The order in which the lasting effects take place is irrelevant – the net sum result of all lasting effects is applied to the card.
<snip>
Lasting effects that affect other character attributes work in the same fashion.
If you have "Fast" from 3 sources, you still round down to "one" Fast, but if another effect enters the equation, you would recalculate from scratch, and then round to one or 0.
By toughness being cumulative, you simply never round off to one or zero. With the other keywords you do, but when the equation changes you don’t start from the rounded value, you reconsider all lasting effects that are being applied to the card.
Marius wrote:
cannon wrote:
Wow, that ruling is really disappointing. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. To be fair though, the "limbo" zone of my explanation isn't so great.
But wait! There is more!
I wrote:
Hello,
Sorry, but something came up again ^^;
•The Black Pharaoh, Brother to Nitocris
Response: after you play a Ritual event, The Black Pharaoh gains TCAI until the end of the phase.
If FM triggers another FM, appearantly the game state is not stable ever, as it increases the number of Rituals played. I'd say after you get infinite rituals played you get to pick a number for Black Pharaoh (or other Avatars) responses.
Giving and 'infinite' avatar to • Wilbur Whateley, His Father's Son (Action: exhaust Wilbur Whateley and sacrifice a character to discard the top X cards of each opponent's deck. X is the number of A icons of the sacrificed character.) sounds horribly dangerous.
Anyway; How is a stable game state defined? Not that I'm too worried about a Black Pharaoh as it requires quite a setup to go large with him this way, but "stable" is quite something else in this case.
Thanks again,
Marius
FFGNate wrote:
Marius,
Thinking about it with cards in front of me, moving them through the game state, led me to this though:
When you play an event (from your hand), it doesn't immediately go into your discard pile.
This is why February's March works? in the first place. If it went right to your discard pile when you play it, it would never play anything from your discard pileother than itself. A played event card does not actually move to the discard pile until its effect has resolved.
Playing an event from your discard pile is no different than playing it from your hand.
So if one FM plays? a second FM,
the second one (played from your discard pile) is no longer in the discard pile when it looks for another event to play.
It's in the same state? as the initial FM, a state of having been played. Again, a played event card does not actually move to the discard pile until its effects have been resolved.
This is even more clear because of the Then? clause on FM. You do not discard it immediately after playing it. You play FM. You play another event from your discard pile. Then (and only then) do you make a choice: exhaust 2 Lost City support cards, or discard FM.
This should clear up the problem of the passive? infinite loop.
Nate
I wrote:
Hello,
That would make sense; Does this mean that if the FM in the discard pile is the top event, but not the top card (there is a character or support on top of it) that the order of the discard pile changes?
-and if so, what is the order if FM plays FM that plays the next event after complete resolution.
(yeah, I'm a pain, I know
)
Thank again,
Marius
FFGNate wrote:
Yes, playing the FM out of the discard pile would move it to that "played event
? state, and then (if not returned to your hand) to the top of the discard pile.
If multiple cards are discarded at once (i.e. simultaneously), the player controlling the cards chooses the order in which they discard. (Imagine a character with a lot of attachments being discarded from play.)
In this particular case, though, the "Then"? clauses on the FM dictate when everything resolves.
• 1) You play FM (FM1). (opens action window)
• 2) FM1 finds another FM (FM2), which you play. (opens secondary action window, within window opened in step 1)
• 3) FM2 finds a third event (E3), which you play. (opens a tertiary action window, within the one opened in step 2)
• 4) Resolve E3. After its resolution, place E3 in your discard pile.
• 5) Resolution of E3 allows you to resolve the "Then" clause of FM2. Resolution of this clause completely resolves FM2. (FM2 is now discarded or returned to your hand).
• 6) Resolution of FM2 allows you to resolve the "Then"? clause of FM1. Resolution of this clause completely resolves FM1. (FM1 is now discarded or returned to your hand.)
