Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

New to CoC LCG, and old Magic player, lots of rules questions!

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
98 replies to this topic

#81
Danigral

Danigral

    Advanced Member

  • Small Council
  • 1358 posts

Savio Corvi. Ok so this guy is a jerk with conspiracies out. You MUST have a day card or card effect to hurt him.
So that leaves me with 2 questions

1: What determines EXACTLY what is a day card? We've been going off of "Day. It is Day" as the requirement. Cards that get boosted by Day effects are not day cards. Is this correct? So basically you gotta force them to sacrifice him indirectly or play a global kill all Day card. Is this correct?

On that note, question 2: I've seen several references to "If a card effect destroys this card" and that the Combat Struggle DOES trigger effects like this. Does that mean Savio cannot be wounded in a combat struggle if it isn't a day card? As the only character I'm aware of with this power (many supports have it) this seems incredibly powerful and difficult to play around, and I want to make sure I'm not missing anything

1. Day is a keyword, so a Day card is any card with the keyword 'Day'. So yes, only a Day card that says to destroy all Night cards will affect Savio.
2. The effects of a combat struggle are not considered a card effect, but a game effect. I believe what you saw before was a reference to card effects that wound and thereby destroy a character, such as Khopesh. Savio, afaik, can be wounded via combat struggles.

Mists of Lethe: Does this follow the "Military Bike" rules, where it can only commit to stories where other characters are at, or does this allow game break rules like Noises in the Hills?

I would say that it would only allow you to commit a defender to a story following normal commitment rules, i.e. to a story with attackers.

Visitor from the Spheres; I understand the "problem" with his effect is it is an exact copy. IE: No new targets etc, but you can use it to double up effects correct? In most examples I've seen with this card (ArkhamInmate had a non violating mill deck based off it) but if I were to cast say, Casting off the Skin, then activate Visitor, that would automatically target the same guy, and double the effect on him? I'm aware X cards become zero but want to make sure I'm using this card properly when it comes to buffs, global effects etc.

Yes, that's right. You are copying the effects, including the target that you already named.

Card Memory and 'Once Per Turn" - As I'm learning the true terror of Yithian Mill played correctly, I want to make sure I understand the card memory rules. Simple example. I have 3 Yithian Scouts in my discard pile, I trigger all 3, and amazingly, all 3 get non characters and return to play. I then kill them all again in the same turn. You and I know they've all been used, but moving in and out of play zone does NOT reset this correct?

It does reset the "memory" of the card since it is entering an out of play zone.

Stone Calendar: From what I can see, this is one of the only cards referring to success tokens not specifying or errated to "Story" success tokens. So this can indeed mill tokens off of Fated creatures etc, correct?

IIRC, that is correct.

Station Eismitte: Explorer and Scientist Characters are immune to triggered character abilites. Does this include their own negative effects? For example, Reckless Elder Thing says "Forced Response; when this character commits to a story, wound it"
He is a scientist and it's a triggered character effect, so he no longer wounds himself?

Characters are never immune to their own effects/abilities.

Triggered Effects from Discard: Yeah yeah I know, ANOTHER one of these questions. When the card is triggered, this bypass ALL costs of the card correct? For example, Flanking Manuevers says Exhaust 2 Characters with C icons. Is this part ignored when triggered by say, Naomi O'bannion?

"Triggering" is the same as "Playing" except bypassing the printed cost. You still must pay other costs associated with the effect. Just read the "triggered effect" as anything after the bold "Action:" word.

Temporal Slip: I know this card was discussed a few weeks back, but I was unable to find the post. It's written weird, and breaks lots of rules. Just need a 100% "How the hell does this work?"
We've been playing as "AFTER a struggle of your choice occurs at a story and resolves fully, name any icon struggle in the game (not nessacarily at that story) and you get the "Win" effects of that struggle. You then continue down the line as normal. So for example on a standard story, Terror goes off, I win, they make a character insane. I then temporal slip, declare combat, they suffer a wound as if they lost a combat struggle, we then proceed to the next actual combat struggle. Am I doing this wrong? If so, please explain. This card can be read so many ways, and my English may be getting in the way again heh

Yes, that sounds right. You can disrupt the resolution of a story at least after the terror effect resolves, and you can name any struggle.

