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!
* * * - -

Unscrupulous Acquisitionist

Unscrupulous Acquisitionist

Unscrupulous Acquisitionist

Type: Character Faction: Silver Twilight
Cost: 2 Skill: 2 Icons: (C)(A)
Game Text:
Response: When Unscrupulous Acquistionist enters play, each opponent must drain one of his domains or return a character he controls to its owner's hand.
Flavor Text: To go against the Lodge almost certainly meant death.
Set: TGS
Number: 95
Illustrator: Jake Masbruch


If the opponent already has all domains drained, can they still choose to drain a domain and therefore get out of having to return a character to hand?


"each opponent must drain one domain or return a character he controls to its owners hand"


I'm going to need more than just quoting the text I'm afraid. I think my question is better phrased as


"If a player is given a choice of 2 effects from a card, can he choose an effect he cannot complete?"


There are other LCGs where they can, and this guy wouldn't be very good as a result. Hence the question.

"There are other LCGs where they can, and this guy wouldn't be very good as a result."


​Can you give an example?  I suspect that the situations are not that similar but I cannot confirm this without seeing an actual card.


The card is not about choosing anything, it is about having to DO something.  You're asking whether you can choose to do something, fail to do it, and then say "ha ha, l can't do it but I ALREADY CHOSE, so it's too late!"  Maybe some game does have a card like that, but this card is not of that

type.  If you cannot perform one of the options, then you must perform the other.

AGoT, screwing with people's trust in LCG rules doing what you think they do since...


Anyway, what VonWibble has in mind, is most likely Penny, who still allows choice of something that would not happen on that side (as far as I recall). There were also other cards, but most of those got changed via FAQ at one point.


And yes, the fact that there is no 'choose' here, makes the whole thing quite obvious in the first place (even with AGoT rules), and even if it didn't, CoC behaves a lot more intuitively with regard to such a situation with the 'choose' word being thrown in the mix (here's an FFG forum thread discussing Apeirophobia, which is kinda related, end result being that FFG ruled you cannot go with the 'drive insane' option if it is not possible).


So, I'm with dboeren, no AGoT-y squirming out of this one. ;)

    • VonWibble likes this

Thanks for confirming. Yes, cards like Penny (and Sorrowful Man before changes to the FAQ) were what I had in mind.


And I'm quite glad the intuitive ruling that you mention is perceived as the correct one.  

Call of Cthulhu: The Card Game, Living Card Game, the Living Card Game logo, Fantasy Flight Games, and the FFG logo are trademarks of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.