The reason this question came up in a game yesterday was the Performance Artist (Core Set 87) ability:

Disrupt : Sacrifice Performance Artist to cancel the effects of a character or support card ability.

Now the question is: Could this ability be used to (temporarily) cancel passive effects?

One example for such a passive effect would be the Chess Prodigy (Summons of the Deep 25) :

When Chess Prodigy commits to a story on your turn, name a struggle type. Resolve that struggle type at that story by counting (I) icons instead of that struggle type's normal icons at that story this phase. The normal struggle effects still apply.

The FAQ indicates that this indeed an effect:

"This type of passive effect that is based on a trigger, will last until the end of the turn when the trigger is met."

So, I think it should be possible to use the Performance Artist's ability to prevent the Chess Prodigy's ability from working.

For an even less clear example consider Alaskan Sledge Dog (Mountains of Madness 16) :

Alaskan Sledge Dog gains a © icon and +1 skill for each card titled Alaskan Sledge Dog in play.

So, could you use Performance Artist to cancel this effect until the end of the turn? Or would this not be possible since there's not even an implicit trigger involved?

On p.15 of FaQ 1.2, last para of Actions, Disrupts and Responses.

"Passive abilities are "always on" and activate whenever the circumstances of their text would indicate. The main difference between a passive ability and a forced response is that the forced response can be cancelled."

To me that means that the artist's disrupt cannot cancel a passive ability, only a triggered ability. I'm not sure though - as your example shows, there are a lot of odd potential interactions given PP's reticence to give clear and definitive rules definitions of the terms they use (like ability, effect, triggered vs passive etc). The FaQ deals with a lot of these, but not all.

yes the only way to turn off a passive effect is to destroy the card or blank its text.

For the chess Prodigee the real problem is not to have make an errata for the card itself and make it as a Response (like the others cards working like him, see Dimensional Worm (The Terror of the Tides F73) for example) to avoid to introduce this strange rule about a 'triggered passive effect". Remember also this rule is only for the chess prodigee, don't generalize to the all passive effects.

Dadajef said:

That's a good point. I was searching the document to see if at any time they mention a 'passive effect'. I thought it was a bit odd to call something like this an effect, hence I was asking for a definition.

The thing is: Isn't perhaps the Performance Artist the card that would have to be clarified? If it's card effect (sic!) would say

Disrupt : Sacrifice Performance Artist to cancel the triggered effects of a character or support card.

it would be clearly defined what it could affect (i.e. Action, Response, Forced Response, and Disrupt).

[Ah, wait, you cannot ever Disrupt a Disrupt, right? ]

Anyway, as written, the Artist would work on any kind of card text. Consider the rulebook p.5 item 8. in the section 'Card Anatomy Key':

Card text: The special effects unique to that card.

This could be interpreted to mean that a card's text is actually synonymous with a card's effect. But maybe this way lies madness...

jhaelen said:

Could it be that the true purpose of the game is to engage us in unanswerable rules discussion, thus leading to madness?

TheProfessor said:

I find this nefarious scenario likely.

That is awesome, Professor.

A+++++

Double-thumbs up and "Post of the Week" honours !

-

That would be truly hilarious, to have FFG-Staff come on sometime and say, "Oh, you guys are still wracking your brains over THAT card ? Wait till you see the new wording were introducing NEXT Asylum Pack ! Don't any of you understand ? The only way to win.....is not to play ! Mwhaahaahaaaaaaaa !"

And we are all reduced to this:

jhaelen said:

Shorter > Disrupt : Sacrifice Performance Artist to cancel a triggered ability.

You must think also the cards from the Coreset are cards from the CCG times where all wordings was not always perfect. Some cards have been clarified, some other not, they have keep the original wording.

The wording of Ward Phillips is better but not perfect also : Disrupt : Exhaust Ward Phillips to cancel the effects of a character ability that has just been triggered.

•Ward Phillips, Obsessed Recluse
[Hastur] Sleep of the Dead F89 / Illustrateur : Henning Ludvigsen
[Character] - Dreamer.
Coût : 2 / Skill : 1 / Icones : A
Descriptif : Loyal. After an opponent wins a story card, sacrifice Ward Phillips. Disrupt: Exhaust Ward Phillips to cancel the effects of a character ability that has just been triggered.

And yes you can cancel a Disrupt effect, no problem. For example I could exhaust my Own Ward Phillips to Cancel the Disrupt of your Ward Phillips.

Dadajef said:

2) Ah, alright. That's good to know.

Check out Chris Long (former CoC Champion) replying to my question list over at BGG forums ....or the responses to my New Player Question List #3 here in this sub-forum.....

Basically, they explain that these terms - like Triggered Ability - and Triggered Effect - are actually separate (If I understand them correctly).

For example, Jack Brady's ability cancels "Triggered Abilities" - which is something that must come from a Character or Support card in play. An example would be a Slavering Gug - where you pay 4 to choose and wound a character with the Gug's "on card ability". Jack Brady could use his Disrupt, if targeted, to bounce back to his owners hand.

However, an Event Card like Shotgun Blast (apparently the FAQ uses this in error, when many feel it should have been "Shotgun" - the attachment) ...or Deep One Assault - targeting him could NOT be "disrupted" with his ability.

However...things like Performance Artist or the actual "Spell" card for Hastur - "Power Drain" (which works like the P-Artist)...COULD actually disrupt to cancel DOA or Shotgun Blast (or most other cards like that).

My only confusion is - could Performance Artist be sacrificed to cancel the useage of the Slavering Gug's ability ? // If she could NOT - then could at least Power Drain ? (seems like it since Power Drain says it works on "Action" or "Response" - just played - and Gug's ability is "Action: Choose and wound...."

Rosh87 said:

Sorry, now you lost me.

Compare:

Disrupt : Cancel an Action or Response just played or used .

with:

Disrupt : Sacrifice Performance Artist to cancel the effects of a character or support card ability.

The former (Power Drain) will affect any card type (Character, Support, or Event) but only cancels the mentioned triggered effects: Action or Response. It will have no effect on a Disrupt, Forced Response, or 'passive effects' (assuming they actually exist).

The latter (Performance Artist) only affects Character or Support cards but can cancel any kind of effect.

Jhaelen is right.

see rules :

triggered ability = a triggered effect from a card (a support or character) already in play, so the Performance Artist CANNOT cancel an event card, like Jack Brady CANNOT cancel an event card. An effect from an event card is not an effect from a card already in play. When a card target a triggered ability , it doesn't target a trigger effect .

Power Drain cancel a Response or Action, it can be a Response or Action from a card already in play or from an event card. The restriction is with power drain you cannot cancel a Disrupt or forced Response.

Then Writhing Wall CAN cancel any triggered effect from a card already in play or from an event card.

Performance Artist, Power Drain or Writhing Wall have not the same text, they doesn't cancel in the same way.

Performance artist can cancel the slavering gug's Action (because its a triggered ability) and Power drain also (because its an Action). Those two cards can cancel the gug's effect' but not for the same reason.

Writhing Wall
[Hastur] Secrets of Arkham F40 / Illustrateur : Matt Dixon
[Event] - Spell.
Coût : 3
Descriptif : Disrupt: Cancel a triggered effect. Then, draw a card.
Citation : If you hear its terrible wail, then it's too late.

I think we agreed - (me and Jhaelen) - actually, Dadajef.....I just used different wording for it - but we agreed on the same points as to what each could stop. I even said - I think the Performance Artist (and) the Power Drain could both stop a Slavering Gug's ability from working.

The only thing I wonder is .... regarding Power Drain...yes, it says "Action" or "Response"....so, one WOULD think that "Disrupt" and "Forced Response" are not covered by it ...but someone else here (Professor maybe ?)....mentioned in one of our other discussions that there was some debate on the limits of Power Drain, since the Rulebook says that "Disrupts" and "Forced Responses" are all "TYPES of ACTIONS" ....and Power Drain mentions "Action"s - as being something it can be used to cancel.... ?

Also - my only issue with understanding Power Drain is that, if taken that it can "disrupt" a "Response" - then it is saying your opponent can play Azathoth to try and Destroy All Characters and Support Cards in Play..... and you can play a 2-cost Power Drain....and "Cancel" Azathoth's "RESPONSE" - because, if you check his card, it's ONLY listed as a "RESPONSE" - not a "FORCED RESPONSE"..... so you cancel the "Destroy everything" effect....yet because Azathoth is still in play at the end of the turn, your opponent will "lose the game" - automatically.

This seems WAY too powerful for a 2-cost card.......

Reading this thread reminded me how much I miss Court of Ythill

Rosh87 said:

it's the way to play azathoth. Power drain cancel only the response from Azathoth not its passive effect.

Then Forced Response or Interruption are not a types of Actions ! Be careful an action (with a small a) is what you make. You play a card, you trigger an effect = you take an action (with a small a). Action (black bold and capitalized) is a key word for the game like Response is another one. Power Drain cancel black bold keyword Action or Response . You can't cancel for example an opponent to play a character card (which is an action he takes).

I understand, and thank you Dadajef.

I just think it's a bit odd that a Power Drain can "cancel" the ability of the "Lord of the Outer Gods" - Azathoth ...preventing him from getting the intended effect of his "destroy everything ability" - and, as a result of that, you basically (still) get to make your opponent lose the game at the end of that turn. . .

I would hope at some point in the future that they label Azathoth's ability as "FORCED Response" - so Power Drain cannot "stop it".

