Q. Can an investigator benefit from both the Storm of Spirits Spell and a Weapon Asset?

A. No. The Storm of Spirits Spell allows an investigator to resolve a Lore test in place of the Strength test during a Combat Encounter. If he does, bonuses to his Strength do not apply to the Lore test. However, bonuses to the investigator's Lore apply to the test.

When resolving a Combat Encounter, you may resolve a Lore test in place of the Strength test, using the same modifier.

What is the reasoning behind this ruling, as it contradicts the text on the card (which has not received an errata)?

To me, this clearly reads that modifiers that would have applied to the Strength test for this Combat Encounter are applied to the Lore test instead. Thematically, I would argue that it should be errata'd so that bonuses to Combat Encounters remain, while general "+X Strength " effects do not apply.

A debate that arose in a previous game I have been unable to find an answer to in the Errata/FAQ document.

Conjuration Spell

Test Lore +1. If you pass, you may gain 1 Item or Trinket Asset from the reserve with value equal to or less than your test result.

2+: All of your wishes materialize before your eyes. You may gain any number of Item or Trinket Assets from the reserve with total value equal to or less than your test result.

I argue that you use the 2+ result in place of the effect on the front.

The other player argued that you resolve the front effect, then additionally resolve the effect on the back.

Normally, these types of effects would use the word instead to indicate that the 2+ effect would superseded the effect on the front, which this card does not do. I have been unable to find a rule that supports my position, even though it clearly seems to be what was intended. Should this version of the Conjuration spell be given errata, or does it truly grant both effects when cast?

I'll answer your question best I can.

I believe you are getting confused with the physical card reading "using the same modifier". That is referring to the modifier to the skill test. Example, certain epic monsters will have:

STR -2 test

IE you test with you base strength -2, then factor in your single best +X mod (from lets say Shotgun), and add in any other "roll an additional die" bonuses.

Therefore: The FAQ for Storm of Spirits is indicating that you would replace "STR" with "LORE" and keep the "-2". You would be unable to apply the bonus of a Shotgun (because it adds +STR) but you would be able to add something such as Spirit Dagger (because it adds +LORE)

Regarding your second question, on the Conjuration spell. I believe you are correct. You resolve both the front and the back.

Therefore: if you rolled a total of 3 success. You may gain a single item which costs 3 or less. Then you may gain any number of items summing up to a total cost of 3 or less.

Yep. If the word "instead" is missing, the effect is in addition to anything else that is relevant. This seems to be a general rule.

Examples: Patricia Hathaway closes a gate during an Otherworld Encounter, that generated from the "Fractured Reality" Rumor (go to space 2, as an encounter, draw and resolve an Otherworld Encounter, if you close that Gate solve this Rumor instead ). Result = Patricia does not gain a Clue and Focus.

Number of Players is 4 or less. Kate Winthrop is standing on Buenos Aires. During the Mythos phase, the Mythos Card "Outbreak!" (Effect: Spawn a Zombie Horde Epic Monster on one of the Gates spawned this round, Monster surge on the rest of the Gates that spawned this round) is drawn. during the Spawn Gate step, investigators reveal the Buenos Aires gate. During the Spawn Gate step, Kate Winthrop triggers her ability, which allows her to discard the Gate and gain 1 Clue instead . Result = the Zombie Horde that should be spawned on Buenos Aires is not spawned, since no Gates spawned, because Kate Winthrop negated the "spawn Gate" effect with her ability that uses instead .

15 hours ago, Muspellsheimr said:

A debate that arose in a previous game I have been unable to find an answer to in the Errata/FAQ document.

Conjuration Spell

Test Lore +1. If you pass, you may gain 1 Item or Trinket Asset from the reserve with value equal to or less than your test result.

2+: All of your wishes materialize before your eyes. You may gain any number of Item or Trinket Assets from the reserve with total value equal to or less than your test result.

I argue that you use the 2+ result in place of the effect on the front.

The other player argued that you resolve the front effect, then additionally resolve the effect on the back.

Normally, these types of effects would use the word instead to indicate that the 2+ effect would superseded the effect on the front, which this card does not do. I have been unable to find a rule that supports my position, even though it clearly seems to be what was intended. Should this version of the Conjuration spell be given errata, or does it truly grant both effects when cast?

This is why I always flip a card before resolving the effects. Because sometimes the back of the card changes the outcome. Even though I believe we are instructed to do otherwise in a few instances.

On 1/3/2018 at 11:15 AM, chico2323 said:

I believe you are getting confused with the physical card reading "using the same modifier". That is referring to the modifier to the skill test. Example, certain epic monsters will have:

STR -2 test

IE you test with you base strength -2, then factor in your single best +X mod (from lets say Shotgun), and add in any other "ro

ll an additional die" bonuses.

Therefore: The FAQ for Storm of Spirits is indicating that you would replace "STR" with "LORE" and keep the "-2". You would be unable to apply the bonus of a Shotgun (because it adds +STR) but you would be able to add something such as Spirit Dagger (because it adds +LORE)

The card allows you to use Lore in place of Strength for the Combat Encounter. It does not modify any other aspect of the encounter. As such, the "using the same modifier" text, if it only applies to unconditional modifiers as you & the errata posit, it would be redundant.

Maybe then, it is simply acting as a reminder that those modifiers apply. Well, no.

