Yeah we've had some issues with players already getting AP8 in the mail and wanting to add it to there cardpool for leagues but the game stores haven't been able to stock'em 'cause their distributors haven't got them yet. Obviously AP8 won't be legal until their available to league players through the store. I'd like to see more coordination between release/availability and league weekly play. My league host had trouble restocking AP7 because his distributors were out. The game store owner contacted FFGs and they allowed him to order directly through them. If you're in town Jim, you are welcome to join us at Bell, Book & Comics on Wednesdays!

Another question. In the 'Heads of Fate' Adventure League encounter the survival guide says "In addition to the primary faction, each player can choose 1 other faction as an allied faction, and use this faction as part of his card pool" The use of the word 'other' seems to indicate a player cannot choose the same faction to be both their primary and allied but the use of the word 'can' seems to indicate that an allied faction is optional and therefore a player could choose to play with a mono faction deck in the league. Is this correct?

Hmmm.. I'm not sure whether the effect drives only the formerly willpowered characters insane or all characters? My first guess was all characters including those originally without willpower. WintermuteZero said: Marius said: Your best shot at Willpower in these factions is: The Underwater Conspiracy Cost 2 Conspiracy. TTCAI Text: If you win this conspiracy, you may cause all characters in play to lose willpower and then go insane, if able. So, you can only use Underwater Conspiracy against Willpower-Characters as i see it, right? Sorry for my questions, but i need a litle bit of trining with understanding the cards correctly :-)

I would like to thank the participants for their contributions in this discusssion. If I may impose once again I have a few more questions. Story Cards; #1. Have we got an official ruling on 'Frozen in Time' yet? "Each player must discard 2 cards from his deck for each resource attached to one of his domains, or destroy that resource." Which player chooses the domains? #2. Back during COCccg Worlds #2 the main development guy for the game ruled that the effect of the Eldritch Story Card 'The Squalid Hamlet' "Each player chooses one of his domains, then attaches the top 5 cards of his discard pile to that domain as resources, if able." could not be triggered unless both players had 5 or more cards in their discard piles. To start I'm not sure if this ruling was correct but it leaves me wondering about the most current Story Card effects. If one of the players is unable to meet the requirements can the effect be triggered? #3. Professor Albert Wilmarth, "While Professor Albert Wilmarth is commited to a story, that story card loses an icon struggle of your choice" When must/can the controller of this character make their 'choice' of which icon struggle to remove? If it said "Action: When...." it would be simple enough but as far as I can tell there has been no eratta on PAW.

Good question. This was an issue for me recently when I decided that Hastur would represent my main faction in the Adventure League senario 'Heads of Fate'. I would like to say that it cancels Forced Responses as well but I must however come to the conclusion that the card has changed and has become more specific in it's wording with the intention of excluding Forced Responses.

That's most likely the case judging by the scale of the peice however, it's unlikely this peice was commisioned and payed for just to exsist as wallpaper. I fully expect to see it on some Cthulhu product in the future. Ruvion said: They are more "cover page" material and have been used as such. I doubt we will ever see anything like that on a card.

Uhhh....wow. If that art makes it on a card it better kick much buttock!

Thanks for your help Dadajef and Marius! I think we'll draft Faction Heads so hopfully that will avoid most last minute deck building. In addition a number of the participants are spliting there shared Core set and APs by faction so it could be there will not be enough flexibility initially to make the match when randomly picking Faction Heads.

Opps. I've already thought of another question! This is pertaining to deckbuilding for the Adventure League senario 'Heads Of Fate'. Do either of your factions (primary or allied) have to match your Faction Head? The wording is a little confusing. The ability to switch up your allied faction from game to game, is this unique to the 'Heads Of Fate' senario or will this be possible in the Leagues as a whole?

Adventure Leagues are about to begin. As a Servitor I don't want to confuse or lead the players down the wrong path so I'm asking the community here to set me straight. I expect to have additional questions in the future but I'll start with this; As far as the icon struggles are concerned, what actions can be taken in the midst of these struggles? In my meta we have always allowed Disrupts during the struggles but Responses and Forced Responses must wait until the window immediately following the struggles. Of course Actions cannot be taken during the struggles. Is any of this consistent with the way the you are playing?

