So...today while playing a solo test game between my Cthulhu - Yog deck and my Hastur - Agency Steps deck...I had a weird situation happen that I was not sure how to play out, so I thought I'd ask you guys.

Basically...the Cthulhu boys were happy, having just gotten a Ravager out, even though they were behind 2-Stories to 0 to the Agency/Steps nastiness.....and they thought they could slow down the enemy and get some other stuff out to contest some of the stories.

However, they had misfortune as the Agency next draw of cards was Blind Submission (and something else I cannot recall). So I got to the start of the Story Phase for Agency/Hastur deck and said "I am going to play Blind Submission on your Ravager of the Deep" - now I take control of him until the end of this (Story) phase ! I picked him up and put him on my side of the board ....and began to do my committals to stories.

However...I suddenly realized something.... I had an Undercover Security in play (I had just payed for them and put them out, before playing the Blind Submission). They are classed as "Heroic". The Ravager I had just gained control of is listed as "Villainous".

Now...page 11 of the Rulebook says "If for any reason a player controls both a Heroic character and a Villainous character at the same time, he must immediately choose one to be discarded".

This seemed ....wrong to me...since it seemed like I would be able to say, "Well I will just Discard (put into the owners discard pile) the Ravager, and keep my Undercover Security".....effectively Destroying the Ravager with a single Blind Submission card. If this is accurate, then a similiar deck with Demon Lovers (exhaust to reduce a character's Skill by -2 per Demon Lover used)....and Blind Submissions would be particularly ridiculous as just one -for example - could reduce the Skill of someone like Y'Golanac to 2 (from 4 natural) ....and you could then "Blind Submission" them over, then discard them because you have a Heroic character on your side...allowing you to effectively destroy Invulnerable Ancient Ones in such a sneaky fashion. . . ?

Did I miss something obvious here ?

Checked the FAQ ?

At work, so can't check it myself, but IIRC, it touches on the issue.

Well, the rulebook isn't very clear on that, but personally I'd play it so that you can't take control of a villainous character when you already control a heroic one.

From the FAQ:

Note that if you already control a Heroic character, you cannot take control of a Villainous character, and vice versa.

Ah - thanks for pointing this out, Professor. I had thought ....but couldn't recall for sure - if I'd asked this before...and so included it in my Questions List #3....oh well, I suppose it will get answered there in the same way :-) But thanks, nonetheless. Good ol' FAQ. I am surprised how certain things they do answer there...yet how many things they don't answer or rule on in a curious way (G-Pillar // Endless Int. // etc) .

Rosh87 said:

My eyes just glaze over when looking at your list of questions. It's also difficult to discuss several questions in parallel without getting confused.

Sorry Rosh, but I have to agree with jhaelen. It is often difficult to decipher and discuss your points. The thread becomes jumbled and loses good formatting due to this sites rather odd quote feature.

You ask good questions though so I encourgage you to keep it up. But I think your enthusiasm may be getting the best of us.

To Jhaelen - I DO - post just one question per thread - generally - with a specific exception - my "New Player Question List" - in which I usually do 10 at once. It makes a lot more sense, and clutters the forum up far less, to ask all the questions my playing group has accumulated in a 2-3 weeks' period - all in one thread.

To do it your suggested way, would have me doing 10-separate posts, each with its own question - which is ridiculous, with all due respect

You are free not to look at any of the questions I ask in that once-per-few-weeks 10-question collection, if it hurts your head, or causes your eyes to glaze over, or whatever other ailment might strike you..... but if a segmented handful of paragraphs, totaling about 6.5 pages of text (I checked in Microsoft Word) is too much for you....I would have to ask how you would ever be able to handle even the shortest of Lovecraft's stories...or, indeed, any other book or newspaper in existence.

-

Secondly - continuing this discussion - my friend and I thought of something last night, that might throw a potential wrench into the "neat and tidy" FAQ answer....and that is "Tyler Scindere, Bounty Hunter" - the unique Syndicate Character from the Whispers in the Dark, Asylum Pack. I think he may have been released AFTER the FAQ was published / updated last ...but am not entirely sure.

In any case, Tyler's text allows you to have "both Heroic and Villainous characters in play at the same time" - and he, himself, is both Heroic AND Villainous.

