You are correct. — Eudaimonea · 5 4/12/25

Dr. Christopher will never believe this! — MrGoldbee · 1480 4/12/25

Yes, and no. A quick filter indicates that there are 49 player cards with "if you succeed by" printed on it. So there are a lot of cards it works for. But it does seem like an oversight that there's also a bunch of cards it doesn't work for and really should. — NarkasisBroon · 10 4/12/25

I don’t think it works on those 49 either. The phrase “(If/After) you succeed by” refers to the timing point at ST.6 when you determine success and failure. “(If/After) this test is successful refers to the timing point at ST.7 when you apply the results of the skill test. Within each of those steps, the “ifs” go before the “afters.” — Eudaimonea · 5 4/12/25

I'd say this is a replacement effect, not a separate trigger. The thing it tells you to do isn't a new game effect, but a modification; you succeed by up to 2 more or less INSTEAD of succeeding by the original amount. So it's not going to use normal timing for if triggers. — OrionAnderson · 111 4/12/25

Yeah, to me this is a clear case of harmful overthinking while the idea behind this card is so obvious. — AlderSign · 373 4/12/25

@AlderSign, that’s just word salad. I don’t know who or what is “harmed” and it doesn’t take much “thinking” to apply the rules rather than personal vibes of my subjective sense of what a card should do. Vibes are subjective, so when you sit down with another player and try to use a card that you think “obviously” does a thing based on your sense of grammar and other players find it less obvious, you’re in trouble. Rules exist to solve that problem, but the devs have to know and for the most part faithfully apply them. Once they don’t, we’ve got a Babel of conflicting interpretations. Talk about harmful. — Eudaimonea · 5 4/12/25

The spirit of the game is harmed, as are design guidelines, if you have to ask. You can find plenty examples in the meanwhile of "devs" being contradictory (see the "as if" ruling for example) due to unclear wording or oversights. This card (and issue at hand) is exactly one of the cases where either the "devs" and/or people supporting the claim of this review bring "conflicting interpretations" to the table. But that's just my opinion, you are welcome to have your own. — AlderSign · 373 4/13/25

@OrionAnderson, if it’s a persistent rather than triggered effect, when do you imagine the player deciding whether “to succeed by up to two more or down to two less”? I suppose the answer would have to be immediately when the card is played? — Eudaimonea · 5 4/13/25