On that note, if I were to use Visitor of the Spheres ability / question I asked above, this would fully copy it to it's extent, even the chosen struggle trigger yes?

Yes. Exact copy.

Hand of Aforgomon: All chars are considered to have 0 skill at that story. Considered is a terrible word in a game like this, and yes I saw the new errata update on him in the FAQ. So he basically says "All characters at the same story as him as Skill 0, as an absolute, much like Guzheng. Now, if he has O'Bannion's Ledger attached, this will discard everyone from play where he is committed yes? If he safe from this effect or does the book take him out as well?

It will discard everyone, including him.

Cards that can effect stories / conspiracies: With Negotium going to be a bit more popular, and recently learning how deadly a well played Mages Machinations can be (Jim, Scott and Jeff all made me fear that card at our Store Championships) I'd like to have a list of all cards that can "deal" with these major problems, and very few cards can interact with story cards.

Foiled, neutral attachment, blanks text of story
Frozen time, Blanks any attached card
Dragged into the Deep: Send any non unique card to the bottom of owners deck

Is there anything else I'm missing? I feel like this type of card will be much more needed for a while for obvious reasons.

I think that's it.

Blackball Jim: If the opponent's domains are all drained, does the ability auto succeed or auto fail?

It would auto fail since there would be no referenced "opponent's domain". However, since there is no real effect to that ability, I don't think you can trigger it to begin with.

Ambush: Nightmare of a card wording wise. We golding ruling this? Lets you play a character cost 3 or less as an event, but still keeps "Played from your hand" effects triggering, then its sac'ed at end? Anything other than this the card seems like a gross misprint or waste of a card

Yes, it allows you to play a card outside of normal operations. There was a big stink about this card when it was spoiled (including from me) about the wording, but it works. Contrast with Midwife which says "as if it were in your hand as your next action." This doesn't let you get around normal player action constraints.

Draining Domains: Draining a domain is NOT an action that opens a response window correct? We've learned a come into play ability response has an action window to being played (as playing a card is an action, thus opening a response, see the Lookout / Nodens discussion) but draining a domain is NOT something you can respond too, correct?

Draining a domain is a passive step of paying a cost usually. I suppose hypothetically if a card had a disrupt that triggered off of a domain being drained then you could. And maybe even a response, but it would happen after the action is fully resolved, i.e. the card is already played.

