https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2017/6/6/echoes-of-the-past/

Interesting, so if I read it right the phrase "Limit 1 Composure in Play" limits the entire table to just one. If it used the term "Limit 1 Composure in Play Per Player", it would be one per player.

Assuming what I said is correct, that means if another player plays a composure, that would knock yours off the table (just like hand slot limitations).

8 minutes ago, Jobu said:

Interesting, so if I read it right the phrase "Limit 1 Composure in Play" limits the entire table to just one. If it used the term "Limit 1 Composure in Play Per Player", it would be one per player.

Assuming what I said is correct, that means if another player plays a composure, that would knock yours off the table (just like hand slot limitations).

RR Page 14: Unless stated otherwise, limits are player specific.

A limit for the whole table would be a Group Limit.

Just like on many location cards for scenarios, they have "limit once per game" and "Group limit once per game". I'd say it's pretty clear that the limit only applies to the player who is playing it.

The reason I am getting confused is that some cards like Lone Wolf state "Limit one per investigator" while other cards like the the above state "Limit one composure in play" which implies there is a difference as there is a difference in wording.

Anyway of more interest is this quote from the article:

"The choice—along with so many others—will be yours to make when Echoes of the Past (AHC12) makes its way to retailers in the third quarter of 2017!"

Q3 is July, Aug, Sept. Since we know that "Lost in Time and Space" is coming out in July, this implies (but in no way guarantees) that Path to Carcossa will be out in July Aug and this mythos pack will be out in Sept.

1 hour ago, Jobu said:

Q3 is July, Aug, Sept. Since we know that "Lost in Time and Space" is coming out in July, this implies (but in no way guarantees) that Path to Carcossa will be out in July and this mythos pack will be out in Sept.

I believe it would be "Lost in Time and Space" in July, "Path to Carcosa" in August, and finally this "Echoes of the Past" will arrive in September.

13 minutes ago, mborda said:

I believe it would be "Lost in Time and Space" in July, "Path to Carcosa" in August, and finally this "Echoes of the Past" will arrive in September.

thanks, fixed my post.

I highly suspect Path to Carcosa will be a Gen Con (August) release.

3 hours ago, Ryric said:

I highly suspect Path to Carcosa will be a Gen Con (August) release.

Yes, for the gen con visitors. The rest of us usually need to wait a month or so. So probably September before it his retailers

Cardhaus has a listed release date of September 30th.

So it says "Non-direct horror must be assigned to Plucky before it can be assigned to your investigator card."

I take this to mean that you can still assign the horror to an Ally if you have one in play, correct?

thats how I see it, you could also assign it to another asset with Sanity, such as the Elder Sign Amulet.

Did anyone confirm that the Plucky limit is per investigator (despite not specifying per investigator like Lone Wolf and Dark Horse do)?

- ignore, was thinking of something else -

1 hour ago, Adira said:

Did anyone confirm that the Plucky limit is per investigator (despite not specifying per investigator like Lone Wolf and Dark Horse do)?

Limits, pg 14: Unless stated otherwise, limits are player specific.

Nothing says per group, so it's per investigator. The ones that say "per investigator" are redundant.

11 hours ago, Buhallin said:

Limits, pg 14: Unless stated otherwise, limits are player specific.

Nothing says per group, so it's per investigator. The ones that say "per investigator" are redundant.

"Limit 1 Composure in play." (emphasis mine) is specifically saying that the limit is not per investigator.

40 minutes ago, Khudzlin said:

"Limit 1 Composure in play." (emphasis mine) is specifically saying that the limit is not per investigator.

I don't think so. Per the RRG bit I quoted, unless something specifically states that it's not player specific, it's player specific. So "Limit 1 in play" means "Limit 1 in play for you as a player".

14 minutes ago, Buhallin said:

I don't think so. Per the RRG bit I quoted, unless something specifically states that it's not player specific, it's player specific. So "Limit 1 in play" means "Limit 1 in play for you as a player".