Donald said: I would never do that. Of course not, never!

Sounds good to me! As with many new rulings or mechanics the impending and full consequences cannot be fully realised until sometime afterwards when it has been more thuroughly tested. I like the idea. I hope 'replacement' doesn't do to the struggles what the 'rituals' and such did to the resource system. I guess we're safe as long as it's not too abundant or more importantly 'not too good'. QUOTE; Marius "For now, Julia’s usefulness in the game is reliant on her replacement effect, which allows her to bypass the insanity-producing effect of the terror struggle. The word “instead” lies at the heart of the replacement effect, as it allows the new effect to occur in place of whichever effect it is replacing. Not “in addition to,” but instead. This means that when Julia Brown sacrifices and “replaces” herself with a new copy from your deck, you have effectively gotten around the consequences of losing a terror struggle." This ruling can be found here . The question boiled down to "Why isn't it in the rules book?" - but it is, under the Golden Rule. The meaning of the word "Instead" means you get one effect in the place of the other, not in addition to the other.

Marius, from what I can understand your interpretation of how Julia Browns' ability works seems likely to be correct. The wording however is not obvious so shouldn't we have an official ruling? Whether you're purposely being condenscending I won't venture to say but you do sometimes come off that way maybe when you think you're being clever or cute. You obviously have a wealth of knowledge. The trick is how to present it. This medium allows for a broad spectrum of interpretation and often misunderstandings. In attempt to avoid any misinterpretation, I can certainly be a jerk but I am not trying to be with these observations.

I know some are bashing the spoiled cards from the upcoming APs and they have thier reasons. With very few exceptions I am quite impressed by what I've seen. I've made the choice to push the ol' RESET button, leaving the past behind and to move forward with the hope of drawing new players into the fold. Not to worry though, I haven't suddenly been transformed into a total fanboy. I will always remain critical and outspoken but I must admit Nate has set the hook and with each revealed card it gets deeper. I hope many of the old school competitive players can roll with the punches.

Manit0u said: Seriously, I don't get why this discussion is having place. It might be because some competitively minded players have reservations about the cards that have so far been spoiled for 'The Summons of the Deep' AP. I myself am not solely a competitive player so I'm not as concerned but I can certainly understand why they are and respect their right to express themselves on this forum and your right ManitOu to whine about what you see as thier whinning. Of course you can always avoid reading this topic to save youself the stress?

Does anyone else find the Organized Play Program announcement, 'particularly the instructions for player registration', to be confusing? The seperate responsibilities of player/servitors/store owners are not well defined. The words 'you' and 'your' are often used where the above terms would make things clearer. The instructions refer to the procedure to sign up "your store". Does that mean "your store" as a servitor, player or owner? As a result of my confusion I may have attempted to sign up the store where maybe the owner was required to do so? Also for instance, the players are not responsible for purchasing League Kits, or are they? The article refers to league kits costing $15 but later mentions that "future league kit prize packs will vary". Are these 2 items the same? If these leagues are as advertised, 6 weeks on and 2 off ,doing the math over a 6 month/3 league period = 18 weeks on 6 weeks off = $45 for 3 league packs + $60-$180 for 1-3 of each of the 6 APs + $40-$120 for 1-3 of the Core Set, total = $145-$405 for 6 months/$290-$810 over a year. We can assume the $45-$90 league pack costs will be spread between the participants and store owner. It still remains however a considerable investment. I've also have not been able to log into the OPP site. Maybe someone with better interpretive skills can translate the procedure in a post for the handicapped forum members like myself. It might just be me!

Nice discussion! I also agree with alot of what you're sayin' TRO. Purely competitive players are going to be 'to say the least' unsatisfied with the Call Of Cthulhu LCG, paticularly if and I expect it's true that the new format will only support the new white bordered cards. With that said, I have never been a 'Purely Competitive Player' and in fact I am to a great extent captured by the games subject, flavour and superior mechanics. I myself have shifted gears and expectations a bit and thanks to that I am looking forward to running events as a Servitor in the newly announced OPP. The whole premise of the Nates' cards are crap argument seems to me almost if not completely based on the point of view of a purely competitive player, maybe I'm wrong? In the 'black border only days' the new cards would never hold up but I sense that those days are gone and I'm prepared to turn the page. I'm not suggesting these discussions are invalid because it's important I think to talk about where we've been as well as where we're going. We may be heading for a glorious or noxious rebirth of the game. I hope 'glorious' and I'll be along for the ride to find out. I hope that there will be many other proud parents there in the 'delivery room' to see.