#82
Zephyr

Zephyr

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 787 posts
1. He's immune to card effects. Getting wounded during C struggle is not card effect. You just cant get rid of him using your Kopesh/Pushed into beyond, etc. Sacrifice AFAIK is a card effect, its often not targeted, but it still doesn't work as he's immune.
He is Night. And pretty much all cards "Day. It is day." have "Destroy all Night cards." part on them. If day boosted card has no "Day" subtype it doesn't count IMO, but i cant remember many such cards. Specifics could help. So if you're really that worried you can play some day card. T + fast is surely nice, but he doesn't look that gamebreakingly threatening to me.
2. Wound resulting from losing combat struggle is not a card effect. Its a game effect.
3. I see nothing stopping you from committing opponents characters to new stories when hes in offence. Im not 100% sure you can commit defender to new story. Lets say 70% it can.
4. Visitor from the Spheres - no idea. Hate this cards wording.
5. Scouts
FAQ only says "A card whose effect triggers as a response from the discard pile may only be triggered once per met trigger requirement."
So Scout is still broken and can mill opponents whole deck, lol... but assuming "Action" should work the same way going out of discard pile should reset memory. (or it could be errated to "1 time per turn" in which case it could happen only a single time per turn no matter how many Scouts are there and what happens to them)
6 Stone Calendar - not 100% sure but i agree with your interpretation.
7. Immunity to own triggered. Tough one. Regarding The Claret Knight it was ruled that he is not immune to his own response. I'd say this tuling backfires on Elder Thing making it not immune as well. But it sounds like an unintended consequence, so i'd ask FFG if i wanted to be sure.
8 Incorrect. Domain drain cost written as a number on top left of a card applies only when you play the card standard way. If you trigger its ability this cost is irrelevant. But if ability has any other cost it must still be payed in order to use that ability.
If there was an event 0 cost saying "Pay 2 to do X" ppl would laugh at it hard, but it would be mechanically different in this case.
9 Slip. Correct, after any struggle resolves (so usually after T struggle) you choose any struggle type and get its win effect, so either one wound, one insane, additional success or additional ready. Some cards can affect those effects altering them.
Visitor again, no f***ing idea. Hate the card.
10 Hand vs ladger. All gone including him. Maybe some timing trick based on order the cards are discarded could do some magic. Like discarding opponents characters first, then discarding hand or ladger wielding guy to stop the effect. It could work... But probably not, and i'm not going to start another rant on how terrible passive effects clash during another effects resoultion timing rules are.
11 Conspiracies. I cant remember more at this time. And i'm not shure blanking Mages Machinations will do you any good. Im pretty sure characters stay out of play even if blanked. They might not come back if someone wins it.
12 IMO auto fails as X is never greater nor smaller than -none- in this game.
13 Ambush - Don't cry over bookmarks, waste of time. Unless someone finds some rules glitch or nice combo playing a card requires paying its cost, it will trigger it "when you play" ability, as you have to actually play it, and it will be gone after phase ends. I cant see much use of it, but card like this sometimes make miracles happen :P
14. Error. Actions are: Playing a card, triggering an "Action: " during action slots. Some game triggered "action like things" like story resolution or committing have response window. Any effect has to work in CoC timing framework defined on several pages of FAQ. There is no "respond to draining a domain" slot, but its not like you can just drain a domain for no reason. You usually drain domain as a cost for some effect, and this effect defines possible timing. Sometimes you drain as a result of some effect. Still this effect is what defines timing here, not draining domains itself.

#83
Jhaelen

Jhaelen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1082 posts

3. I see nothing stopping you from committing opponents characters to new stories when hes in offence. Im not 100% sure you can commit defender to new story. Lets say 70% it can.

You mean apart from the FAQ?

Military Bike (F102)
Characters can only be re-committed by Military Bike to a unresolved story where there are already characters.

13 Ambush - Don't cry over bookmarks, waste of time. Unless someone finds some rules glitch or nice combo playing a card requires paying its cost, it will trigger it "when you play" ability, as you have to actually play it, and it will be gone after phase ends. I cant see much use of it, but card like this sometimes make miracles happen :P

I think that's actually a very nice card. It's very flexible and costs 0. It's first benefit is the surprise factor, second, it allows you to use 'when you play...' effects, so it's better than allowing you to put a character into play. Downsides are that you have to make sure the resources match and of course the sacrifice at the end. Tip: Choose a character with an effect that requires it to be sacrificed anyway ;)
I suppose it's a Johnny card, but it definitely gets my creative juices flowing. It even fits right into my latest deck, except I'd have to replace Syndicate faction with Shub...hmm...

#84
Zephyr

Zephyr

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 787 posts
"can only be re-committed by Military Bike"
This qoute doesn't seem to cover anything other than Bike. Its a card effect commit so it doesnt have to follow normal procedure. I might have missed something though. I dont remember what exactly disallows commiting to stories that don't have active players characters commited. (they wont resolve anyway) Maybe it should still apply,

AD Ambush
Draw disadvantage to have a little surprise factor with massive drawback of sacrifice. As i said someone can make some magic happen with it, but in general its a bad card.

AD Visitor from the Spheres
@ Danigral thx for explanation, now that i think of it it makes sense, as effect is the part after paying cost and choosing targets
i still think this card should get a FAQ explanation or some extra text as this type of effect is unique and easy to missinterpret

#85
BeldVanGuard

BeldVanGuard

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts
Danigral,

Well I hosed up my multi-quote thing because I'm tired, so apologies this is a mess. Thank you again for the time and answers.


