Don't complicate the game?, LOL, its too late for that. I mean your commenting on a forum that in large part helps clarify already complicated and ambiguous rules for everyone. This post is no different. The original rulebook was simply not clear enough on a number of aspects of the game, this being one of them. The rules simply do not say that it takes two dice, we have been over this already in this post.
I think the Game Designers will have to address this question eventually since we can go round and round forever on this one. While I agree that the rewards on the card are substantial and one could imply that because the rewards are so high it would thus take two dice, this would still only be a guess. Unfortunately we still have no rule for it (wauh wauh). Making a rule that says "each box requires at least one die" would certainly solve the problem for the card, but from a design stand point it would also limit the flexibility of the game for any future expansions. What if they wanted to include alot more cards like this, or what if they wanted to include special rare dice that might have a spot for say a Lore sign X2 (thus allowing you two complete 2 Lore signs within a task using this one die) Etc, Etc. And lets not forget the rulebook does not state I need a die for each box, only that I need enough signs to cover the task.
Honestly I don't care what they decide, we can guess all we want, in the end it will be the game designers decision that decides the fate for all humanity (BUM BUM BUUUUM!!).
Oh for Pete's sake, are you still whinging on about this pet peeve of yours
Look, the rulebook does tell you how to deal with this situation, if you want to ignore that fact, fine just play it the way you want. I'm sure very few people here really care!
You say that the rules do not state anywhere that you need at least one die per "box". For a start, why are you using the term "box", the term you are looking for is a "requirement". Look at the bottom of page 5 and the top of page 6 of the rules.
Each Adventure card features one or more horizontal rows of symbols
Each symbol represents a requirement necessary to complete the task
This tells us that a "Task" is made up of a number of "requirements" (what you are calling a "box"). Now we look at page 6 again under Completing a Task.
When an investigator completes a task, for each of its requirements that corresponds to a specific die result, the player places a die with that result on top of the corresponding requirement.
This tells you that you require at least one die per requirement. How in the world does this rule work of you could place a single "2 Investigation" result on two separate "1 Investigation" requirements? How is it possible to put that one single "2 Investigation" die on both requirements?
Oh for Pete's sake, are you still attacking me, can you not get over this personal kick of yours to attack me
I have never been whining, I'm only responding to peoples post they have directed at me, mainly yours. You could have responded with your opinion instead of how you approached it. I don't appreciate either one of your posts.
Why do you feel the need to attack me on the word "box" and point out the bottom of page 6 that its called a "requirement" and I should be calling it a "requirement"? I already called it a "requirement" in my very first post, but it still doesnt change the fact that its also a box so why do you care? Are you purposefully trying to be malicious?
You still don't seem to be getting the rulebook, the problem is on page 6, it tells us two different ways on how to handle it. It says "the player places a die with that result on top of the corresponding requirement. " But you are taking this out of context, because later it states "In the case of investigation results, a player may need to place more than one die on the card to meet the task's requirements" and most importantly right before that it says "If the player is able and willing to meet all of the rquirements for a single task, he completes that task."
So like i have stated before, what we have here, is the rulebook essentially telling us two conflicting ways to approach how to complete a task. In other words two ways of looking at it. I already presented both of these arguements in my very first post and carefully stated that either one of them could be true. You can certainly have your opinion on one and make a good case for it, thats great. But you don't have to bash other people on theirs, thats just not needed, C'mon lighten up. Can't everyone just get along.