Final value of failed skill tests never negative - where can I find this rule?

By ParinorB, in Arkham Horror: The Card Game

I am uncertain about the final value of a failed skill test, and that becomes relevant for things like the shotgun, or grasping hands

The FAQ on the flashlight basically states that a difficulty of 0 for a test means that I always succeed at a test (except for the auto-fail token). This means that any end result of a test that is negative is counted as being 0. For example, I have a skill value of 3 and draw a -6 token. The test result is considered to be 0.

However, I fail to find the relevant place in the rules, where that is written? In the reference p 26 at the bottom it says:

"If the investigator’s skill value is less than the difficulty for this test, the investigator fails at the test.

  • If an investigator automatically fails at a test via a card ability or revealing the [tentacle] symbol, his or her total skill value for that test is considered 0."

This, to me, does not explicitly say that the result for the test with a modified value of, say, -3 (from above example) is considered 0. It just states that for auto-failed tests, the result is considered 0 but a normal modification to a skill value is not an auto-fail as far as I understand. Anyone know where this is made clear?

RR p.15, under "Modifiers".

A quantity on a card (such as a stat, an icon, a number of instances of a trait or keyword) cannot be reduced so that it functions with a value below zero. Negative modifiers in excess of a value’s current quantity can be applied, but, after all active modifiers have been applied, any resultant value below zero is treated as zero.

Edited by CommissarFeesh

Ahhhh perfect! Thanks for the clarification.

I have the feeling that is one rule that should be put in the "learn to play" or in some more obvious place. If I hadn't read the FAQ on Flashlight, I would not have noticed this rule. In the learn to play it says, "read the reference when you are getting stuck or have a question". I would argue it is easy to never wonder about negative modifiers and never wanting to look them up.