Nouvelle FAQ du 18 octobre 2011

dadajef a écrit:ça devrait être la version 1.6 (et non pas 1.5)

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/ffg_content/coc/support/coc-faq%20Ver%202.0%20print-friendly.pdf

Elle apporte quelques présions de règles et de cartes (le 2ème effet du canopic jar est au final un effet passif et non pas une réponse ou une action) mais surtout détail la structure de résolution des actions, effets passifs, réponses forcées (y en a une pleine page).

En gros ce qui change si j'ai tout compris après une lecture rapide :
- Distinction entre le déclenchement de l'action et la résoultion de son effet
- les Réponses sont mises en "attente" le temps de résoudre tous les effets passifs et réponses forcées qui peuvent découler de la résoultion d'une action. (un peu sur le principe de la résolution des histoires ou les réponses sont renvoyés après la résolution des histoires). Une carte qui suite à un effet quitte le jeu, le fait immédiatement (et donc les réponses en "attente" sont perdues).
- On aurait eu un exemple ça aurait été mieux.
- Sinon, si si Cthulhu est un jeu plus simple qu'il n'en a l'air

Au fait, rien sur l'Initiate of Huang Hun (Curse of the Jade Emperor F40), enjoy

Selpoivre a écrit:Déçu déçu déçu....

Rien sur l'Initiate (qui mérite laaaaaargement sa place en restricted) ni sur l'un des deux problèmes du Kopesh (est-ce que je peux annuler la blessure subie par mon perso et quand même tarter la tronche de mon adversaire ?)

B_P a écrit:

Selpoivre a écrit:Déçu déçu déçu....

Rien sur l'Initiate (qui mérite laaaaaargement sa place en restricted) ni sur l'un des deux problèmes du Kopesh (est-ce que je peux annuler la blessure subie par mon perso et quand même tarter la tronche de mon adversaire ?)

Pour le kopesh, c'est non. La justification est que si la blessure est annulée, l'effet n'est pas entièrement fait et donc tout saute d'après Damon.

B_P a écrit:Pour le kopesh, c'est non. La justification est que si la blessure est annulée, l'effet n'est pas entièrement fait et donc tout saute d'après Damon.

Jhaelen a écrit:One ruling that still bothers me is the following regarding Conspiracies:
they equally affect both players!

I'm pretty sure this is a reversal of a previous (official) ruling but cannot seem to find it. Does everyone agree with Damon's ruling?

Imho, it removes the incentive to play any of those Conspiracies.

mzi a écrit:Many conspiracies from the Yhughghoth (place the <h> wherever you want) cycle become less usable. That is a pain. Another pain on top of many others.

A conspiracy card once entered into play functions exactly
like a story card, as the rulebook says. If the effect refers to your
characters committed to this story, would operate exactly the same way
a story with the wording would say, in other words it would apply to
both players. When a conspiracy, like a story event says your, in
relation to the person who has won the card and has chosen to trigger
it, refers to that specific player. Conspiracy cards never refer to
the owner of the card, since there is no controller.

I'm sorry that some people have been playing it wrong, but I just
checked with Nate French who was the designer before me and he says
they have always been played this way, which indicates that some group
of people may not have properly understood the conspiracy card type
since the beginning. The easiest way to think of conspiracies is as a
story card that is in your deck, not as a regular card that you retain
control of and gain sole benefit from.

The Locked Door
0
[Neutral Conspiracy]
Each of your characters committed to this story gains .

The Locked Door
0
[Neutral Conspiracy]
Each of your characters committed to this story gains

kriss a écrit:

The Locked Door
0
[Neutral Conspiracy]
Each of your characters committed to this story gains

If i understand well, ALL characters from both players, will add at each character he control which is commited in The Locked Door :it seams there is no controller for storie card, so each player use trigger for him
That means the player use this conspiracy may lose investigation struggle if opponent have more characters commited in conspiracy ...

Selpoivre a écrit:

kriss a écrit:

The Locked Door
0
[Neutral Conspiracy]
Each of your characters committed to this story gains

If i understand well, ALL characters from both players, will add at each character he control which is commited in The Locked Door :it seams there is no controller for storie card, so each player use trigger for him
That means the player use this conspiracy may lose investigation struggle if opponent have more characters commited in conspiracy ...

