HilariousPete

Members
  • Content count

    342
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About HilariousPete

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    http://-
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Tettnang, BW, Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

76 profile views
  1. I think this is not the case. Insane characters which are also facedown lose their faction and just retain their title. FAQ 3.1 says that cards attached to Fthaggua don't even retain their title. I'd be really surprised if they would retain their faction...
  2. a) Jhaelen doesn't read anything from Back From the Dead into Eidolon. He just expressed his wish for Eidolon being worded more clearly (for example, stating what happens when Eidolon leaves play but not the character). b) Right, good obeservation. Control-taking triggered effects are permanent effects, so I'd also vote for "the character stays in play under your control if your Eidolon is removed". (As if this were a democracy ) Granted, the FAQ entry doesnt specifically mention the phrase "return to play", but I think it is sensible to extrapolate the entry to include this phrase: 1.4) Duration of Effects If a triggered effect has no specified duration, then the effects of that ability expire at the end of the current phase. “Put into play,” “Remove from play,” and “Take Control” effects are all an exceptions to this rule, and unless specified by a specific duration are considered to be permanent effects. With “take control” effects, control of the card in question is granted to the most recent “take control” effect.
  3. I think it is correct. After you ready the character, the Forced Response triggers and resolves making the character insane. Right after that, the Stygian is discarded (I look at rule texts as passive effects). All this happens in step 5 of the Action window. Later, in step 6, you trigger the Response of the Greatest Fear. By then, that character's controller is your opponent.
  4. I think it does not resolve. After the opponent commits, Actions may be taken (and you resolve Houdini's effect). After that, there's the green box "Story resolution" (no Actions may be played). So the reasonable point to check this would be at the start of the green box on p. 13 of the Core set rulebook. The story still continues. From the FAQ: It is possible for a player to win an icon struggle even when his opponent has committed no characters A story will "stop" and won't resolve if it is won in the meantime, though: Additionally, if a story card is won by any player before it is resolved (i.e., at any point during the story resolution sequence), all success tokens are removed from the story, and all characters are no longer committed to that story. Any remaining steps of the sequence are not resolved. That's difficult. Now there's no one left at the story at all. While I'm pretty sure that the "no characters at stories"-check is made at the beginning of the story resolution, I don't know if it is continuously done during its resolution. I'd guess the story continues and counts as considered resolved (usually with no results to the game, since neither played had any character at that story), but that's a guess. You need to ask someone else about this one... Although the answer to this question seldomly makes a difference. I can only imagine a combination with Expert Testimony or Inconspicuous Zoog to have any effect at all.
  5. Oh absolutely. I totally overlooked that issue
  6. I've got to side with Jhaelen here - the Mummy's effect is triggered in the discard pile, and that's all that counts. The reason why the Mummy got there is irrelevant. Yithian Scout has his text to limit his effect to be only triggered in the discard pile. It's meant as a limitation, not a clarification regarding Tesla. (There are some effects that may be triggered in discard pile and from somewhere else - see Stalking Hound: "Response: After an opponent's character enters play due to a triggered effect, put Stalking Hound in play from your hand or discard pile.") Or does the confusion come from a timing problem? Here p. 16 of the FAQ 3.0 is helpful. The timing structure for an Action (e.g. if the Mummy entered the discard pile because of a Shotgun Blast "Action: Choose and wound a character with skill X or lower.") is like this: 1. Action is initiated. 2. Disrupts 3. Action is executed. 4. Passive abilities 5. Forced Responses I. Forced Response ability is triggered. II. Disrupts III. Forced Response is executed. (Follow steps I through V, etc.) IV. Passive abilities are initiated. V. Other forced response (requirements now met) are initiated. 6. Responses 7. End of Action The Shotgun blast is an Action and is resolved in step 3 (-> the Mummy goes into the discard pile in step 3). This satisfies the Mummy's Forced Response, wich triggers in step 5.I and wounds all characters in step 5.III. This satisfies Tesla's Forced Response that puts a success token on him in step 5.V. I hope I could help you with that... timing in CoC is a subtle thing wich takes some time to understand, but afterward frees the player from thinking about the stack as other card games use it (e.g. MtG). FFG's card designers clearly indicate at which time you might play a card (there are some really tough exceptions of course). By this, designers take some mental work off from you. Constructs like Disrupts and Forced Reponses and Responses also exist in games with a stack, but you as the player have to "parse" each card's text correctly and watch out for subtleties like present tense vs. past tense and so on... Kind Regards - and have fun with the game Pete
  7. badash56 said: This is a good question. I think the FAQ only covers when attachments leave play, not blanked (could be wrong). That's also the only thing I found. If an attached card gives you control of another player’s card, you retain control of the attached card only as long as the attached card is in play. badash56 said: We do know that when attachments leave play control reverts to the owner. Would the same logic apply to blanking? I think so. A player gains control over a character via Infernal Obsession's passive. If that passive is blanked, control should go back again, because the ongoing passive effect is the thing that keeps the character under control of the other player. (I guess we all agree that e.g. icons given by the Lightning Gun would vanish if its text box were blanked. Why should it be different for passives that deal with control?)
