I think writing a bit of text to make compliceted cards clear is the way to go. I don't think it makes much sense to write it all on cards, as its both unreadable and might confuse more then it clears, but additional document, like online page. Why not?

Lets try this idea on some actual AP.

Issue I : The unspeakable pages (newest pack)

Dr. Cornelius Rose

Forced Response: After a story resolves to which both Dr. Cornelius Rose and at least 1 Villainous character are committed, ready Dr. Cornelius Rose

This is a forced response so its mandatory and it will trigger just after a story resolved, before next story resolves and before any responses can be played. The vilanous character can be commited to any side, but remember you cant control both Vilainous and Heroic character unless you have cards like Tyler Scindere. The condition of vilainous character commited is tested when the ability is to be triggered (after story resloves) so if he uncommits from this story (or dies) it will not work.

Eryn Cochwyn

Action: Drive Eryn Cochwyn insane to choose a Tome card and trigger its effect without paying any costs. Then, the controller of that Tome card must sacrifice it.

Drive insane is a cost. If any effect cancels or prevents it the cost has not been payed so nothing happens. You do not pay cost of triggering tome, meaning you do not do anything before "to" part of the cards cost. For example with Forbidden knowledge you take 4 cards and the character is not sacrificed. Becouse of "then" the controller of the tome must sacrifice it only if tomes effect successfully resolved, for example you cannot get rid of Book of eibon that way as it cant be triggered. Sacrifice is not destroy for response purposes, but card does leave play.

[edit: who gets those 4 cards when you trigger opponents Forbidden knowledge? you or the controller?]

Inside Man

Response means it can be triggered after any "thing" (Action or game effect, i don't know the common name), for example you can trigger it after committing him. Reveal means all players get to see the cards. When you place them on deck you do it one by one and only you know the order (or not? idk; thought this card was simple, guess its not that simple)

Kaleidoscope of Calyptra

Characters committed to the same story as Kaleidoscope of Calyptra that would go insane are instead wounded.

This changes the effect of going insane. It affects both sides of the story and both results of losing T struggle and any effect that would make those characters go insane while they're committed like Horrifying Daydreams card. Insted is a replacement, so the character is not considered to be going insane, but he is considered wounded. T icon or willpower will not protect him (or will it?), but invulnerability will. And responses and disrupts for taking a wound can be triggered, but effects that refer to going insane cannot. Charles Dexter Ward will not be able to protect himself from this effect (or will he, here i really dont know. thats one of the reasons of making this - you have to think how card will interact and explain it)

Magical Theorist

Lower the cost to play Ritual and Spell cards by 1 (to a minimum of 1).

Action: Exhaust Magical Theorist to add X success tokens to a Ritual support card. X is equal to the number of Tome support cards in play.

If hes exhausted you cant trigger the action as you cannot pay the cost.

Named by the Unnameable

Action: Choose a Lunatic character you control committed to a story. That character gains TTCA and +3 skill while it is committed to that story. At the end of the phase, if that character is still in play it goes insane.

If some effect like The Cavern of Flame removes him from the story he immediately loses additional skill and icons. Even then he still goes insane at the end of phase. If you manage to keep you lunatic at the story with cards like Voice of the Jungle and protect him from going insane with Cho-cho mask the effect will still last only one phase as there is nothing on the card that says otherwise (or is this "while commited" description of cards duration?)

On the Run

Action: Choose a story. Characters cannot commit to that story this phase. Any characters committed to that story are uncommitted.

Uncommitted characters remain exhausted if they ware exhausted. There was no A struggle so A icons don't help them. If character cannot uncommitlike Obsessive Detective he will satay (or will he? idk, another FAQ entry… )

Padma Amrita

Forced Response: After Padma Amrita is destroyed, put a [Cthulhu] character into play from your hand.

Sacrificed is not destroyed. Yes, also your cthulhu or other great character. Its forced response so you have to do it (idk what happens when you don't have green character in your hand? you have to show it? idk)

etc etc

Some non obvious interactions appeared. Some FAQ candidates appeared.

Personally, I think that any decent card database should contain a field for this kind of comment or explanation, including, by order of importance:

1) FAQ clarifications

2) official comments/answers by FFG/game desginers

3) brief explanation paragraph with quotes from rules where necessary (as above)

4) links to forum discussions for that particular card

This would make the game clearer and avoid repeated questions and discussions on the same card or similar mechanics. And with the current sizeable, dedicated fanbase, it shouldn't be such a pain to maintain.