So, if you had Tyler in play on your side of the table, in a dual Syndicate - Hastur deck....and you then played Blind Submission on a Ravager from the Deep....would you THEN be able to Sacrifice it as part of another card effect you had in play ?

The main thing I am thinking of is "The Yuggoth Contract, Nefarious Pact " - card, appearing in that same Whispers in the Dark expansion. That card is an "Item / Attachment" costing 1-neutral resource to play, and having the following text: Attach to a character you control. Attached character gains "Action: Pay 1 and sacrifice a character to draw 2 cards ."

If you had this in play, on another character, or even attached to Tyler Scindere....and you then took control of a Ravager (since Tyler allows you to ignore the restriction on Heroic // Villainous) - could you then Sacrifice the just taken-over character using Yuggoth Contract ?

Or ....I guess I could say it a different way - ignoring even the issue of Heroic // Villainous...which is.....when you take control of a character because of a card or card effect (such as Blind Submission).... can you then do whatever you want with it, while it is under your control..... INCLUDING Sacrificing it per the Yuggoth Contract wording....to get rid of an opponent's Character - AND - at the same time (in the case of Yuggoth) draw 2-cards for your troubles !?

Thoughts ?

Cards over-ride Rules, so Tyler lets you ignore the standard rules on Villainous/Heroic.

When you take control of a character (Blind Submission or whatever), it is considered as YOUR character. So sure - go ahead and sacrifice it. Not a problem.

Rosh87 said:

The thing is: If you don't find it's worth your time to post a rules question as succinct as possible, then I don't find it's worth my time to answer your question. Some of your questions can be easily answered by reading the FAQ. Again, if you are unwilling to to take the time to try finding answers to your questions before posting them here, why should anyone else bother to invest the time?

If it takes you a whopping 6.5 pages to ask a couple of beginner questions I would have to ask you how you would ever be able to handle writing even the shortest short story, newspaper article or report without using a word count approaching novel size

Adding extraneous information to a post will not make it easier to read.

But I'm just going to follow your advice and stop reading anything you write before it hurts my brain. Have a nice day!

Let me take a step back here, and say - I didn't mean to sound as....condescending as I might have....but it annoyed me that you seemed to imply all the questions / posts I've asked are of some massive and unreadable length, when - in fact - the only ones that are like that (3-total) have been the ones where I set out to ask 10-questions at once, after accumulating them over a multi-week period.

I also said (in another thread here on the rules forum) today that I have always heard (from other Forums I have been a member at) that it is considered bad Forum Etiquette for someone to post multiple times....all about (generally) the same thing.

In other words...in a Modern Warfare 2 or some other FPS-genre game.... it would be fine for someone to post a thread titled: "My Thoughts on the Weapons in this Game" ....and then have a single post with 10-15 different firearms with that persons descriptions and feelings on each, with perhaps some questions to other members like "What do you guys think of this rocket launcher ?" (example).

It is considered BAD etiquette if instead that guy made 15-different posts each saying 1.) My Thoughts on the Sniper Rifle, 2.) My Thoughts on the Pistol, 3.) My Thoughts on the Missile Launcher.... 4.) - etc etc .

So the idea that I should naturally assume (on this forum) that it is .....desired...for me (or anyone with multiple questions) to actually flood the page with 10- separate -posts, each on a single different question - just never occurred to me and is, as I said, quite opposite any Forum "rules" I've ever known.

Secondly...while some of the questions I have asked have been addressed in the FAQ, many have not - and it always helps to have other players point out things that are an error (like the FAQ's wording on the Jack Brady matter = Shotgun Blast - when it "should" have been Shotgun (the attachment)), or perhaps unclear in some way. And, if you notice, the bulk of this (and the other) multi-question posts have been "in-game context" that I purposely tried to lay out to explain to those who might answer the question, the scenario we were facing as we approached the situation that gave us pause.

It was done as a potential courtesy to those reading the thread, and not intended as an obstruction to their ease of reading it. Since others have mentioned it is hard for them to follow, at times, I have said in the future that I'll try to - not - include those "in-game descriptions" - and just have the actual rules-based question for review.

So...hope you understand where I was coming from (originally) and accept my slimy Hasturian-tentacle in forum friendship !