PRODIGEE said: don't know why I feel a little bit upset against ancient players ... (not pointing anyone in particular!) Why being pessimistic about that ? I'm an "not so old" player, despite I have a playset of every card for long ... and I'm really happy to have new challenge, new cards and new opponents to met ! Why don't we use this newly opportunity to make our game bigger and bigger ? Why don't we stop screaming about white boards, reprints and others stuffs ??? It's now time to celebrate the revival of this wonderful game. And some of us might use the energy they have to whine to demonstrate the game to new players. my two cents ... Yeah, I as well wonder why you'd be focusing your angst against the old school players? You mention, "...screaming about white boards, reprints and other stuffs ???" but most of these grievences have been put aside and aren't even much discussed anymore. When they are discussed I haven't noticed anyone 'screaming'. I welcome the discourse whether it be to discuss the positives or negatives. We don't need to whitewash the conversation with positivity. Let's keep it real. Like you PRODIGEE, I see the new start and limited card pool as a chance for a fresh start. I think this experience will take me back to the beginning when all we had was Arkham and those were some really good times! I will be welcoming old hands and newbies to the game without grudges or favouritism.

Ahhh, finally we have the announcement! No really, the Call of Cthulhu OPP is reveiled so get busy Servitors!

Carioz said: World Record! Spotted the first typo in Summons of the Deep AP I 29 minutes after they were spoiled: F10 Erich Zann, Someone really needs to hire a proofreader blah blah blah Fluff text: "Thereafter I heard Zahn every night... I was haunted by the wierdness of his music" You beat me to it! I was just about to reference my 'Encyclopedia Cthulhiana'. The most vital aspect is that the cards play well and have the proper flavour but these typos are now at a ridiculous level.

Wow! To say that I am impressed and intrigued would be an understatement. I like that Julia is making her debut as a neutral character. I'd expect that as she is corrupted she will be transformed into a Cthulhu character represented by an additional card. Erich Zann and the Grim Wraith are nice as well! I'm curious about the Sleepwalker and Dr. Carson. Nice article Nate!

The Spaniard said: Sorry, you don't like the insert tray. Unfortunately, as you say, we decided that keeping the box below the $40 price point was worth this. Also, plastic storage trays tend to not hold components effectively (things will bounce around anyway,) so we feel that giving this back to the customer in the form of a lower price point is the reasonable thing. I can assure you that we have placed as much value for the dollar in this box as we do with every other FFG game. I think it is an excellent set, although I'll take your critique into consideration for the future. I'd also note that the level of hostility is unhelpful in your case. Best Wishes, Christian T. Petersen CEO FFG Amoung other things I find it odd that you as the 'CEO' would choose as your first post on these forums to be in defense of the Core Set packaging? The absence of FFGs participation on this forum has been curious to say the least. I welcome further participation by you and your employees in the future. You say " I think it (Core Set) is an excellent set,...". This is based on what, your extensive experience as a COCccg player?

johnny shoes said: If there were a problem with New Clarney, it would be for MU, not Agency. He's the only 3 cost MU (besides Yog steadfast Learned Astronomer) with willpower. For core players who do not have old MU Clarney, the weakest faction just got dinged. Yes js you've hit the nail on the head. The real problem is MU gets even weaker! It would be a shame to be forced to play MU with Agency limiting the potenial pairings of the Core Set. Personally I think Agency/Shub is the best pairing of the Core Set, lots of nasty suprises.

Also note that Agency has Transient to make 'Torch...' more viable in some circumstances.

A very good point. It does seem like basic common sense. Now I suppose someone will explain that with a tray the Core Set would have been over budget and ask would we be willing to have fewer cards in the Core Set to make up for the added cost of the tray?! Anyone?