Pulp Writer and the 'If Able' clause

[Nomad 0]

OK, here is a question that came up the other day concerning that old Hastur favourite, Pulp Writer from the Forgotten Cities set. It has two printed terror icons and the text: “Action: pay 1 to choose a character with fewer terror icons than Pulp Writer. That character loses a terror icon, then goes insane, if able.”

 It’s the “if able” bit that is confusing me. According to the FAQ: “Certain card effects contain the text ‘if able.’ For these cards all normal rules apply for choosing targets and triggering effects, with one exception: if there is no legal target during resolution, there is no effect.” It goes on to say “if a player cannot fulfil the entire effect of an ‘if able’ clause, that effect is ignored.”

My question is this then: can Pulp Writer send a character with no terror icons insane? I had always assumed he could, but I am now having second thoughts. Does the ‘if able’ clause mean that the target must have at least one terror icon to remove (because the wording says it loses a terror icon), otherwise the whole effect will fizzle?
 

[TheProfessor 4]

Wow... good question.  I started writing this thinking "of course you can do that", but starting hesitating.

Can you lose an icon if you don't have any?  If the first part can't be accomplished then the second part won't happen.

It's like Byakhee Attack - you can't choose and discard two cards if you only have 1 in your hand, so it doesn't work against an opponent with 1 card.

You might be right - if you can't lose an icon because you don't have one, then the "go insane" part won't happen.

????

[Dadajef 0]

Faq, p.4 Icon Removal (just before the "if able clause"):

You can “remove” an icon from a character who
does not have that icon, but the modified number
of icons that character possesses will still be 0. 

So the first part of the effect can resolve if the character can lose 1 or 0 icons.

For the word then see Faq p.3 

Any time two effects are linked by the word
"then," the first effect must resolve in order for
the second effect to occur.

The if able means, you can't just use Pulp Writer to remove a terror icon to a Character which have 2 terror icons, for example. The character must lose 1 or 0 icons and must become insane. If he can't become insane (because he have others terror icons or willpower for example), all the effect is ignored.

 

[Nomad 0]

Thanks Dadajef, that makes sense now. 

I had been playing Pulp Writer incorrectly in the past.  I had allowed a Pulp Writer (with extra terror icons from some source) to make multiple payments of 1 to remove multiple terror icons from characters with the last one sending the victim insane.  I will explain this to my group.  Incidentally,  I must say I really do admire those players who play this game whose first language is not English, at times it is hard enough to understand even for a native speaker. 

Professor, I am glad that I am not the only one that gets confused at times!

 

[Dadajef 0]

We have played Pulp Writer like you (multiple payements of 1 to remove multiple terror icons...) a lot of time because the "if able" is not easy to understand.

If you can read or translate french see this post about the if able clause with an exemple with the Pulp Writer :

cenacle-hd.bb-fr.com/points-de-rgles-questions-sur-les-cartes-f28/un-post-lire-imperatif-t959.htm

[Veross 0]

Hi Guys, I have a doubt here.

The text says "That character loses a terror icon, then goes insane, if able.”

 

I read that as 2 "actions": First is "lose T", please look that there is comma there.

Next to do is "make unsane, if able".

So you take away T icon, and then if able go insane.

 

Please look at another example:

"That character loses a terror icon AND goes insane, if able.” - if the text looks like that then the rules applies as you write above. In that case "if able" applies to both "actions" and does not remove T if the character cannot go insane.

 

I think that here FFG should clarify.

[marius8 1]

Hmmmm... templating and the 'if able' clause. It's always such fun.

 

My take on it is that you can have negative terror icons. Or negative stats in general. Like, if you would remove a terror icon with Pulp Writer, when the target doesn't have terror icons, then add terror icons after that, suddenly you'll notice that you're missing a terror icon because all values are calculated together, and it's not based on timestamp or whatever.

Long story short; Yes I think PW can drive someone insane even if it doesn't have a terror icon.

The 'if able' clause is very counterintuitive. There is something about it in the FAQ, but it's the reverse of how it is played/intended/templated sometimes. The FAQ entry on it is more like making to wrongs to make a right. Often, the game makes much more sense if we would just forget that FAQ line, really.

[jhaelen 98]

Marius said:

The 'if able' clause is very counterintuitive. There is something about it in the FAQ, but it's the reverse of how it is played/intended/templated sometimes. The FAQ entry on it is more like making to wrongs to make a right. Often, the game makes much more sense if we would just forget that FAQ line, really.

q.f.t. is all I can say to that.

[Nomad 0]

I agree a bit of clarification from FFG would be welcome as it is not at all obvious and Pulp Writer is such a popular card. 

I must admit I do rather hope he is allowed to remove multiple terror icons as he is fun to play that way and he was a real boost to one of my favourite factions.  It would be nice to know before Stahleck.

Hint to FFG: If the "If able" part of his text was simply removed, I think all the confusion would go away...