  8. Received a very fast answer from Damon Stone - I've been wrong, the Prism doesn't allow prophecies to be triggered.
  9. Q: If a Prophecy is face-up on the deck not via its Action but via cards like Prism of the Many Views, may its Response be triggered? A: No.
  10. Sorry for the long delay after that I'm posting, but I didn't have the SoK rules sheet at hand until now. I think prophecies may be triggered if they are face-up on the deck, no matter how they entered that state. Usually card effects can't be triggered from out-of-play by the rules, but there are already some cards that supersede this rule. For example Local Sheriff: "Action: Pay 1 to return Local Sheriff to your hand if it entered your discard pile this phase." That effect is implicitly stating that it can be triggered out of the discard pile. It's the same with prophecies. All their responses read "Response: After X, discard this card from the top of the deck to do Y." So they're also implicitly stating that they're triggerable from out-of-play. To me, the section in the SoK rules sheet reads like an example for the regular use of prophecies, not like a rule. Especially since it only describes what happens if you use the prophecy's Action, but not what happens if it is face-up on top of the deck through some other way. But like Penfold said, it can easily go both ways, and Danigral made an excellent explanation for the other way. I send a rules question to FFG, so we have confirmation. SoK sheet: Prophecies When a player plays a Prophecy event card from his hand, triggering its Action effect, the card is placed face up on top of his deck. Each Prophecy event then has a triggering condition, which, when met, allows an effect to be triggered from the top of its owner's deck. If an effect would cause the Prophecy event card to move from the top of a player's deck before its Response effect is triggered, the Prophecy card is turned face-down before resolving the effect.
  11. Good to know. Thx for sharing!
  12. Danigral said: Poor kamacausey thought he was asking a simple question. Talk about a can of worms. lol. Haha indeed Danigral said: HilariousPete said: Furthermore "Cards cannot be attached to FS" is ambiguous in English. One meaning is that the act of attaching a card is forbidden (-> 1 single point in timeline). The other meaning is, that the state of a card being attached to the Shoggoth is forbidden (-> all the time). With the former, things are just like you say, and Infernal Obsession will stay on the Shoggoth after he gains his textbox back. In the latter case, the Obsession will fall off as soon as the Shoggoth has his textbox again. I have no idea what the designers intended ;-) But I'd guess that it's the latter one, just to prevent such strange constellations. I think they changed this, because the attachments section in the FAQ says that play restrictions for attachments are checked only when playing the attachment. So I think it would stay on. Sorry for the long delay… It's true what you say, but that FAQ section deals with texts like "attach to X" printed on the attachment itself - but the text from the Shoggoth is formulated in a completely different way, and it's on the target, not on the attachment. So I think the FAQ section about play requirement doesn't apply here at all. From a very simple point of view, what does the Shoggoth's text say? No attachments on the Shoggoth. And the passive just states this: Cards cannot be attached to the Shoggoth. (There's still the ambiguity if this text refers to the act of attaching or the state of being attached, but the more I think about it, I'd say it's the latter one. So the passive is "always on" (unless blanked) and forbids attachment cards on the Shoggoth. If it is unblanked later, it is "on" again and leads to the discarding of the attachment.)
  13. jhaelen said: I think you'd first have to show how someone managed to attach Infernal Obsession to Forgotten Shoggoth in the first place. This should be very hard to do and probably only happens when the stars are right… Hehe, yes jhaelen said: Since we've had a reversal of rules in the FAQs, attachments now only check if they're legal when attaching them, not afterwards, so I suppose you could trigger Dimensional Rift at some later point rather being forced to do it in the same phase. That's right. But I'm not sure if this applies to the Shoggoth, too. Usually, the attachments state "attach to X" and such play restrictions are only checked once, when the attachment is played. With the Shoggoth, things are complicated. I think "Cards cannot be attached to FS" is not a play restriction as it is defined in the FAQ: (2.33) Attachments Cards with the Attachment subtype are followed by the term in the card text box “Attach to X.” (For example, attach to a character you control). This term is not a card effect, but rather an additional requirement to play the card. … An attachment only checks the requirements for attaching it when the card enters play. Furthermore "Cards cannot be attached to FS" is ambiguous in English. One meaning is that the act of attaching a card is forbidden (-> 1 single point in timeline). The other meaning is, that the state of a card being attached to the Shoggoth is forbidden (-> all the time). With the former, things are just like you say, and Infernal Obsession will stay on the Shoggoth after he gains his textbox back. In the latter case, the Obsession will fall off as soon as the Shoggoth has his textbox again. I have no idea what the designers intended ;-) But I'd guess that it's the latter one, just to prevent such strange constellations.