For contrast, in
A Game of Thrones
there is a moribund state for permanent cards and events that leave play during any action window. Cards remain in moribund until the entire action window closes, and then all cards are placed in the proper piles in any order of their owner'¢s choice. So under the moribund ruling, all the cards used above would remain in Moribund until the initial action window (created in step 1) closed.
Fortunately (I'm not a big fan of moribund, as it is unnaturally complex and creates some odd situations) such a rule was never introduced to CoC, and events can move to the discard pile as soon as they are completely resolved.
By the way, these questions are not a pain at all - I learn something about the game trying to figure out what the answer is/should be. J
Take Care,
Nate
So there you go. Events go into a "played" state (not to be confused with an "in play" state) when played, no matter where they are played from and naturally end on top of your discard pile once completely resolved (unless the card, or some effect -I'm pointing at you, Chant of Thoth!- says otherwise.)
Makes sense with the new wording of Chant of Thoth too.
Chant of Thoth
Spell
Action: choose up to 3 Spell of Artifact cards in your discard pile. Until the end of turn you may play those cards as though you were playing them from your hand. If any of the chosen cards are event cards, put them on the bottom of your deck instead of your discard pile after playing them.
Although CoT doesn't need errata anymore because playing a card would put it in discard and thus let the game loose track due to another, newer rules clarification.
So, thank Nate for clearing this all up and have fun playing FM!
Brazier of Nodens Vertiginous Visions
Forced Response:
FFG Nate wrote:
Marius wrote:
FFG Nate wrote:
In the context of this card, the phrase "in the draw phase" is explaining how the cards are drawn, not when. This card only modifies the standard "draw two cards" game effect of the draw phase, and has no interaction with any other cards that are drawn
during
the draw phase, outside of the standard "draw 2 cards" game effect.
Additionally, because of the use of the word "additional," the brazier only modifies the original draw effect (increasing its potency from "draw 2 cards" to "draw 2 + X" cards), it does not create a new draw effect, to which additional responses (of other sorts) could then potentially be triggered.
Nate French
Designer/Developer
Fantasy Flight Games
To be honest, "
Forced Response:
after you draw cards in the draw phase, draw X additional cards. X is the number of Artifact cards you control." seems to be a new instance of drawing the cards. However, I must agree that the "after you draw cards in the draw phase" means the cards you draw automatically.
The difference is that Rice cannot modify the modification, but it can modify an extra triggered effect (forced response: )
Because there seems to be some confusion, note that my previous clarification regards the presence of the word "additional" in the card text, and it is not a commentary that changes anything on how Forced Responses are handled.
To see what I am getting at, compare the following two cards:
BON #1:
Forced Response: after you draw cards in the draw phase, draw X additional cards. X is the number of Artifact cards you control.
BON #2:
Forced Response: after you draw cards in the draw phase, draw X cards. X is the number of Artifact cards you control.
In BON #2, you have a new draw effect. In BON #1 (which is the card we have), you have a modification of the original effect. It is a modification that is happening after the fact, but it is a modification none-the-less.
Here follows the info from the "unanswered questions" thread on the old forums. [
b]Note:
[/b]
these answeres are quite old, and just put here for reference. Any information in the FAQ's will override this. It also states that some problems are being evaluated and there may have been FAQ entries or rulings made after these posts. Use at your own disgression. Answeres may be stated in
bold
text.
Casey wrote:
Greetings all,
In an effort to answer your rules questions, feel free to email me. Note that at times FFG will be out of the office for a short period of time (ex. Origins, Gencon) so it may take 7-10 business days to answer your questions.
In an effort to service our community, any player with a rules question not found in the current FAQ or Rules document may post here. I'll be editing your questions with answers. Every week, I'll be removing questions and adding them to another thread dedicated to questions that aren't covered in the current FAQ.
Remember, please do not post here unless it is a question not covered in the current FAQ or Rules document. Look for my answers in black bold beneath the question. As always, these are subject to change and only the official FAQ is the final word.
Thanks again and have a good day.
Doomlich wrote:
Hi here are some questions I didn't get answered, properly.
I use Chant of Thoth to choose Gathering At The Stones. How many times can I play Gathering until end of phase, since it doesn't leave discard pile? Once or until I spend all my resources.
