How would both these cards operate off 1 reaction and 1 token pull?

My assumption is, because they both resolve the chosen tokens you could not do one after the other.

My other assumption is that you would simultaneously use both triggers off the "instead of 1 token".

So there's 3 options I can see...

You can only use McBride or the Statue for a reveal, not both. Which goes against the rules but is logical.

You can use both off the "revealed instead of 1" ruling, which means you draw 4 tokens and resolve The grotesque statue first, then Mcbride as to not change the amount of potential choices.

You can use both at the same time and draw 5 tokens all together, and choose 2 to resolve.

Any thoughts on this conundrum?

I think the main question is whether Grotesque Statue can be used multiple times on a single check?

Also, what exactly does the word resolve mean? Can you ignore (via Olive) a token which has already been resolved (via the Statue)? Does resolved mean the effects of the token are directly applied to the test results, or just that the token is considered to be the one drawn from the bag?

I think it might work something like this:

Example:

1. Use Olive to draw 3 and keep 2.

2. On the first token pull, use Grotesque Statue to draw 2 keep 1 (let's say I draw -2 and 0 and keep the 0)

3. On the second token pull, use Grotesque Statue to draw 2 keep 1 (let's say I draw auto-fail and Cultist, keep the Cultist)

4. On the third token pull, I don't use Grotesque Statue (let's say I draw -4)

5. Now I can choose between (Cultist / 0), (Cultist / -4), or (0 / -4)

I also think you can use them in the opposite order, although just about the only time this might be worth doing is if you draw the Auto-fail as the first token?

Ex:

1. Use Grotesque Statue to draw 2 and choose

2. On the first token, draw the auto-fail

3. On the 2nd token, exhaust Olive to Draw 3 and Keep 2

4. You can still choose between the Auto-Fail and whatever Olive got (maybe auto-fail is "better" if Olive drew Tablet/Cultist/Skull or something )

Both cards replace revealing one token with revealing more than one token. Since they both still reveal tokens, you absolutely can play them off each other. It gets confusing, though, because to keep things honest, you want to know which tokens come from which draw for which card. You'd also need to declare ahead of the draw what you're doing, just like you can't draw a token then decide to use Grotesque Statue on it.

So you could say, "I'm using Olive for this draw, and I'm using one Grotesque Statue charge on one of the draws". You would then draw two (the Grotesque draw, replacing one Olive draw), one, and one (the other two Olive draws). Then you'd choose one of the group of two to keep (the Grotesque Statue effect), and finally, from the remaining three, you'd keep two (Olive's effect)

Conversely, you could say "I'm using Grotesque Statue and I'm using Olive on one of the tokens". You'd draw one (the first Grotesque draw), and then three more (the second Grotesque, replaced by Olive's three). Of the three, you would keep two, and then you would keep either those two or the other Grotesque one.

Could you use both Olive and Grotesque Statue in reaction to the initial "reveal a chaos token", thereby revealing a group of three tokens and picking two and a group of two tokens and picking one, then resolving all three of the tokens chosen?

I'm not sure doing this would ever actually make sense, I'm just curious.

9 minutes ago, Assussanni said:

Could you use both Olive and Grotesque Statue in reaction to the initial "reveal a chaos token", thereby revealing a group of three tokens and picking two and a group of two tokens and picking one, then resolving all three of the tokens chosen?

I'm not sure doing this would ever actually make sense, I'm just curious.

I don't think so. "when you would" replaces the original trigger, so only one of them could react to it. For the other, the trigger never happened.

Edit: Confirming, here's the rule, under "Instead":

Quote

• If a replacement effect that uses the word "would" changes the nature of a triggering condition, the original triggering condition is replaced with the new triggering condition. No further abilities referencing the original triggering condition may be used.

Each one can, though, trigger off of the other card's new token reveals, as those are new, different triggers.