The mythos card Pushed into the Beyond from dunwich shuffles an asset into the owners deck and then discards 3 cards from the deck.

1. Are permanent cards legal targets for this card? I couldn't find any rule that would prohibit this.

2. If the permanent card is among the 3 cards drawn from this encounter card, what happens? The rules state, that permanent cards cannot be discarded, so it would be put back on top of the deck or be shuffled in again?

3. If the permanent card stays in the deck and is drawn by the player, can he play it with an action (ressource cost of 0)?

Permanent cards are in play, not in your deck.

From the RR:

A card with the permanent keyword
cannot be discarded by any means.

That does not prevent the Card from being shuffled into the deck or does it?

The only way it *could* get shuffled into your deck is by being discarded. Basically, Permanent assets are just that, permanent, they never go away and you can't lose them, voluntarily or involuntarily.

Did you read my first post? There's an encounter card, that shuffles an asset into your deck then discards 3 cards from the deck. But what happens if you don't have any assets in play yet, so CAN only choose permenant card?

This was discussed on FB a while back, and a clarification from Matt cleared up that permanent cards cannot leave play by any means. It should be corrected in the next FAQ, whenever that might be.

It's in the RR no need for a faq

A card with the permanent keyword cannot be discarded by any means.

Since cards can be discarded from your deck a permanent card can therefore not be shuffled into the deck.

Well "discard" and "shuffle into deck" are two different things in my opinion, or does the RR define "discard" as "leaves play" somewhere"?

The encounter card does not have a 100% chance to discard the card that was shuffled in the deck, so the permanent card might stay there for the rest of the game and the player cannot use it's effect.

As a house rule (before posting here) i treated permenent cards as "immune to any asset effects", as otherwise they make no sense.

30 minutes ago, django042 said:

Well "discard" and "shuffle into deck" are two different things in my opinion, or does the RR define "discard" as "leaves play" somewhere"?

As was noted above, Matt Newman has ruled on this. Permanent means permanent, and cannot leave play by any means.

If you have no non-permanent assets in play, Pushed into the Beyond whiffs. If you have any other assets, you must carry out the card's effect, which includes, "choose and shuffle," so you have to choose a card that is able to be shuffled into your deck if you can.

1 hour ago, Meretrix said:

It's in the RR no need for a faq

A card with the permanent keyword cannot be discarded by any means.

Since cards can be discarded from your deck a permanent card can therefore not be shuffled into the deck.

This isn't true. You are not prevented from doing something to a card because it might enable something else to happen in the future that might be prohibited. If you want to follow this logic, you could say "I can't play Daisy's Necronomicon, because I can't discard a weakness and that one card might make me do it later."

1 hour ago, django042 said:

Well "discard" and "shuffle into deck" are two different things in my opinion, or does the RR define "discard" as "leaves play" somewhere"?

It's an error in the rules, which has been confirmed by the lead designer. It should be "cannot leave play".

3 hours ago, Buhallin said:

If you want to follow this logic, you could say "I can't play Daisy's Necronomicon, because I can't discard a weakness and that one card might make me do it later."

umm no it's not the same thing. Weakness cards are resolved differently depending upon their cardtype. but yes they should have used different phrasing.

5 hours ago, Meretrix said:

umm no it's not the same thing. Weakness cards are resolved differently depending upon their cardtype. but yes they should have used different phrasing.

The point wasn't that they're resolved differently. You were saying "You can't do this, because it might enable something you can't do at some point in the future." That's not a valid argument at all. The rules care only about the game state as it currently exists. If you could shuffle a permanent into your deck then that would be allowed, and the "you can't discard this" rule would only kick in later, when something actually targeted the permanent for a discard.

I don't know, the rules seem pretty clear to me.

No, this is a genuine glitch in the rules. Per RAW, permanents are only immune to being discarded, not shuffled into your deck or bounced to your hand or anything else. A permanent in your hand would then become a dead card for the rest of the scenario, since you can't play it (it has no cost), commit it (it has no icons), or discard it (because of the keyword).

This probably isn't the intent. I imagine that the intended wording is "a card with the Permanent cannot leave play by any means (except the elimination of the controlling player)." Still, just because the intent seems clear to some people doesn't mean it's clear to everyone.

Ok, just say, for giggles like , you put your Permanent card into your deck, as instructed by an encounter card. You then start discarding cards from your deck, the first card you draw is the Permanrnt card. What do you do, since you cannot discard it? Cannot is an absolute, and cannot be countermanded, so your game would just stop!

From the RR, page 4;

4 hours ago, General Zodd said:

I appreciate people want 100% clarity on the rules, but this seems like the intent and logic is fairly easily understood to mean you can never lose Permanent assets in any way. I'm not sure why some here are insisting that these cards don't work like this.