You can't choose Gathering at the Stones. Chant of Thoth stipulates that a
Spell
or
Artifact
must be chosen.
Academic Conference. How much cards do I actually draw after this story is won? Do I draw a card for each character that was commited this phase during commitment process or do I draw a card only for those characters that survived story resolution?
You draw cards equal to the number of characters that were commited that survived story resolution
.
Thanx.
pwvogt wrote:
I looked but couldn't find a definitive answer on how "Seduction of the Tomb" works. The question is whether or not the character is able to commit to a story after the normal commiting timing. There was a thread on here that was like two pages long, but I didn't see an official answer, so I think we badly need one.
If this was officially answered, just point me in the direction and delete this post.
A character targetted by Seduction of the Tombs may be commited to a story even if the window for commiting has closed. Look for errata/clarification in the next FAQ v1.6
xedric wrote:
Just a reminder of what needs be added to the next FAQ:
Define text box. And like printed icons is clarified in the FAQ so should probably printed text box.
A card's text box is will be defined as any
Subtype
and game text. Flavor text, skill, cost, title, descriptor, rarity, card type and faction symbol are not considered to be part of the text box.
Undefined X is zero. Forgotten Isle on your Slithering Formless Spawn or using Shining Trap on Unspeakable Resurrection in discard pile.
Unless assigned a value, X is equal to zero. Thus, if a Slithering Formless Spawn had its text blanked, it would be skill zero.
Errata Chant of Thoth so that you cant play the same Spell over and over. (Casey has said that you now can play the same Spell over and over, and that will be fixed. IIRC)
This is currently being evaluated.
Witch-Tree. What do you do with the revealed card if its NOT a Shub card? Either errata Witch-Tree or update FAQ with what happens to revealed cards. Or just clarify what happens.
Look for errata in the next FAQ v1.6. For now, place the revealed card back on the top of the deck.
Dream Messenger. Will it get errata or not?? If not, it would be nice to know so that everybody plays it the way it "should" be played.
This is currently being evaluated.
Keeper of the Ancient Ways. Same as above. Will it get errata or not?? If not, it would be nice to know so that everybody knows the possibilities of this card (especially in combo with DM).
This is currently being evaluated.
What did I forget Richard??
Casey wrote:
Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:38 am
Ancient One
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 6
"Deflect Harm" states: Disrupt: cancel the effects of a triggered ability.
Will this work against Ravager from the Deep's forced response? Isn't it still a "triggered ability"?
Yes. However, note that Deflect Harm only works during your operation phase.
"Forced Forclosure" states: Action: Attach Forced Foreclosure to a Location Card. While Forced is Attached, you gain control of that location.
This is an event card, so does this only last for the phase? Otherwise how is it removed?
Please refer to the official FAQ v1.5 under Attached Cards
Strange Ian wrote:
The Unnamable House (R14
Support card, 1 cost
Location
Action: exhaust to move a wound token from a character you control to another character you control.
Can this be used to move a wound token to a character with Invulnerability as it does not wound the character, but simply moves the token? If so, does it destroy that character?
Treat this effect as wounding the character. Thus, you cannot target a character with Invulnerability with The Unnamable House.
casey wrote:
1. Can I sacrifice an opponents card? Doesn't seem as though I ought to, but the rules don't specify.
Please refer to the rules under "Destroy and Sacrifice". You can only sacrifice cards you control.
2. Does the word "transient" which I see on some of my eldritch cards have any rules to go along with it? Or is it merely a keyword for the purposes of being targeted by another card?
Again, refer to the Eldritch Edition rules or updated rules found on the CoC website.
Doomlich wrote:
Burning the midnight oil.
How to play this card? After stories are resolved and there is place to take responses and actions, characters still stay commited, and they don't uncommit until end of turn. However since Burning The Midnight Oil adds new story phase how are those characters treated? Uncommited? Or they are commited during second story phase but I also get chance to commit some more?
Treat characters formally committed as now being removed.