danach81 said:

On that one I'd say yes.

Yes, what? There are two parts to that question...

To me that's one question,but yes, they would both trigger IMO.

The problem is to know if "commit" and "committed" means the same thing with the same timing.
I commit a character, then he is committed for example. Julia has a Forced Response when she commits not when she is already committed. So it depends how a player understand the timing between "commit" and "committed".

Agree with Dadajef. to me there is a difference between commiting a character (we know what happens in this case - exhaustion, ability triggers) and coming into play committed. To me and my use of English, the latter means there was no "Commit" step. If so, then there are no triggers - no exhaustion, no Forced Response.

"Commit" and "committed" are differents gametexts.

I still don't know if the character that commes into play "committed" has to exhaust or not, as you exhaust your characters once you commit them ! The FAQ indeed lakes a precision on this point ! But I tend to rules like the Professor .

Dadajef said:

Thanks Prodigee, Professor, Jhaelen, et al. for your invaluable input. This game has a great community of gamers, which really helps make this game what it is. (And as a side note, I couldn't imagine doing as you do in French, so doubly thanks.)

I hope FFG makes a new FAQ soon.

Hi FFG,

I have a rules question.

In the FAQ it clearly states that when an action (an event or a card ability) has the template ' "do x" TO "do y" ' the "do x" part is considered an (additional) cost to play the card / use the effect.
As an example: when playing Pulled Under, one should pay the card cost (0 in this case), and then exhaust one character TO blahblah. Since exhausting the character is part of the cost, that implies that if the effect is canceled, the cost is still payed.

Does it also imply that you can only exhaust a character you control to pay the cost ?
The answer to this question is nowhere to be found in the rulebook or the faq, and even though i think the answer is untuitivly clear (that you cannot use cards that someone else controls to pay for your own effects), an official ruling would be very helpful, not only for Pulled Under in partilcular, but for the 'Do x TO do y'-template for additional costs in general.

In the same vein:

What to make of Bootlegging Operation ?
When I opened the pack and saw it for the first time I was like "Wow, a good way to get rid of, say, an opposing Guardian Pillar, and drawing a card in the process as well !"
(also see Professor's post indicating the same, here: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=35&efcid=4&efidt=362424 )

However, now i'm thinking that, because of the "do x" TO "do y"-template on this card, you can only use the ability from BO when it's attached to a location you control ... Am I understanding this right, and does BO only make sense when playing it on a location you control ? That definately makes BO less playable, than for example Forced Foreclosure, which simply steals a location.

Was this intentional / Is this the way we should play BO ?
Or did it follow the 'Do x TO do y'-template 'by accident' and should it be erratad to make the 'exhaust'-part' and the 'draw one' part to be two seperate effects (like: Exhaust BO to exhaust attached location and draw one from the bottom of your deck') ?

Kind regards,

Thomas

Bootlegging Operation

Type: Support
Cost: 2
Subtype: Attachment
Game text: Attach Bootlegging Operation to a Location support card.
Action: exhaust attached location card to draw 1 card from the bottom of your deck.

Pulled Under

Type : Event
Cost : 0
Subtype :
Game Text : Action: Exhaust a character with at least 2 T icons to choose and destroy an exhausted non-Ancient One characte

I have been asking the same six rules questions for a month using the Rules Question link on the bottom of this page. Why can't general question be answered in a timely manner? The playerbase should not need to wait for a FAQ update to receive basic rules clarifications. Please provide us with an actual working mechanism where we can get answers to critical rules questions. If FFG can do it for AGoT then...

Hey Mr. Hata! I request that you explain how Doppleganger works. There seems to be some argument over whether it can copy coming into play abilities. This needs to be addressed officially. Thank you.

In the current FAQ there's a firm definition of what it means to 'Win'. I could use the same treatment of 'Lose'.

Specifically, can a player Lose a given struggle if he has not commited any characters to the Story?

Regards!

K xx

www.fantasyflightgames.com/ffg_content/coc/support/coc-faq%20Ver%201.3-print-friendly.pdf

faq 1.3 Agree 100% with the modifications and explanations.

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=37&efcid=4&efidt=431736

Quite open discussion on how to apply lowered costs.

Secrets of Arkham:

The Greatest Fear...

Spawn of Madness

The Greatest Fear

See the difference? Despite my total willingness to abuse this by playing 6x The Greatest Fear last week if SoM were legal I assume that this was a mistake and the reprint was supposed to have the "..." and is actually supposed to be the same card.