1. Day is a keyword, so a Day card is any card with the keyword 'Day'. So yes, only a Day card that says to destroy all Night cards will affect Savio.
2. The effects of a combat struggle are not considered a card effect, but a game effect. I believe what you saw before was a reference to card effects that wound and thereby destroy a character, such as Khopesh. Savio, afaik, can be wounded via combat struggles.

Ok so a card saying "if it is Day, this char gets XXX" does NOT qualify as a Day card. It has to say IT IS DAY? Figured as much, but wanted to make sure. Thank you


I would say that it would only allow you to commit a defender to a story following normal commitment rules, i.e. to a story with attackers.

I assumed this as well, but the reason I asked is because of the recent discussion with Noises in the Hills, Swimming in the Deep etc. This does seem correct and how we been playing it though.


It does reset the "memory" of the card since it is entering an out of play zone.

That is evil as hell


Characters are never immune to their own effects/abilities.

Where is this written? I believe you, just can't recall ever reading this anywhere. Also, damnit.


"Triggering" is the same as "Playing" except bypassing the printed cost. You still must pay other costs associated with the effect. Just read the "triggered effect" as anything after the bold "Action:" word.

OK easy enough to remember, thank you.


Yes, that sounds right. You can disrupt the resolution of a story at least after the terror effect resolves, and you can name any struggle.


It would auto fail since there would be no referenced "opponent's domain". However, since there is no real effect to that ability, I don't think you can trigger it to begin with.

Ok so if they are all drained, you can't target a drained domain to drain, since the exact conditional wording isn't met, thus fizzling the ability. Well that's a shame. If it could be triggered when they are all tapped out as an auto win, that would make him much more viable


Yes, it allows you to play a card outside of normal operations. There was a big stink about this card when it was spoiled (including from me) about the wording, but it works. Contrast with Midwife which says "as if it were in your hand as your next action." This doesn't let you get around normal player action constraints.

Yeah I remember all the hubbub over this card. I been toying with it, and wanted to make sure I was playing it right. As I said, its basically useless if this isn't what it did, so glad that's correct.


Draining a domain is a passive step of paying a cost usually. I suppose hypothetically if a card had a disrupt that triggered off of a domain being drained then you could. And maybe even a response, but it would happen after the action is fully resolved, i.e. the card is already played.

Ok makes sense. The reason I asked is any of the characters or spells that increase cost (Dampen Light, the Agency guy) don't seem nearly as helpful as one would like. Since active player always has first action, you could never increase the cost of their first card played a turn with any of these effects, because none are disrupts. If draining a domain was an action, you could then, but that didn't sound right. Was just hoping they were more useful than they are.

#86
Zephyr

Zephyr

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 787 posts
Day. <- Makes card a day card
It is day. <- Effect that changes game state to be considered day
(Destroy all Night cards.)

Immune to own effects.
Damon said it about Claret Knight. I don't remember if it was added to FAQ.

Jim and draining.
Im pretty sure you can trigger it. Most effects can be played doing nothing, with exception of not playing cost, cards that explicitly cannot be X and targeting fail. But for targeting there has to be word "choose", otherwise effect resolves as much as possible. So IMO it fires, but its still useless as opponent resource count is -none- and all compare with none auto-fails.

And all ignored my Scout still broken comment? (point 5)
I missed something or is there still whole in FAQ patch of Ihtians?

#87
BeldVanGuard

BeldVanGuard

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts

Day. <- Makes card a day card
It is day. <- Effect that changes game state to be considered day
(Destroy all Night cards.)

Immune to own effects.
Damon said it about Claret Knight. I don't remember if it was added to FAQ.

Jim and draining.
Im pretty sure you can trigger it. Most effects can be played doing nothing, with exception of not playing cost, cards that explicitly cannot be X and targeting fail. But for targeting there has to be word "choose", otherwise effect resolves as much as possible. So IMO it fires, but its still useless as opponent resource count is -none- and all compare with none auto-fails.

And all ignored my Scout still broken comment? (point 5)
I missed something or is there still whole in FAQ patch of Ihtians?


I didn't ignore it, but yeah it's still broken. Sadly it falls under the "Cant prove when it was where" out of play state, and can still be triggered. They COULD errata it and word it like On the Lam where it is "A card named this can only be activated once a turn" but that would be an extreme overnerf and wreck the whole mechanic of him. It's extremely annoying, but I don't think it's too big of a deal. The Yithian deck as a whole took a pretty big hit with the new restrictions and a tiny boost with the "trigger" mechanic change making Snow Graves not stop as much as it did (but still speed bumps it bad)

Ok so if any card has the word Day / Night on it, it qualifies as a Day/Night card? Then weird ones like Savio are not a night card until activated as per his new ruling, correct?

The FAQ says nothing of Characters cannot be immune to their own abilities. However I just found the old forum post from Damon back in 2012 stating this. Even covers the exact combo that made me bring it up. Kinda sucks but alrighty.

Blackball Jim is clear now, and that is unfortunate. Thanks

Back to the deck building drawing board!

#88
jasonconlon

jasonconlon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 299 posts

Ok so if any card has the word Day / Night on it, it qualifies as a Day/Night card?

If it has (or has gained) 'Day.' or 'Night.', then yes. (Obviously this excludes cards that only say "While it is Day/Night...", though.)

Then weird ones like Savio are not a night card until activated as per his new ruling, correct?

Correct, as confirmed here.

The FAQ says nothing of Characters cannot be immune to their own abilities. However I just found the old forum post from Damon back in 2012 stating this. Even covers the exact combo that made me bring it up. Kinda sucks but alrighty.

You must have missed this in the FAQ --
(2.36) Immune
Some cards have the card text "Immune to X" in their text boxes. This means that they cannot be targeted by cards with that subtype and/or card type. This also means that if a card with that subtype and card type does not target a specific character, but affects all characters or a group of characters, these cards ignores that effect. A character can never be immune to its own effects.

#89
BeldVanGuard

BeldVanGuard

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts
Ok so say, Church Operative, is NOT a day card? Think we've been playing these wrong for a while.

I did miss that part in the FAQ so I fail miserably heh

#90
jasonconlon

jasonconlon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 299 posts

Ok so say, Church Operative, is NOT a day card?

That's right. Church Operative (which reads "While it is Day, each opponent must discard a card from his hand in order to target an Agency character you control.") is NOT a 'Day' card.

#91
BeldVanGuard

BeldVanGuard

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts
Incoming stupid question,

The joys of teaching dozens of new people, (which is a good thing!) and getting hammered with questions, and everyone using Khopesh, ugh lol.

Ok so, come into play abilities. Again see the Lookout vs Nodens topic.

So as long as it isn't a Forced Response, the act of playing the card, before triggering the response from come into play, can be responded too, correct?
So if Grasping Cthonian comes into play and there is a Khopesh out, it can be killed before it's effect goes off destroying Khopesh. Is this correct?

Also, I am 90% sure the answer is no but it came up last night and there is a minor discussion to be had over it. I have Lucas Tetlow in play, opponent uses Flooded Vault to fetch Khopesh. This still counts as "playing" the card and doesn't loophole Tetlows disrupt steal correct?

#92
jasonconlon

jasonconlon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 299 posts
Grasping Chthonian (The Rituals of the Order, F51) reads:
Response: After Grasping Chthonian enters play, choose and destroy a support card.

Khopesh of the Abyss (Ancient Relics, F16) reads:
Attach to a character you control. Attached character gains Toughness +1.
After Khopesh of the Abyss leaves play, shuffle it into its owner's deck.
Action: Choose a character. That character and attached character each take 1 wound.


Lucas Tetlow (Seekers of Knowledge, F9) reads:
Disrupt: When a player would play a non-Location support card, discard one of your success tokens from a story to instead put that card into play under your control, as if you had just played it from hand.

So if Grasping Cthonian comes into play and there is a Khopesh out, it can be killed before it's effect goes off destroying Khopesh. Is this correct?

Here's the action timing rules - noting that playing a Character, Support or Conspiracy card is considered taking an action:
1. Action is initiated - pay the cost to play Grasping Chthonian
2. Disrupts
3. Action is executed - play Grasping Chthonian
4. Passive abilities (requirements now met) are initiated
5. Forced Responses (requirements now met) are initiated
6. Responses - all Responses to Grasping Chthonian entering play can be triggered, with the other player getting the first Response opportunity; here, Grasping Chthonian's Response would trigger, and could destroy Khopesh of the Abyss
7. End of Action - now that the action is fully resolved, the other player has the opportunity to perform the next action, such as triggering Khopesh of the Abyss's Action ability (if Khopesh of the Abyss wasn't already destroyed by Grasping Chthonian)

See the Timing Structure section of the FAQ for more detail.
I also highly recommend HilariousPete's 'Timing in Call of Cthulhu LCG' articles for more information on this topic - Part 1: Basic Introduction and Part 2 - Triggered effects.

I have Lucas Tetlow in play, opponent uses Flooded Vault to fetch Khopesh. This still counts as "playing" the card and doesn't loophole Tetlows disrupt steal correct?

Lucas Tetlow lets you change the controller of a non-Location support card when they would "play" it, by discarding a story success token.
Flooded Vault lets you search for Khopesh of the Abyss and then "put it into play", by paying its cost. However "put into play" is not considered as having "play"ed the card, and therefore Lucas Tetlow's ability would not be able to trigger.

See section (2.24) “Put into Play” vs “Play” vs “Enters Play” in the FAQ for more detail.
  • Danigral, Jhaelen and BeldVanGuard like this

#93
BeldVanGuard

BeldVanGuard

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts
I did read Pete's article, and it was extremely informative. I should have probably re-read it recently heh. Think I'm getting to the point of weird exception rules sticking more than standard.

Nice to know Flooded Vault is a work around for Tetlow, I noticed the wording last night and it hit me it may be possible.

Thanks kindly sir
  • jasonconlon likes this

#94
BeldVanGuard

BeldVanGuard

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts

Ok so 1 new question, only one is good, means me and the new players all learning quick!

However, we did run into an oddball one, and we were very split on it's resolution (thankfully it didn't change the outcome of the game but)

 

Immurement - Cost: 0 

Action: Drain a domain you control with the most resources to choose a support card or a non-Ancient One character an opponent controls. That card's owner attaches it to a domain of his choice as a resource. 

 

The Guardian (Conspiracy) While this conspiracy is in your won pile, increase the cost of any opponent's triggered effect that targets characters you control by 1. 

 

Ok so.....how does this work? 

I can't pay 2 Domains for 1 ability, and it isn't an added cost, it's an increased cost (from 0 to 1) but the other cost to play it is Draining the biggest Domain (so it's meeting the 1 requirement minimum) 

 

So does this satisfy the cost requirement's of Immurement built in, or are all characters now illlegal targets for Immurement or something else?

 

Thanks kindly as always!



#95
Zephyr

Zephyr

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 787 posts

I'd say you pay 1(draining domain), then have to pay cost of (drain domain with most resources) draining second domains.

 

The option of "you cant trigger as it costs one more than highest domain" makes some sense, but with wording of Immurement i think it is incorrect interpretation. Immurement doesn't cost as much as you highest domain, it forces you to drain specific domain as extra cost. I dont think this kind of cost can be increased by 1. But rulings are quite weird sometimes.



#96
dboeren

dboeren

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 2834 posts

Paying 1 (the increased cost over 0) is the cost of the card, which can only use one domain to pay for it.

 

Draining your largest domain is part of the effects of the card, and not actually a cost.



#97
jasonconlon

jasonconlon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 299 posts
You'll likely need an official ruling on this one, but my guess is: Immurement still costs 0 to play, but then to trigger its effect you need to both drain a domain with the highest resources and separately pay 1 from another domain.

Here's what we've got to work with...

From the latest FAQ --
OFFICIAL RULES CLARIFICATION
(2.13) Paying Costs
Costs are any resources paid in order to play a card, as well as anything before the “to” part of a card ability. For example, Slavering Gug (Core Set F124) reads “Action: Pay 4 to choose and wound a character.” Draining a domain with at least 4 resources is the cost for that ability.
...
If a card states you must pay an additional cost that cost is added to any current costs of that card or effect. If the additional cost is “pay 1” any card with a cost paid by draining a domain must increase the number of resources by 1. If the card effect does not include a cost that involves draining a domain already on it, you must now drain a domain with at least 1 resource on it.


TIMING STRUCTURE
The Action Window in Detail
1) Action is initiated
After a player initiates an action, the timing window starts.
For the initiation stage of any player action, a player must go through the following sub steps, in order. The first step is always revealing the card or declaring the intent to use an ability.
Then:
a) Determine the cost (to either play the card or pay for the card’s effect) or costs (if multiple costs are necessary for the intended action).
B) Check play restrictions, including verification and designation of applicable targets or cards to be effected.
c) Apply any penalties to the cost(s). (Any effects that modify a penalty are applied to that penalty before it becomes a part of the cost.)
d) Apply any other active modifiers (including reducers) to the cost(s).
e) Pay the cost(s).
f) Play the card, or trigger the effect, and proceed to step two.


From the Core rulebook --
TURN SEQUENCE
4. Operations phase
Important: Players can never drain more than one domain to pay the cost of playing a card or activating a card effect. Many times a player will “overpay” for a card, because the drained domain will have more resources than the cost of the card. The extra resources paid are immediately lost; they do not “carry over” to the next card played.


The questions in my mind are:
Q1) Is paying the card cost (e.g. paying Immurement's 0 cost) and paying the cost of the effect (e.g. draining a domain with the most resources) two distinct things?
A1) The FAQ and rules use the word 'or' in all the above instances, to separate "(playing a) card" from "(activating a card) effect", so I believe that yes they are, and therefore they would need to be paid separately.
This would mean that The Guardian isn't increasing the cost to play the card (i.e. the card's cost is still 0), but it is adding a cost of 1 to the effect cost of draining a highest-resourced domain to successfully trigger Immurement.
(In which case, a card like Dampen Light, which increases the cost to play a card, would force you to drain a domain to now pay 1 for Immurement, and then you'd separately need to drain a second domain with the most resources to trigger its effect.)

Q2.i) Is the instruction (i.e. cost) to 'drain a domain' the same as 'pay X' where the domain and X equal the highest number of resources on your domains?
If yes, then the instruction to increase X by 1 would mean you would never have a domain with highest+1 resources, and could not successfully activate its effect.
If no, then 'drain a domain' is a separate action from pay 1. But this in turn poses another question:
Q2.ii)Is it possible to meet two requirements by paying a single cost - of draining a highest-resourced domain to both pay the additional cost 1 and to have drained a top domain?
A2) I honestly don't know the answer to these questions, but my best guess is that 'drain a domain' is a distinct requirement that differs from a 'pay X' instruction, and consequently you would still separately need to pay the additional 1 from a separate domain to trigger Immurement's effect. This seems to contradict the Core rules statement that you can only drain one domain to trigger an effect, however I believe that rule is implied as being specific to 'pay X' instructions, unlike Immurement.

#98
Danigral

Danigral

    Advanced Member

  • Small Council
  • 1358 posts

Paying 1 (the increased cost over 0) is the cost of the card, which can only use one domain to pay for it.

 

Draining your largest domain is part of the effects of the card, and not actually a cost.

I agree with dboeren, except with the little nitpick that "Drain your largest domain" is technically a cost of the effect (as it comes before 'to'), although not a cost to play the card. However, draining a domain is just that, and you can't increase the value of highest domain because there is no number to add to.

 

So the cost to play Immurement is a 1-domain, and then your highest domain.


  • GrahamM likes this

#99
dboeren

dboeren

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 2834 posts

OK, that's true.  It is *a* cost.  But it's a cost of the effect and not a cost of the card was what I was getting at.

 

Main thing is that you do need to drain both a 1-domain and then your highest domain to play the card in this situation.