Let's see if cardgamedb decides to implement something like that…

My point is cards like Eryn - its a completely different mechanics, allowing to trigger a card you don't control, and there is no word of explanation what is this supposed to do. (does controller or the player who triggered benefit from it, does controller or a player who triggered make all decisions?) Also using then when there are cards like • The King In Yellow Folio that cant be triggered is bound to create confusion among new players who are not used to this wording (but this at least is explained in FAQ). There is also no explanation on how it interacts with cards like Cthaat Aquadingen, Response: After you play a Deep One character, does this condition refer to Eryns controller playing deep one? or when tomes controller play one? can both players trigger it? or maybe Eryn can ignore response condition somehow… (i think not, but maybe… its her action anyway) With Pnakotic Manuscripts who is "you" player triggering or controller…

Srsly its not a complicated interaction, this cards text is long enough already and there are so many things to clarify that i feel cheated - i don't know what the card i got does… (i don't have this AP yet, but it doesn't change the point, i have some other cards like this)

Same with Kaleidoscope of Calyptra (and Vaporous Isle), its a passive so it has really weird timing implications. Is this effect applied before of after checking for insanity resistance (T/willpower) Can Dexter disrupt it (i think he can't, but i'm not sure)

For Calyptra work through a story struggle using the timing outline, I'm confident that it can be figured out using the FAQ.

My guess is since you trigger the effect of the Tome, you get to take advantage of the effect. If the Tome's effect was "Exhause to draw 3 cards" then you would drive Eryn Cochwyn insane, and then you could draw 3 cards.

I also think that you do, but this games rulings are often surprising for me.

With responses i'm now think you just cant trigger them as Eryn uses action and it would be too weird considering timing structure… but maybe its not the intended behavior…

With Pnakotic i guess it would give icons of one of Eryns controller characters, i guess…

And with Calyptra you probably can. But even if you can do it without doubt (i'm not sure the solution would be clean enough to leave no room for lawyering) I still find lack of such effects explanation a big mistake on failing to educate players. If experienced players have difficulty understanding what cards does in its most basic use, how are new players supposed to play with this card… i think its really horrible way of treating players, giving them lawyery riddles so they can even use the card… its not a complicated combo or sth that was not foreseen and requires complicated analysis to get how it works. Im just trying to use this card…

I guess this part

NOTE: If a passive ability would alter an action as it is being resolved, the passive is first resolved on the action, which now altered, is initiated. A Disrupt triggered, disrupts the altered action not the action before the passive is applied.

Suggests it modifies before anything is checked, but on the other hand it says "if character would go insane" and this sounds like it modifies effect after someone is actually chosen to go insane and not the general effect of going insane itself, so i guess T/willpower should protect as T/willpower character "would never go insane"… but it would be really weird for example on character with invulnerable but no T/willpower: he is chosen to go insane and then passive changes it to illegal effect… ok i surrender… does anyone get how this card is supposed to work?

I think they do test cards/draw pictures/put some thought to wording etc. How much additional work would writing a paragraph of text to tell what card does and posting it online be?

EDIT: actually……. i dunno. its 1am here. im going to bed.

Dude, for a 1000 cards? It would be a lot. There is one person working on this game, that one person also works on another LCG. If he did this for this game he would have to do it for the other. We could pretty much kiss any new cards good bye for a year.

Im not crazy to propose FFG stops developing cards and writes guide to every card ever developed .

But writing about 20 cards (often less if there is no effect on card) when you ship them to market is not that big of a deal and would help a ton.

Getting older cards explained would also be nice, but definitely not all at once but little by little, lets say one new AP comes with one old AP or sth of this sort.

Also I could do fans work of describing them, but i need someone who can make an official ruling to check does this card work like i think it does.

(Like this Calyptra - i still don't know, i dont see how FAQ helps when i don't understand what "would go insane" means in terms of timing. Cards like expandable muscle wave similar wording so it suggests effect happens in some weird timing during effect application… and this witch char that has invulnerability and can go insane creates really weird situation, does anyone know how this card works and can share it?)

I am completely failing to understand how these cards pose problems for you.

Would means when an effect initiates that when executed will cause a thing to happen, you can do this thing here.

If it uses the word instead it is a replacement effect, which means it replaces what would happen when that effect executes with that other thing.

So what is the problem with how Expendable Muscle and Kaleidoscope of Calyptra work? They replace the initiating effect for the designated cards with a different effect when it executes. I can't think of an easier way to explain it, and all I did was say pretty much the same thing that is in the FAQ.

Which witch were you referring to? What about invulnerability don't you understand?

I commit Kaleidoscope of Calyptra, opponent commits character A with willpower and character B with invulnerability.

I win T struggle.

What happens?

Opponent wants B to go insane. But then it would replace effect with wounding and you cant wound invulnerable…

So maybe A goes insane and that is changed to wounding… but he cant go insane in the first place

And what if there is C that can go insane and get wounded? What if i can replace going insane with something?

I am going to have to chalk this up to English not being your native tongue.

Let's work this thorugh together rather than me just providing you with the answer. I think you'll pick up a better feel for the rules and how to resolve questions this way.

Kaleidoscope of Calyptra does what precisely?

P.S. Who knew that groups of moths and butterflies were called Kaleidoscopes? Or that Caypltra were vampire moths? If I have kids I'm having them play this game. I'm learning stuff at my late age.

Penfold said:

ha. dunno if thats a good idea penfold, otherwise they'll end up like my goth friends 5 year old who drags around a doll she named 'blood sausage', and introduces it to all the freaked out 'normal' mothers.

Kaleidoscope of Calyptra

Has a passive replacement effect that replaces part of effect that makes character insane with an effect that wounds the same character.

This replacement only affects characters committed to the same story as Kaleidoscope of Calyptra.

What i dont know is timing of this substitution and how it interacts with making choices etc.

Does Kaleidoscope of Calyptra's effect say anything about altering how a character would be made to go insane at a story it is committed to?

Don't understand this question. It doesn't make any sense to me.

It changes "go insane" to "be wounded" - thats whet card says; what i dont understand is when exactly change happens.

"would go insane" suggests as late as possible, but still where in timing chart is this exactly is what i don't know.

And it is not on the card, its the consequence of many detailed timing explanations in FAQ. This game has nice timing chart, it doesn't need to rely on language intuitions that are not precise and would break with card interactions.

And this is why you don't know how the card works.

If you can't answer this question then you don't understand the effects and will never be able to find the answer.

Kaleidoscope of Calyptra does not say that the means of determining how a card goes insane is altered in any way. It says that the end result of going insane is replaced with wounding. If it does not alter the determination but instead alters the end result then the process remains unchanged, meaning the only legal cards which could be made insane can be chosen. When you go to flip the card KoC says you must wound that card instead, so you do. Done.

You know its not described in the rules as such and the fact that you understand this wording this way doesnt make it less ambigous.

I see the logic of your interpretation but it is not mechanical process of interaction with timing. Choosing legal targetting etc might be affected in some ways, you can try to disrupt this wound, try to disrupt going insane and what can and cant be done depends on details of timing that your approach simply doesnt cover at all… simple mechanical rules are more clear and can have complicated interactions more easly.

i can't help myself and apologise beforehand ( giggle ).

but the definition of Zephyr = soft, gentle breeze.

be one with your namesake my young friend………..

i do empathise with you, i really do. it is a common virtue of youth to try and change the system somehow. in my day it was anti-logging, chaining ourselves to bulldozers and sitting 50ft up an old growth tree to stop them chopping it down. now, it seems to be more of a digital revolution.

but you know what. all our efforts, and all our time, amounted to zero. they simply ignored us and cut down trees somewhere else. people have lives, wives and complications, and the fist of youth is generally a soft one. yes, changes can be made, but they are slow and require patience and some time collecting the rare few that will rally to the cause. if you want to make a database, thats really great, but it won't happen with a thunderous clamour of supporters, will often go unrewarded, and will just plain annoy those without the time or interest in devoting to it if constantly hounded.

the fact that 'humanity' has generally been tamed, hypnotised, brainwashed and trained into jumping through the hoops of society / media and interconnectivity is only making the 'revolutionary' cause harder to instigate.

thats my spiel. ending with a blather of nonsense, as im finding lackey much more rewarding and time consuming as im teaching a new player nearly every 2nd day and having a ball, without some pesky derogitavely french speaking monkey on my back responding to everything i say. have fun. may the cool stay cool, and the 'disappointed' a little more patient and 'breeze-like'.

I just think about systematic solutions that should work in the long run rather than one time solutions.

The more i think of this effect the more i see it as a disrupt timing effect that is passive to force it, but it should have disrupt timing. With disrupt timing of changing effect after initiation but before resolution it all works well.

There is still problem of interaction with other disrupts, but timing of:

play all disrupts to not altered version; apply replacement; play all disrupts to the altered version should work just fine; if thats whats it about.

This is me leaving this conversation.