I don't think anyone IS suggesting that, the issue is that RAW don't make this situation clear (and this ambiguity has been confirmed by Matt). Matt has confirmed the intention is for permanents to not leave play for any reason, so that is how we (or my group, at least) are playing.

Yes, this has been addressed by the design team. Permanent cards are just that, permanent. They cannot be discarded, returned to hand, or have anything else happen to them. They're permanently in play until your character leaves play. That also means that if some effect forces you to discard or bounce an Asset in play, you can't choose your Permanents for that effect -- you must choose one that can be removed from play.

On 5/20/2017 at 3:36 PM, Meretrix said:

It's in the RR no need for a faq

A card with the permanent keyword cannot be discarded by any means.

Since cards can be discarded from your deck a permanent card can therefore not be shuffled into the deck.

You've committed a logical fallacy here.

You believe that "If the card can't be discarded, then it cannot be in a state that permits discarding." This is false, as permanents begin in play, and "in play" is a game state from which cards can be discarded. The Permanent keyword simply overrides all effects that would discard the card, and prevents the card from being a valid target for discard effects.

Without the FAQ, the Permanent keyword would indeed allow the card to be shuffled into your deck, or returned to your hand, or removed from the game, or placed underneath the Agenda deck, or sent to the Void, as none of these involve being discarded. That they do not preclude being discarded later is irrelevant; the Permanent keyword would still protect the card in those cases as it is not dependent on being in play.

Specifically, any effect that attempts to discard a Permanent card from your deck would fizzle once the card was revealed.

11 hours ago, General Zodd said:

From the RR, page 4;

"Generally, assets remain in play unless discarded by a card ability or game step."

This would suggest that any removal of an asset in play is tantamount to a discard. As you can't discard Permanent assets, you couldn't lose it out of play in the first place.

I appreciate people want 100% clarity on the rules, but this seems like the intent and logic is fairly easily understood to mean you can never lose Permanent assets in any way. I'm not sure why some here are insisting that these cards don't work like this.

From the RR, page 2:

"If the text of a card directly contradicts the text of either the Rules Reference or the Learn to Play book, the text of the card takes precedence."

Page 9:

"Any time a card is discarded, it is placed faceup on top of its owner's discard pile."

Any effect that does anything other than place a card faceup on top of its owner's discard pile is not discarding the card.

Game rules aren't written to be interpreted based on "intent." They're written to be ironclad and have no wiggle room.

4 hours ago, Xenu's Paradox said:

You've committed a logical fallacy here.

You believe that "If the card can't be discarded, then it cannot be in a state that permits discarding." This is false, as permanents begin in play, and "in play" is a game state from which cards can be discarded. The Permanent keyword simply overrides all effects that would discard the card, and prevents the card from being a valid target for discard effects.

Without the FAQ, the Permanent keyword would indeed allow the card to be shuffled into your deck, or returned to your hand, or removed from the game, or placed underneath the Agenda deck, or sent to the Void, as none of these involve being discarded. That they do not preclude being discarded later is irrelevant; the Permanent keyword would still protect the card in those cases as it is not dependent on being in play.

Specifically, any effect that attempts to discard a Permanent card from your deck would fizzle once the card was revealed.

Fizzle? What do you mean? So what happens next, since you cannot discard the card, what do you do?

11 hours ago, unitled said:

I don't think anyone IS suggesting that, the issue is that RAW don't make this situation clear (and this ambiguity has been confirmed by Matt). Matt has confirmed the intention is for permanents to not leave play for any reason, so that is how we (or my group, at least) are playing.

Having chatted about this discussion topic with a friend who is *far* more LCG-literate than I am, I now realise my comment was based on a different perspective than most posting here. I come primarily from a role play and miniature gaming background, where a little (often, quite a lot!) interpretation is expected in the rules given the wide range of possible situations you may encounter. As a result, arguments of this kind in those games would be to ensure we're all playing the rule correctly, rather than being conducted on an academic point of principle.

I now realise the exactitude and precision expected of LCG rules, and my esteem for the development team behind Arkham has only risen given the very few instances where there has been debate on points like this!

41 minutes ago, Daft Blazer said:

Fizzle? What do you mean? So what happens next, since you cannot discard the card, what do you do?

If it were possible (which, yet again, it's not - it's been clarified that you can't shuffle them in)...

Honestly, I'm not sure It would depend on whether the keyword is considered active while it's not in play. I tend to think it's not, so it would actually discard just fine. But since it can't happen, I'm honestly not interested in digging through the rules to try and figure out how to play something that can't happen

(I think this is why most abilities would be phrased like "Reveal the top card. If it's an X, discard it, otherwise put it back")

5 hours ago, Daft Blazer said:

Fizzle? What do you mean? So what happens next, since you cannot discard the card, what do you do?

The discard effect fails to resolve, as well as any conditional effects dependent on the discard effect.