  14. .Zephyr. said: "If its not your rift. [Rifts] Controller chooses to destroy infirmary first. [infirmary's] Disrupt has already altered the effect [of Rifft so its too late]" I think/hope I understand now. You wanted to say that even if the Infirmary is destroyed first (which you think will happen if the Rift's controller is different from the Infirmary's controller), it doesn't matter, since the effect has already been replaced? .Zephyr. said: Maybe each card destruction having its own initiation, disrupt, resolution sequence or something. This contradicts FAQ guidelines a bit No, I don't think so either. The Rift has 1 action, so the timing structure is run once, not one time for each affected card. .Zephyr. said: Ok, i was quite sure player triggering an effect chooses, not controller of said cards… This is wierd IMO as there is still a question of the exact order of characters leaving play. Whos characters get destroyed first? Can other side react? Is it one from one side then one from other? I cant find a case where it would matter now, but such stuff often starts being a problem with introduction of new cards. Intuitively I also thought that the active player decides the order. But the FAQ Danigral stated tells us "no". The controller decides the order (I think the controller of cards leaving play is meant, but I'm not sure). So Player A decides the order in which his cards leave play, and player B decides the order in which B's cards leave play. But I can't tell which "packet of cards" leaves play first… I'd guess the active player decides, but that's a pure guess. You need to ask someone else. Usually it also doesn't matter. The case with Shoggoth+Obsession is extremely rare, perhaps not even possible (see my answer to jhaelen). Regarding reacting: Sure they can. But Responses come later, after the Rift's Action is resolved and each card has left play. .Zephyr. said: Ok got one: Rift + forgotten shoggoth with Infernal obsession - attaching something to shoggoth would require blanking his text but it could be done i think. (unless cannot have attachments does count after getting text back, not 100% sure here but i think its like invulnerability and dmg, you cant get one, but if you have it already it stays) When Obsession is destroyed shoggoth will change sides during resolution of effect and might change other players options … idont remeber how was Rift vs Forgotten Shoggoth ruled, anyone remembers? Ok this is really complicted and seldom now ;-) I just assume the Obsession+Shoggoth thing were possible. I remember the discussion about the Shoggoth, I also took part in it ;-) The Shoggoths's second passive is an altering effect. Passive altering effects are "faster" than Disrupts: The alteration takes place during initiation of the altered effect. If a passive ability would alter an action as it is being initiated, 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. So if player A controls the Rift and the Shoggoth via Infernal Obsession, all his cards (with the exception of the Shoggoth) will be put underneath his deck, and his opponent's will go to the discard pile. The order of the cards leaving play doesn't matter, since the alteration already took place during initiation. Even if the Shoggoth were the first character to leave play, the alteration has been done already. (The Shoggoth is an exception and doesn't go underneath the deck of player A, because his effect doesn't apply to himself at all - if a card changed control and leaves play, it will be returned to its owner's discard pile, FAQ 1.13) If player A were stupid enough to let the Obsession leave play before the Shoggoth, I think the Shoggoth would switch sides and go to B, and will leave play on his side. I don't think the Shoggoth will go underneath the deck of player B then (because the effect has already been altered long ago, and only for player A…) At least that's what I think. To be sure, you should submit a rules question ;-)
  15. Danigral said: when something leaves play, it does so *immediately*, and the Disrupt: would not be in play anymore to trigger for the character being destroyed. Ah, I think the confusion lies here. Cards don't leave play immediately after triggering the Rift's effect. There's a small slot between the initiation and the resolution of an effect - the disrupt slot. So after the initiation, we know that a lot of cards (among them MU characters) will leave play in future. This knowledge satisifies the trigger condition for the Infirmary. After the Infirmary's effect is resolved, the resolution of the Rift's Action begins - now the characters+supports leave play, one at a time, with the selected characters being returned to hand instead of the discard pile. It's the same with this example in the FAQ: For example, if Darrin plays the triggered ability on Slavering Gug (Core Set F124) on Tommy’s Jack “Brass” Brady (Core Set F61), Tommy may choose to use Jack “Brass” Brady’s Disrupt: action, which would return him to Tommy’s hand. Assuming both players subsequently pass, the Slavering Gug’s ability now resolves. However, since Jack “Brass” Brady is no longer in play and is thus an illegal target, the Slavering Gug’ s effect is ignored Card texts so that you don't need to look them up too: Slavering Gug: Action: Pay 4 to choose and wound a character. Jack "Brass" Brady: Disrupt: Before a triggered ability resolves, return Jack "Brass" Brady to his owner's hand.