Nope. As I understand it, "your" in a conspiracy refers to the winner of this conspiracy (should this winner decide to apply its effects).

Therefore I think my interpretation is weird but correct

juzam a écrit:So the "of your" in the text is not necessary.
"Each characters committed to this story gains ." work very well.
Again a bad wording...

Shuffling a won conspiracy is weird, but as of right now that is the proper way to play it, and unless there is some serious problems that come from it, I am unlikely to change it.

The key is not how other card types are handled, support cards do not play the way event cards do, and neither play the way characters. Card type is the first thing a player needs to consider before any other text. Frequently that will mean little outside of when the card can be played or how it is played, the text becoming the most relevant part of the card from their on out.

Conspiracy cards are clearly outlined as an exception in the rulebook which says treat it like a story card. I do understand some of the confusion, which is why we tried to make things more clear moving forward, but the key to understanding the cards even as they were printed back then, lies in the base rulebook, "Conspiracy cards are built into a player’s deck and played from his hand, but when they are in play they function as additional story cards to which players can commit characters and struggle for success. If a player wins a conspiracy card, it counts towards that player’s total of three story cards necessary to win the game."

Hopefully the players will understand and accept this, and reexamine Conspiracy cards and how and why they should be used in certain decks.

On Oct 20, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Jhaelen wrote:

Hello Damon,

Thanks for the super-fast answer!

I think, the confusing bit is the chosen wording 'each of your characters...'.
If any other card type uses that wording, it only applies to characters under your control.
E.g.:

Lecturing Historian
[Miskatonic University] The Gleaming Spiral F89 / Illustrator: Kristina Gehrmann
[Character] - Faculty.
Cost : 2 / Skill : 2 / Icons: AA
Game Text: Action: Exhaust Lecturing Historian to choose a story. Each of your characters committed to that story gains skill equal to the number of A icons it has.

It's somewhat unintuitive that a card you played is not under your control, even if the rules say it works just like any other story card.
Explicitly mentioning that (by inference) this also means it has no controller would be helpful.

If the Conspiracy cards had simply been saying 'each character...' the intent would have been clearer, imho.

Anyway, at least this also confirms a related issue I was unsure about:

Village of Ash
[Story] The Shifting Sands F9 / Illustrator: Chun Lo
Icons : TCAI
Game Text: Each player chooses one story card that he has won (except this one) and shuffles it into the story deck. Then, shuffle all Relic cards in play into their owners' decks.

So, a player can choose a won Conspiracy card just fine, causing it to be shuffled into the story deck.

I was a bit surprised when this happened in one of the games I played, particularly since the story cards had been sleeved in a different colour than the Conspiracy card, resulting in a logistical problem, since we didn't have any extra sleeves of that colour with us!

I should point out that my grammar here is atrocious, and I apologize
for that. I was responding while in the midst of art direction so I
apologize if it is unreadable. Also James Hata was the designer
immeidately before me, but Nate French designed the original
conspiracy cards, and that was what I was referring to.

*sigh*

Have a great day. I'm going to grab some food before I lose anymore
sanity points.

Prodigee a écrit:Par contre, Damon se plante largement, il suffit de lire le ruling sur les packs des packs du début de l'ère conspiracies. Ca explique bien que les conspiracies fonctionne pour le possesseur de la carte. Sinon-qu'on m'explique comment marche la conspiracies Polar ... ???

Realm of Ice and Death
Conspiracy

Coût 1
After a Polar event is played, attach that card to Realm of Ice and Death.
A Polar event card a player owns can be played from Realm of Ice and Death as if it was in that player's hand by removing 1 success token from Realm of Ice and Death as part of the cost of that event.
Mountains of Madness F20 / Illustrateur Tim Arney-O'Neil

B_P a écrit:Je suppose qu'il vaut mieux se poser les questions maintenant que pendant le tournoi. Mais, s'il vous plait, faites comme tout le monde et jouez un deck student sans problème de wording...