Jump to content



Photo

You've Got Questions? I've Got Answers - Straight From Damon Stone


  • Please log in to reply
132 replies to this topic

#41 .Zephyr.

.Zephyr.

    Member

  • Members
  • 309 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 05:20 PM

 Seriously… what ?!

So if i play Action, then my opponent gets firs opportunity to do somethin and plays Responce, and then I want to play disrupt… and what happens…
or is it like this: i ask "any disrupts?" i play my disrupts first, then my opponent, and if only he plays a disrupt i get my responce first so its back and forth???
or is it "Responce to Action (or play of a character/support/conspiracy card) by active player is started by the next player, all other things start with active player" [if so, why is it not written that way in the f**** rules…]
or is this something else
this timing doesn't make any sense to me.

Why design it like this so it makes no sense, is context dependant and no one understands how its supposed to work? Wouldnt just "first player starts playing every timing type (Action, Disrupt, Responce), if he plays/passes opponent can play, it continues till all players pass in a row" be simpler and better?

And using "action" meaning something else than "Action" is just plain stupid… are "Response" and "response" also different things?



#42 COCLCG

COCLCG

    Member

  • Members
  • 672 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 07:24 PM

.Zephyr. said:

"Responce to Action - EDIT : Response / Disrupt - (or play of a character/support/conspiracy card) by active player is started by the next player, all other things start with active player"

Basically, yes.



#43 COCLCG

COCLCG

    Member

  • Members
  • 672 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 07:30 PM

.Zephyr. said:

So if i play Action, then my opponent gets firt opportunity to do somethin and plays Responce, and then I want to play disrupt… and what happens…
or is it like this: i ask "any disrupts?" i play my disrupts first, then my opponent, and if only he plays a disrupt i get my responce first so its back and forth???

And basically no. The opponent would play his / her disrupt first to your action. But yes, you would respond to his disrupt before he / she did.



#44 .Zephyr.

.Zephyr.

    Member

  • Members
  • 309 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 09:41 PM

So, if I trigger an Action or play a card other players act first i. e. they trigger their Disrupt first, and then trigger they're Response first.

But when something other than above causes an Disrupt/Responce opportunity it's active player who goes first.

Thats how it works?

When i think about often it doesnt really matter who goest first, but i really hate when such mechanics are unclear as i consider them basic framework on whitch all mechanics should work, and having holes/misscommunication in basic framework sounds like a really bad idea.

I really dont get FFGs approach, they do design and playtest really interesting cards, and then fail to explain what are they designed to do… How hard would it be to write a paragraph explaining some uses of cards with interesting effects and post them online. There are so many cards where a few examples of what this card can do and what are its limitations would help so much. Like apeirophobia explanation with T icons, not enough cards in hand. Hamu XX 15:14 and picking itself back; The Claret Knight with sacrifice effect from Cthulhu, etc. those are not very complicated interactions that need much rule expertise, those are basic interactions of those cards, that define what they do…



#45 COCLCG

COCLCG

    Member

  • Members
  • 672 posts

Posted 27 November 2012 - 12:23 AM

And another interesting rule that may not be common knowledge and that I have had clarified by Damon concerns the Artists Colony - Hastur Location. If the case is that both cards revealed are the same cost, then the active player DOES get to keep the card. Although not specifically the 'highest', there is a rule buried within the FAQ that when a player has 2 equal targets of the same cost / skill ( in the example it is the 'lowest' skill' I believe ) then the active player chooses the target out of all the available ones. This rule also carries over to the Artists Colony. It was explained in a convoluted post that went on about the emphasis of language and so forth so I will spare you the details as it only confuses the response which was to be short - yes the active player keeps cards of equal cost. It mat recieve an errata in the future but for now that is how it is played. A much better card now yes ??


  • bobby likes this

#46 Danigral

Danigral

    Member

  • Members
  • 803 posts

Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:58 AM

COCLCG said:

And another interesting rule that may not be common knowledge and that I have had clarified by Damon concerns the Artists Colony - Hastur Location. If the case is that both cards revealed are the same cost, then the active player DOES get to keep the card. Although not specifically the 'highest', there is a rule buried within the FAQ that when a player has 2 equal targets of the same cost / skill ( in the example it is the 'lowest' skill' I believe ) then the active player chooses the target out of all the available ones. This rule also carries over to the Artists Colony. It was explained in a convoluted post that went on about the emphasis of language and so forth so I will spare you the details as it only confuses the response which was to be short - yes the active player keeps cards of equal cost. It mat recieve an errata in the future but for now that is how it is played. A much better card now yes ??