What I think is that "in play" is specific enough, same as "Max 1 committed per skill test" on the double-icon skills (there's no "group" in that text either, but the max applies to the group nonetheless).

Limit and max are different though. Maybe they think that putting "limit 1 composure per investigator" may make the player think that they can only put 1 kind of composure card in their deck so they put "in play" instead.

4 hours ago, Buhallin said:

I don't think so. Per the RRG bit I quoted, unless something specifically states that it's not player specific, it's player specific. So "Limit 1 in play" means "Limit 1 in play for you as a player".

I think "in play" applies the "unless otherwise stated" part of the Limit definition. "Limit X per" is defined as an "in play" restriction, so if it was per investigator, it would say that, just like Dark Horse. Or it would say nothing, since as you say, "per investigator" is redundant because of the Limit definition.

57 minutes ago, CSerpent said:

I think "in play" applies the "unless otherwise stated" part of the Limit definition. "Limit X per" is defined as an "in play" restriction, so if it was per investigator, it would say that, just like Dark Horse. Or it would say nothing, since as you say, "per investigator" is redundant because of the Limit definition.

You might be onto something here. Based on the description of "In Play and Out of Play," it sounds like all the cards all the investigators control in their play area are "in play." So "limit 1 composure in play" could definitely imply that only one investigator could have one composure in play at a time.

I really hope FFG clears this up when they release this mythos pack.

9 hours ago, Khudzlin said:

What I think is that "in play" is specific enough, same as "Max 1 committed per skill test" on the double-icon skills (there's no "group" in that text either, but the max applies to the group nonetheless).

Maximums and Limits are not the same:

“Limit X per [card/game element]” is a limit that appears on attachment cards, and restricts the number of copies of that card (by title) that can be attached to each designated card or game element.
=Unless stated otherwise, limits are player specific.

...
“Max X per [period]” imposes a maximum across all copies of a card (by title) for all players.

"In play" is the [card/game element] in question here. It doesn't make the limit apply to all investigators any more than "Limit 1 something attached to this card" would.

4 hours ago, Adira said:

You might be onto something here. Based on the description of "In Play and Out of Play," it sounds like all the cards all the investigators control in their play area are "in play." So "limit 1 composure in play" could definitely imply that only one investigator could have one composure in play at a time.

The templating for Limits is "Limit X per Y". They're following the templating, but that doesn't make the specific text somehow imply something outside the rules. "Limit 1" and "Limit 1 per investigator" are functionally equivalent, but they add the "per investigator" to follow the pattern. Likewise, "Limit 1 Composure" and "Limit 1 Composure in play" are functionally equivalent, it's just structured that way to follow the template.

Remember that the golden rule of card interactions is that abilities only override things when they do so specifically. Default rule is that limits are per investigator. Does the text on Composure do anything to explicitly change that? Nope. So it doesn't.

10 hours ago, Khudzlin said:

"Limit 1 Composure in play." (emphasis mine) is specifically saying that the limit is not per investigator.

While it could be read that way, there is already a convention for group limits, and this formulation doesn't introduce any additional nuance to that.

There's no particular reason to think FFG just arbitrarily decided to use"in play" over the RRG-established "group limit" to indicate that this is a group limit on composures. Wording for "per investigator," OTOH, isn't specified by the rules, except to state that it's per investigator unless otherwise stated.

Cards override rules when there is a direct contradiction. That isn't the case here, so the limit is investigator, not group.

I just have to wonder why some cards specify "limit X per investigator", while others don't, if they are meant to imply the exact same thing. If all limits are automatically "per investigator", then why do some cards include that wording? And if some cards do and other cards don't, it implies there is something different about them. What's the difference? If they are the same, then why doesn't this card read "Limit 1 Composure per investigator"? Or why doesn't Lone Wolf say "Limit 1 in play"?