The text on the card does not distinguish between what types of modifiers, or which sources of modifiers, it is to apply to. Because what modifiers are unspecified, along with the redundant nature should it only apply to universal modifiers, the only valid interpretation as written is that it applies to all modifiers to the Combat Encounter test. That is, you determine which modifiers to apply as though you were making a Strength Combat Encounter test, then you substitute your characters Lore value in place of their Strength value to determine the total.

Given this, I assert that in the absence of errata changing the functionality of the written card, the FAQ ruling is made in error.

What then is the justification for the position of the FAQ? If it is the intended functionality, why did they not issue an errata to the spell instead?

I also contend that with the ruling, while there will certainly be occasions where the spell provides greater benefit than the Combat Encounter bonuses from the other weapons or spells it would be overwriting, those times occur infrequently enough that even including the spell in the game is, on average, a detriment to the players. That is, the reduced chance of acquiring another more generally useful spell outweighs the times it would be beneficial. This is something that should not be the case.

1 hour ago, Muspellsheimr said:

The text on the card does not distinguish between what types of modifiers, or which sources of modifiers, it is to apply to.

It does. Rules reference page 11 "Tests":

"test modifier (the number that follows
the skill icon on the effect)"

And the reasoning behind this ruling is: You're testing lore against strength, so the same modifier applies now to your Lore test, instead of being 0 (no lore)

After reviewing the rules again as suggested, it does appear that the game uses Modifier and Bonus as distinct game terms, despite having no clear indicator of such and them being close synonyms. Very irritating.

I still disagree with that ruling, but at least the reasoning behind it now makes sense. Thank you.

I also still think that this particular version of the Conjuration spell unintentionally left out the word "instead", and never received the intended errata. For now I suppose we will continue using it as written, but can anyone tell me the best way to bring it to the attention of Eldritch Horror development, to either receive an official affirmation it is intended as is, or to get it qued for future errata?

1 hour ago, Muspellsheimr said:

this particular version of the Conjuration spell

All of your wishes materialize before your eyes

Muspellsheimr, Contact Customer Service here. There's a link there that let's you ask questions and bring ambiguous wording up.

The card:

" Test Lore+1. If you pass, you may gain 1 Item or Trinket Asset from the reserve with value equal to or less than your test result.
Then flip this card. "

It doesn't say: Test Lore+1. Then flip this card. Then resolve the effect on the front of the card if you passed the test .

1. do you flip the card after this: Test Lore+1

2. do you flip the card after this: Test Lore+1. If you pass, you may gain 1 Item or Trinket Asset from the reserve with value equal to or less than your test result.

If you chose 1, you made a house rule. Nothing wrong with that, just use it for every card. Flesh Ward becomes pretty useless unless you succeed by 3+.

if you chose 2, you followed the official rules (Cards > Reference Guide > Rulebook) (Poison Mist still works)

4 hours ago, Muspellsheimr said:

it does appear that the game uses Modifier and Bonus as distinct game terms, despite having no clear indicator of such and them being close synonyms

oh come on...

I assume that general ruling with spells goes like this:

RITUAL spells:

Test Lore. If you pass, you resolve the effect on front of the card entirely (f.e. Shrivelling: chosen monster loses 2 health). THEN you flip the card to see if something else would happen (f.e. one other monster loses 2 health also).

INCANTATION spells:

Test Lore. If you pass, you get the benefit in front of the card (f.e. Wither: gain +3 str. during combat encounter), but BEFORE resolving it, you flip the card to see if the effect changes in some way (f.e. gain +5 str. instead).

FAQ:

Q: Can the effects on the front of a double-sided card be used while the card is facedown?

A: No. Only the currently showing face of a double-sided card is relevant. While a double-sided card is facedown, the effects of its front face are ignored and cannot be used.

So in case of Muspellsheimr's Conjuration spell it goes like this:

I assume your test result was 2+. (let's say 3)

1. You gain one item or trinket from the reserve with value equal or less than 3. Then, before replacing a new card in the reserve ('cause the effect is not yet fully resolved), you flip the spell card.

2. "2+: You may gain any number of item or trinket assets from the reserve with total value equal or less than your test result". So, you also may gain one or more items or trinkets from the reserve with value equal or less 3.(remember, there are only three cards left in the reserve...)

After that, you replace cards in the reserve.

Correct me if I'm wrong..

On 1/13/2018 at 2:23 PM, Muspellsheimr said:

I also still think that this particular version of the Conjuration spell unintentionally left out the word "instead", and never received the intended errata.

While the word "instead" should be there I think it was left out intentionally. I'm not willing to dig for the card but I suppose they needed to save a few characters somewhere. This is a relatively common occurrence. The text needs to fit on a small card and the wording is compressed.

21 hours ago, Wizace said:

I assume your test result was 2+. (let's say 3)

1. You gain one item or trinket from the reserve with value equal or less than 3. Then, before replacing a new card in the reserve ('cause the effect is not yet fully resolved), you flip the spell card.

2. "2+: You may gain any number of item or trinket assets from the reserve with total value equal or less than your test result". So, you also may gain one or more items or trinkets from the reserve with value equal or less 3.(remember, there are only three cards left in the reserve...)

After that, you replace cards in the reserve.

Correct me if I'm wrong..

If this text would be written in english language then your interpretation would be correct.
But it's written in eldritch horror jargon which, while very similar to english language, follows different conventions.
The "2+" effect replaces the front side effect in this case.

tl;dr
You are wrong but it's not your fault - the wording is misleading.