It would be interesting to hear the reasoning that Damon had for that, since it's rather unintuitinve - in the English language, lowest would mean lowest and highest would mean highest, so if there was a tie then the effect would fizzle, but the FAQ says otherwise regarding "lowest" (which I didn't know btw, and this makes Calling Down the Ancients much better, too). I can see that the FAQ may change to say that in all ties of effects (as opposed to stories) the active player decides, which would make sense, but that's not clear now since the FAQ specifically clarifies this ruling under "Lowest Skill". It does not reference highest skill at all. 



#47 Danigral

Danigral

    Member

  • Members
  • 803 posts

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:20 AM

.Zephyr. said:

 

So, if I trigger an Action or play a card other players act first i. e. they trigger their Disrupt first, and then trigger they're Response first.

But when something other than above causes an Disrupt/Responce opportunity it's active player who goes first.

Thats how it works?

 

 

I believe that's right, and when put that way, it makes vastly more sense than the FAQ, which at this point may be in dire need of a TL;DR.

I myself did not understand the subtle distinction between "player action" and "action" until a few months ago. And it always seeks to elude my understanding. Take this passage for example:

 

Action, Disrupt, and Response Effects
Throughout the course of the game’s 
action windows, players alternate 
taking player actions. Player actions 
consist of playing a card from hand, or 
of triggering a triggered effect on a card 
already in play.
 
This definition of Player Action is probably too limited, since it doesn't include the possibility of triggered effects on cards in out-of-play areas, such as Dirk Sharpe or The Cats of Ulthar. What would that be defined as if not a Player Action? Or perhaps this falls under the definition of "play" (which I don't think does, since play seems to always have meant playing a card in operations paying normal costs.) The fact that this definition for Player Actions is listed under "Action, Disrupt, and Response Effects" is also rather misleading, since Disrupts and Responses are not exactly Player Actions, but are rather "Player triggered effects" played (also a dangerous word with implicit meaning) to disrupt/respond to either "Player actions," "Framework Actions," or "Framework Game Events." (God, this is ugly…)
 
How's this to aid clarity?
Glossary:
Action: a general term that includes Player actions and Framework actions
Player action: includes playing a card in the operations phase, triggering a player-triggered ability, and triggering an "Action:" triggered effects
Framework actions: actions that are dictated by the game, such as all starts of phases, drawing cards in the draw phase or committing characters to stories (note: many of the framework actions are optional, including restoring 1 character, resourcing 1 card, or committing characters to stories)
Framework game event: effects that are triggered by a framework action, such as the effect of an icon struggle or the process of a character committing (this one is a little slippery since it's only used once…)
Play: to play a card from your hand during the operations phase by paying costs as normal; (alternatively, could mean to trigger an Action: from an out-of-play state as well…)
We could create definitions for terms like "Committing," "Committed," "Made insane," "Drive insane," "Go insane," etc.
 
 
Is anything off there? It would really be helpful for FFG to clean up the FAQ a little to remove some of the guesswork caused by redundancies and discrepancies.


#48 Penfold

Penfold

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,180 posts

Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:24 AM

Oh I don't agree with that ruling on Hamu at all.

Hrm. Time for an email. There has got to be something I'm missing, or he is.



#49 COCLCG

COCLCG

    Member

  • Members
  • 672 posts

Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:22 AM

HilariousPete said:

Relevant FAQ:

1) Action is initiated
a) Determine the cost (to either play
the card or pay for the card’s effect) or
costs (if multiple costs are necessary
for the intended action).
b) Check play restrictions, including
verification and designation of
applicable targets
or cards to be
effected.

e) Pay the cost(s).
f) Play the card, or trigger the effect,
and proceed to step two.

