Fox Mask

Fox Mask

If you move with such enemy (ex. if you are engaged with it), do you also get the offering?

This is a great niche card, +2 for is useful in many situations, but specially when you can abuse its replenish trigger ^.^

soymauro · 2
I am certain you no longer "move out of a location with an enemy" if you take said enemy with you, unless there is another enemy at that location. — AlderSign · 391
In an email they specify an engaged enemy will move with you. Unless there's an additional enemy at the location you left you will not get a charge by simply moving with an enemy engaged with you. — gw1108 · 20
@AlderSign/ @gw1108 : Do y'all have any intel on whether moving out of a location with two enemies (leaving them both behind) would count as two distinct procs? I could see it either way since you move out of the location once, but the end should maybe have been "a location with any enemies" if that was the intention — Malcoto · 4
@malcoto. No official Intel. But it should just be once. Because the trigger is the location, not the number of enemies. An enemy is present, so yes you get 1 charge. 3 enemies? Well, there is an enemy there. — Rolandironfist · 37
@Malcoto: Actually, I don't think it can get any more official than the first glossary entry: https://arkhamdb.com/rules#A_An — AlderSign · 391

Wounded Bystander

Wounded Bystander

If you compare this card to Carolyn Fern's Rational Thought this weakness is ridiculously soft. Yes, you can only heal the bystander with cards that heal Ally assets, but that's about it - the card neither blocks your ability (which Rational Thought does double), nor do you even need to heal it entirely. What's more, it gives you soak and another way to trigger the investigator ability!

I think cards that heal Ally assets need to go into a Vincent Lee deck anyway, since the whole group benefits from them.

Didn't research much into combos yet, but Protecting the Anirniq can get some value out of this card if you do choose to get rid of him, one way or another.

AlderSign · 391

Dirty Deeds

Dirty Deeds

If you have Mandy backing you up, I think you can put two illicit assets in play (paying their costs), and activate each once.

Engineering a situation where you can benefit from both of these activations while sharing location with your fellow Mandy may not come up as often as I'd like to, but it would be a power play to remember even if it happened once per campaign.

Aesyn · 591

Survival Knife

Survival Knife

I asked to FFG :

When an enemy with elusive attacks an investigator holding a Survival Knife(lvl 2 :Return to the Forgotten Age #2) ?

What happens after the knife reaction attack ?

  1. If the enemy dies after the attack, I guess we doesn't resolve the enemy attack ?
  2. If the enemy doesn't die, I understand that the enemy will disengage and move to another location. But should I resolve the attack and so apply damages to the investigator with the knife ? I guess no ?

They (Alex Werner) answered :

Say an elusive enemy initiates an attack against you, triggering the reaction ability on Survival Knife (L2). First, you resolve your attack against the enemy. If the enemy survives the attack, it moves via its elusive keyword, exhausts, then completes its attack against you (since that attack was already initiated). If the enemy is defeated by your attack, it does not complete its attack against you.

sbernard · 1

Watcher's Grasp

Watcher's Grasp

Ruling from Alex Werner, FFG Game Rules Specialist via the official rules question form:

Question: Hello! If during Mythos Phase, the treachery Watcher’s Grasp makes the Spectral Watcher “move, engage, and attack as if it were the enemy phase,” can I swing my Survival Knife (2) at him, which has a reaction trigger of “when an enemy attacks you during the enemy phase”?

Answer: No. Survival Knife (2)’s reaction ability can only be triggered during the enemy phase; Watcher’s Grasp does not create an “enemy phase.”

(So with treacheries like this, which cause enemies to attack "as if" it's the enemy phase, other cards will not "resolve with the altered game state in mind," in contradiction of the FAQ rules on "As If..." This raises the question of whether MJ's ruling about the enemy exhausting would also be invalidated.)

Holy Outlaw · 269
I do not quite, what you mean in the last sentence? That an enemy exhaust after an attack in the enemy phase is a general rule, not an effect of another card. So unless when played with the "Return to" addendum, it should still trigger the exhaust. — Susumu · 381
I think the issue is that if the Survival Knife doesn't consider it the enemy phase (and therefore doesn't trigger) then it doesn't make sense that other cards (such as The Watcher) do consider it the enemy phase and thus exhausts after the attack. If enemy phase triggers don't happen for one card then they shouldn't happen for the other card either. — Pseudo Nymh · 67
From "As if..." in the Rules section: "The game state is considered to be altered throughout the duration of the indicated ability or action, from its initiation (including the paying of its costs, attacks of opportunity, etc) through the resolution of each aspect of its effect, and up until its completion." Reading that makes me react to Werner's statement with a quote from the same campaign's intro: "This is bullshit." — AlderSign · 391
Like Holy Outlaw said, the ruling directly contradicts with the mentioned FAQ. Bad times... — AlderSign · 391
I've sat through a thousand 'Is the game dying?' questions over the years and I've confidently dismissed them all. The series of recent rulings that directly contradict rulings from the designers (this ruling, Quick Learner, etc) or that just seem plain against the spirit of the game (Rod of Carnamagos) lead to me to question if MJ's departure has left the game on shaky ground. I'm not predicting doom and gloom yet, just observing that the timing of all questionable rulings could be interpreted as a bad omen. — Pseudo Nymh · 67