Magnus Arcanis said:

To be honest, I am a bit irritated that they didn't replace the SOM cards that have already been reprinted for the LCG with something new (or a different reprint...). What am I supposed to do with them?

jhaelen said:

decorate your room with them?

... Just a suggestion.

jhaelen said:

Build 2 decks that use them?

Eldrich Nexus proxies?

Donation to a new player?

Prizes for a small local tournament?

Shoebox liner?

Arts and Crafts? Oh... I know. Cut/fold it in a way so it looks like a monster miniature with a floating title above it to scare you're opponents with their greatest fear!

Brilliant!

So is there no more Restricted List? Or will there be one?

As far as I know, the restricted and banned lists have not been changed.

I see no Restricted List here, but I see Aspiring Artist as a banned card which is new for me.

javascript:void(0);/*1319203288798*/

Take another look and see if the problem is still there. I just looked and both files are now marked 2.0.1 and have both a restricted and banned list in them.

Hi,

I am new to the game and I've been playing the core set + arkham secrets + silver twilight a few times. My problem is that I did not find a rule clarification on the card "shotgun" (core set, F14) regarding the following issue:

When I commit a character with shotgun attached to a story, can I, then, trigger the action of shotgun, which reads "Action: pay 1 to choose and wound a character committed to that story", multiple times ? For example, if I have 2 non-drained resources, can I execute the action of shotgun twice and wound two characters of my opponent? [Additional question: Is the shotgun after executing this action still attached to the character?]

I did not read any information that indicated otherwise. However, I believe that a multiple executions of shotgun are quite extreme, so that playing with agency seems to result in unbalanced games with an advantage for agency.

I saw some discussion on the boards, but this was in my eyes not decisive. An official ruling would be extremely helpful.

Many thanks in advance!

Bearer of the Yellow Sign

Bearer of the Yellow Sign said:

Welcome to the game! A minor point - this would have been better served as a new thread in the rules section. Anyway - to your question:

You are correct that you can use the shotgun as many times as you can pay the cost. This is true of any Action in the game.

The shotgun is a nice card, but it an attachment - if the character carrying the shotgun goes insane or is wounded, or exhausted so that he can't go to a story, then the shotgun is not useful. Also it is necessary to keep open domains, which means you did not use them for something else...

An official ruling is not needed specifically on Shotgun. The FAQ tell us that to perform Actions we must pay the costs and have legal targets. Other than that there are no restrictions on the number of times an Action can be executed. Some Actions require the card to exhaust, which puts some limitations on the frequency of use (you'd have to find a way to ready the card before using it a second time), but in general there are no restrictions in the rule book, so this doesn't really need an official ruling. Check out section 2.4: Paying Costs in the most recent FAQ.

Dear TheProfessor,

Many thanks for the clarification. Also my apologies for posting on this thread. Since I have some questions/comments, which directly refer to your reply, I do not know what else to do than to put them here.

Please let me explain why I think that shotgun gives a very strong advantage. Please correct me, if I do not apply the rules correctly.

In the games I played, it often hapened that one cannot play more than one action/character/support card. Since shotgun costs only 1, one could use all remaining domains. [Question: Can I only execute use shotgut with domains containing agency? Does a restriction to faction costs also apply for other support card actions (e.g. blackmore estate; core set, F114) and character actions (visiting author; core set, F26)?]

Suppose I use agency and miskatonic u and commit some characters, with one character having shotgun attached to a story as active player. Suppose further (as described above) that I have two non-drained domains. Since actions can be played after my opponent attaches her characters, I can - except my opponent has e.g. a disruption action - choose and wound 2 of her characters attache to the story, before the story struggles are resolved. This has quite extreme effect on the side of the opponent, since in most cases the opponent might not able to defend or lose some important characters of her by being wounded. Furthermore, if I take some additional characters with me, I might just let one go insane and the other be destroyed (the latter of which is unlikely if I use agency, who excel at combat). However, taking out two characters of the opponent of my choosing really turned the stories struggles and also effectively the whole game to my advantage, since I leave the opponent only the choice between loosing important characters of her or not committing characters to stories for defense at all.

The same mechanism also works for "defending" stories as passive player.

Moreover, support cards, characters and actions which allow one to get rid of an attachment are relatively spare in the core set and, thus, my opponent is very likely not able to stop that mechanism for quite some turns.

Best,

Bearer of the Yellow Sign

P.S.: Next time I will start such a discussion in the rules section by starting a thread. Can we, nevertheless, move the discussion to the "official" rule section?