I sent this section of the FAQ to Damon and challenged both the decisions on Hamu and the Logan ( with skill bonus ) / Necronomicon about 4 days ago. He's usually very prompt so either he's too busy or is PERHAPS re-evaluating. The designation of applicable targets is the key wording here as this happens before either reach the discard pile. The ONLY reasoning I can see ( and it would be a total whack job reasoning ) is that you designate the discard pile as the target, but this doesn't sit right with me.



#50 COCLCG

COCLCG

    Member

  • Members
  • 672 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 06:01 AM

Another question answered :

Rule Question:

just a quickie this time. if for example Constricting Elder Thing chooses a relic as the card to return to hand, which takes precedence ? the return to hand OR the when relic leaves play shuffle into deck ?? thanks.

Answer:

Very intriguing question. The passive is not a replacement effect so technically the Relic leaves play to be returned to hand and the moment it gets there the passive then resolves on the card causing it to be shuffled into the owner's deck.

This is how a Snow Graves prevents a destroyed or sacrificed relic from being shuffled into the deck, because it must actually hit the discard pile first where its effect then immediately tries to resolve but is halted by Snow Graves conflicting, but absolute, passive effect.

 

Funny though. Sent this one after the above question and no answer to that one yet……….



#51 marcoa.ramirez@gmail.com

marcoa.ramirez@gmail.com

    Member

  • Members
  • 115 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 11:02 PM

COCLCG said:

 

 The passive is not a replacement effect so technically the Relic leaves play to be returned to hand and the moment it gets there the passive then resolves on the card causing it to be shuffled into the owner's deck.


This is how a Snow Graves prevents a destroyed or sacrificed relic from being shuffled into the deck, because it must actually hit the discard pile first where its effect then immediately tries to resolve but is halted by Snow Graves conflicting, but absolute, passive effect.

 

Funny though. Sent this one after the above question and no answer to that one yet……….

 

 

Then, If a am playing Initiate of Huang Hun with a Snow Graves over opponent's discard… his character don't go to his hand?



#52 COCLCG

COCLCG

    Member

  • Members
  • 672 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 05:18 AM

No. The returned character doesn't hit the discard pile first, it goes straight to hand, so don't worry about that one. The only real relevance this question has is to Relics, because they have the 'when leaves play shuffle into deck' text, and the characters Constricting Elder Thing and Lodge Housekeeper, which may try and return them to hand.



#53 Mnemonaut

Mnemonaut

    Member

  • Members
  • 34 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 05:22 AM

When an action reads "put into play from your hand" do I have to pay the costs of that specific card?

 

Thanks!



#54 jhaelen

jhaelen

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,044 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 08:02 PM

Mnemonaut said:

When an action reads "put into play from your hand" do I have to pay the costs of that specific card?

No.

Please note that this thread is supposed to be used to post official answers anyone received from FFG and not to ask rule questions.



#55 Carioz

Carioz

    Member

  • Members
  • 318 posts

Posted 02 February 2013 - 01:12 AM

Hello,

browsing the forums I came up to this rule answer:

Rule Question:
What is the proper timing for Prophesy cards?
E.g. Hastur's Hamu XX 15:14 says:
"Response: After a character is made insane, discard Hamu XX 15:14 from the top of your deck to choose up to two cards in your discard pile. Add those cards to your hand."
Can I choose the Prophesy card just triggered as one of the cards to be added to my hand from the discard pile?

Answer:
Yes. You pay the cost of the card and then choose its targets.

 

Now I am a bit puzzled: this answer doesn't really fit the current action framework from the current faq.

a) Determine the cost (to either playthe card or pay for the card’s effect) or costs (if multiple costs are necessary for the intended action).
b) Check play restrictions, including verification and designation of applicable targets or cards to be effected.
c) Apply any penalties to the cost(s). (Any effects that modify a penalty are applied to that penalty before it becomes a part of the cost.)
d) Apply any other active modifiers (including reducers) to the cost(s).
e) Pay the cost(s).
f) Play the card, or trigger the effect, and proceed to step two.

Now, Hamu XX in order to be able to target itself need to be in the discard pile during b. During b however Hamu is still sitting on the player's deck since it can get into the discard pile only during phase e) Thus I'd rather say that by current framework it is not possible to have Hamu XX target itself.

