Jake yet again said:

Disregard that. I don't want more mosquitoes. In fact, I got a bite today, and it's probably your fault.

jgt7771 said:

I'm a little hoarse now, so I'll have to take it easy on the Caps Lock button.

That card hasn't changed a bit. Was it a problem?

Yes, it was supposed to clarify whether or not the items remain when the environment is replaced.

That's what I figured. I personally don't see any ambiguity. Cards aren't normally placed on the board, but there's no language like "while this environment is in play." Therefore, there are no instructions for removing the cards, except when an investigator picks them up. If the Exhibit Item cards are removed when the environment is replaced, then logically the +1 to Terror would also be removed, which can't happen. Since one effect of the environment is permanent (+1 to Terror), it implies that the other part of the environment is also permanent. Basically, the card acts like a headline, except that it's called an environment (and hence is subject to effects that act on environments, like Ithaqua). Confusing, but not ambiguous, unless I'm missing something.

I guess you could argue that the investigator's ability to pick up the items lasts only while the environment is in play. Okay, there's ambiguity.

For me the ambiguity arose from their opting to make it an environment rather than a headline. I can't imagine just disallowing the items in an Ithaqua game was motivation enough.

Tibs said:

Sorry for the bump, but I thought I'd add my two cents. What if the environment card was referring to the streets being flooded, and the waters recede when the environment card is replaced? I.e. the unique items appear when the environment card is replaced? Just an idea.

Of course, you could always drop the movement points by one for all investigators while the environment card is in effect.

I think that's more thematic at least.

Yes, I used to say that when the Weather card is replaced, the water rises up again and carries the items away when it recedes. It works perfectly fine from a thematic standpoint, but a little clarification would have been great!

Aside from the "dessicated/desecrated" thing, I was impressed to see that one instance of "nauseous" was changed to the correct, "nauseated." But I was later disappointed when "search the Skill deck for the Expert Occultist (or some card I can't remember) card" was changed to "search the Spell deck." Whoops.

I also noticed that the Ma's Boarding House encounter where monsters sneak in and your successes on a sneak (-2) check determined how many appeared was made more reasonable (with a +0 check). However, the flavor text for the 3+ success entry was removed, giving no indication how you managed to kill three monsters with a sneak check!

Tibs said:

It's worth 2x successes in Final Battle. Pretty good, if your investigator can't pass the check.

Yes I thought of that, and then that's really mostly what he's good for. Outside of final combat he's a huge burden. Still not great.

Tibs said:

One other scenario where Messenger is useful is against Yog. Being able to ignore one LITAS can be critical.

LiTaS is both a sentence and a status. The Messenger can not protect you from Yog's LiTaS devouring: as soon as you discard him, you're still LiTaS so you still die.

Tibs said:

Please, don’t tell me, there was an official statement concerning this, considering all the sloppyness around here. Anyway, If I were to decide, if you get LiTaS with the Messenger against Yog-Sothoth, you are still LiTaS as against every other Ancient One, but not devoured. (Hmm, what a way to join Yog-Sothoth’s Winning Team.)

I'm not sure if I can say there was an official statement. I know that what I said was the way I and many other forum cultists viewed it, and I'm pretty sure that I asked it to the FAQ, but I can't remember if it was answered and I couldn't tell you the answer if it was.

Something to consider, though. Yog-Sothoth is the master of time and space, so it's no surprise that The Messenger can't really bail you out from Yog's overwhelming presence. If you were Beloved of Bast, on the other hand, you might make a case for survival because that card essentially protects you from devouring so long as you choose it.

Wrzlprmft said:

How I read Yog-Sothoth is that is checks to see if any investigators is LiTaS at all times and if someone is they're devoured. If you get LiTaS with the Messenger and discard him to avoid being devoured you're still LiTaS after he's returned to the box so you still get devoured.

arkhamresident said:

Whereas I've read it as "When an Investigator becomes LITAS, he/she is devoured", as this matches event to event rather than condition to event. Except in the case of the Messenger, the difference is purely cosmetic. I don't think it's a gamebreaker to play it that way, and it does help make a slightly non-useful ally a bit more balanced. Using the original Messenger I'd probably rule your way, though, as that version was strong.

Jedit said:

Well, the new Messenger it's not an issue with whether Yog and LITAS are instant or continuous at all, since they don't prevent devouring - they just give you a 2 doom token refund if it happens.