It seems odd the way it is...because.....are they saying you COULD (the controlling player who laid down Azathoth's card) ....choose NOT to "activate" his "destroy everything" ability ? - Because it's "only" a Response, and NOT a Forced Response ?

It's obvious that Azathoth's controller has te option of not using his Response: when putting Aza into play, that's exactly the main difference between a Response and a Forced Response, the first is, well, not forced.

Yes, I guess I just didn't / can't imagine a time in a game where a player would pay the high cost in resources to put Azathoth into play....and NOT want to trigger his ability. Other than Skill-6, he has NO icons (which is dumb, IMHO - and not thematic for an Outer God, but ...oh well ) .....so his ONLY "thing" which makes him worthwhile to play is his "Destroy Everything" ability.

If a player put him down....when / what situation would they ever NOT want to trigger that ability ? I can think of almost none. So why not (FFG) just make it a Forced Response and be done with it ? It also would (if Forced Response wording) get rid of the (IMHO) silly fact that a Power Drain from Hastur can "stop" the "Destroy Everything" effect of this card, while leaving the person who played it with the "You Lose the Game at the end of the turn" - death sentence.

Hi,

here for you, guys, another nasty question on Performance Artist: What if I want to play her disrupt on Infernal Obsession ?

Performance Artist Disrupt: Sacrifice Performance Artist to cancel the effects of a character or support card ability.

Infernal Obsession- (madness, attachment) - "Attach to a non ancient one Character.While attached, you gain control of attached character. (If control changes again, discard Infernal Obsession from play)".

Now the questions:

Does the disrupting of PA work in this case ?

Is IO considered in play when the disrupt of PA resolves?

What is the end result ? Does IO go back to owner (After spending the 3 resources domain) or in the discard pile since control changed again ? )

thanks for help

Rosh87 said:

I'm not sure how changing it to a forced response would fix that. Unless I'm greatly confused on the rules of Power Drain, it *can* target a Forced Response as well as a normal Response, Action etc.

Changing the whole thing to a passive effect, however, would stop the power drain.

Yay for no Edit functionality.

Anyway... I just read the rest of this post. My group has always looked at Response and Forced Reponse as both being "Responses" for purposes of game terms with just that the Forced part has to happen. So we treated Power Drains as able to affect both.

Live and learn I guess.

msommi said:

My take:

Attaching Infernal Obsession to a character to gain control of it is an effect, so disrupting it using Performance Artist should work.

I'm pretty sure IO is considered in play, since:

(v1.0) Working Effects
In general, Support and Character card
effects can only be triggered (or affect
the game) when the card is in play.

The end result will be that IO has to be discarded. Compare to the following example from the FAQ:

If a player triggers the Dreamlands Fanatic’s
response ability and an opponent plays a Power
Drain in response, does the character go to the
discard pile or back to the owner’s hand?
The character enters the discard pile.

Edit: hmpf, how does the quote function work again on this forum?

Despite being very wrong with the Power Drain, let me chime in on the Infernal Obsession. I don't think that in this case the "effect" in question is a valid target for the Performance Artist. I think what PA refers to in the "support card ability" part of it's text is any support card with Action: or Response: etc.

Otherwise you could argue that basically any support cards functional could be stopped with Performance Artist. For example, attaching a shotgun to a character. You could say that the "character gains ...." portion of it is an effect and you cancel it. Curse of Azathoth: "treat attached character as ..." you could say that's the effect and you cancel it. I'm pretty sure that in this PA really does refer to something that can at least be triggered. (like being able to cancel the "restore and ready" portion of the Arkham Asylum)

KallistiBRC said:

yes, I tend to lean on your interpretation.

Since there are mutliple questions open while many have been answered by experienced players like you, one thing comes to my mind:

Till there is some official clarifications from FFG, why don't we all set up a card wikipedia with all the contributions of these posts ? Wouldn't be easier to access a database of rule clarifications on each card ? It would be mainly a copy and paste job from this forum ( I know C&P it's not that easy) . Would FF offer the web space for that ? wikipedia itself maybe ?

KallistiBRC said:

As written, the Performance Artist can cancel every effect caused by a character or support card abilty, since it doesn't specify it has to be an ability with a trigger. This means (until clarified in a new version of the FAQ) it can also cancel passive abilites (i.e. really any ability).

I think this is yet another case that isn't properly defined in the rules. As with the recent discussions about the Doppelgänger and the new Yog-Sothoth, the rules as written (RAW) aren't sufficient to properly explain why the cards are supposed to work the way they apparently have been intended to work by the designers (RAI). Either the card text has to be amended or the rules have to be amended.

Such conflicts between RAW and RAI are the most common cause for the release of errata / rules updates and they exist in every game, so it's nothing to get overly worked up about. However, the templating of many cards (particularly older ones) is just shoddy, and this has basically also been admitted by the designers.