Am I right?

If I am, care if I post the updated answer?

Thank you for your time.

Answer:

As far as my understanding goes, yes you are correct. As always Damon might correct me. But I would say that I am fairly confident on this one.



#56 COCLCG

COCLCG

    Member

  • Members
  • 672 posts

Posted 02 February 2013 - 10:36 PM

Seeing as this topic is dedicated to answers straight from Damon Stone, one can only presume that apparently the answer you quoted (the one posted by Jhaelen) WAS the official ruling made by him.



#57 jhaelen

jhaelen

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,044 posts

Posted 03 February 2013 - 11:07 PM

COCLCG said:

Seeing as this topic is dedicated to answers straight from Damon Stone, one can only presume that apparently the answer you quoted (the one posted by Jhaelen) WAS the official ruling made by him.

Correct. IIRC, it was the last time I received a reply from Damon. I had sent in several questions after that, but they remained unanswered. At the time I thought maybe it was because a new FAQ was in the works, but it's been a while, now.

Feel free to attempt to get an official verification (or clarification). I felt the ruling was a bit odd myself, but then I'm regularly surprised by official rulings burla



#58 jhaelen

jhaelen

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,044 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:50 PM

Lo and behold, just as I was complaining of not having received answers for a long time, I received two replies to questions asked over two months ago:

Rule Questions:
1) Is it possible for the defending player to succeed at a story?

2) If a card copies another card's text or effect and the text includes self-references (i.e. the card's title) is it replaced by the card's title that is copying the effect?

Examples for affected cards: Richard Upton Pickman and Neil's Curiosity Shop.

Answers:

1) No. The skill check is to determine whether or not the active player is successful. If the inactive player has equal or greater skill than the active player he has kept the active player from succeeding at the stroy, but has not himself been successful.
 
2) Copying a character's text box does just that. All examples of a card's name remain unaltered, and as such are no longer able to be resolved in most cases (if a card said "Response: After a Diseased Sewer Rat comes into play…", it would trigger every time any card named Diseased Sewer Rats comes into play, but that is different than Response: After Diseased Sewer Rat comes into play…" which would not.
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
It's good to know at least that submitted questions aren't lost in limbo - so thanks to Damon!
 
The answers probably aren't that surprising, but I've played both wrong before, so go figure…
I'm actually a bit disappointed because both answers mean that quite a few cards aren't as good as I thought or even almost useless.


#59 dboeren

dboeren

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,163 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:54 AM

#1 is just part of the definition in the rulebook.  "After the four icon struggles, the active player determines if he has been successful at the story."  I guess I always took that one as pretty evident.

#2 I think is a case of the card does what it says.  If it copied the text box AND the title, then it would have to say that.  Otherwise, if it only says that it copies the text box then that's all it copies.



#60 jhaelen

jhaelen

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,044 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 09:34 PM

dboeren said:

#1 is just part of the definition in the rulebook.  "After the four icon struggles, the active player determines if he has been successful at the story."  I guess I always took that one as pretty evident.

#2 I think is a case of the card does what it says.  If it copied the text box AND the title, then it would have to say that.  Otherwise, if it only says that it copies the text box then that's all it copies.

Well, I wondered about #1 because of the following sentence in the rules:

Note also that only the active player may place a success token for being successful at a story.

This is semantically equivalent to the following sentence:

Note also that the defending player may not place a success token for being successful at a story.

If the defending player cannot succeed at a story period, the sentence wouldn't be required and is in fact slightly misleading.

Regarding #2 I never assumed that the title was copied. My assumption was that any occurence of the card's title in the text box is basically a reference to the card's title, i.e. equivalent to the text saying 'this card'. In other words I expected the reference to the card's title to adjust if the card's title changed for any reason.

But apparently card titles are simply part of the text and not actually references. And that confuses the hell out of me because the FAQ speaks about self-referential cards:

A card that is self-referential (that is, has card text that refers to itself by Title) refers only to itself, and not to any other copies of that card.

Since we just found out that card titles in the text box are not in fact references, how can they cause the card to be self-referential?

 

It's probably the software-engineer in me that causes me to question these things that make perfect sense to anyone else.

 






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS