Interaction with Drawing Thin via designer Matt Newman.

Greetings,

This is a bit of a tricky interaction, so I apologize for any confusion here. I agree it’s a bit ambiguous. I think the ruling that makes the most sense here is the following:

As a general rule, when you use Live and Learn to attempt a test a second time, all effects with a duration that expire at the end of the first attempt will have expired by the time the second begins. This includes effects used during the first attempt that say “until the end of the skill test…”, “…for this skill test,” or the bonuses from committed cards, which are all discarded at the end of the first attempt. Effects that are inherent to the test itself (the test’s parameters, what happens if you succeed/fail, that sort of thing) all remain the same, even if they have a duration of “for this test.” So, for example, if an effect said “play during a skill test. until the end of the skill test, increase the test’s difficulty by 2,” that would expire at the end of the first attempt, whereas if the test itself said “Fight. Increase the difficulty of this test by 2,” that increase in difficulty would exist in both the first and second attempts.

Now for the tricky part: Which is Drawing Thin? Is it an effect that initiates during a skill test with a duration of that expires at the end of the skill test? Or is it an effect which alters the inherent nature of the skill test itself, such that it would affect both attempts? Since Drawing Thin does not explicitly say any variation of “until the end of the skill test” or “for this skill test,” and since its triggering condition is a “when” reaction to the skill test initiating and not something you use during the first attempt, my ruling is that Drawing Thin is changing the skill test’s inherent difficulty to be 2 higher—altering the nature of the test itself. Therefore if you use Drawing Thin when the skill test initiates, and then use Live and Learn to attempt that test a second time, the increased difficulty would carry over to the second attempt.

Again, apologies for the trickiness/ambiguousness. Hopefully this clears up this interaction, as well as clearing up how Live and Learn works in general. Thank you for bringing this to my attention; I’ll be sure to add it in the next edition of the FAQ as well.

Cheers!

Interaction with Live and Learn from Matt Newman (designer)

Greetings,

This is a bit of a tricky interaction, so I apologize for any confusion here. I agree it’s a bit ambiguous. I think the ruling that makes the most sense here is the following:

As a general rule, when you use Live and Learn to attempt a test a second time, all effects with a duration that expire at the end of the first attempt will have expired by the time the second begins. This includes effects used during the first attempt that say “until the end of the skill test…”, “…for this skill test,” or the bonuses from committed cards, which are all discarded at the end of the first attempt. Effects that are inherent to the test itself (the test’s parameters, what happens if you succeed/fail, that sort of thing) all remain the same, even if they have a duration of “for this test.” So, for example, if an effect said “play during a skill test. until the end of the skill test, increase the test’s difficulty by 2,” that would expire at the end of the first attempt, whereas if the test itself said “Fight. Increase the difficulty of this test by 2,” that increase in difficulty would exist in both the first and second attempts.

Now for the tricky part: Which is Drawing Thin? Is it an effect that initiates during a skill test with a duration of that expires at the end of the skill test? Or is it an effect which alters the inherent nature of the skill test itself, such that it would affect both attempts? Since Drawing Thin does not explicitly say any variation of “until the end of the skill test” or “for this skill test,” and since its triggering condition is a “when” reaction to the skill test initiating and not something you use during the first attempt, my ruling is that Drawing Thin is changing the skill test’s inherent difficulty to be 2 higher—altering the nature of the test itself. Therefore if you use Drawing Thin when the skill test initiates, and then use Live and Learn to attempt that test a second time, the increased difficulty would carry over to the second attempt.

Again, apologies for the trickiness/ambiguousness. Hopefully this clears up this interaction, as well as clearing up how Live and Learn works in general. Thank you for bringing this to my attention; I’ll be sure to add it in the next edition of the FAQ as well.

Cheers!

Does it work with Payday. Cuz it's write "this action does not count toward the number of actions you can take each turn" so that action could'nt count to Payday ? that text seem unclear to me. It's mean does not count to limit of actions, or jusst does not count.?

Sometimes having Fanatic show up isn't terrible as there may be one final clue in his location with a victory point, upon which he spawns, takes that clue onto himself, and then that location is now clear of clues for the victory point.

TCU's Seeker version of "I'll see you in hell!" Ghastly Revelation offers the promise of an extremely powerful and efficient action that could completely swing a scenario, but with the substantial cost of defeating your investigator and taking a trauma. Just like "I'll see you in hell!" Ghastly Revelation has the Spirit trait, and thus is available to Calvin Wright who is actually incentivised to take trauma.

When is Ghastly Revelation good? Being defeated is bad because it means your investigator can no longer contribute to completing the scenario or gathering xp from Victory enemies and locations, so its massive cost can be mitigated when it is played right at the end of a scenario - just like you might be able to ignore enemies and some treacheries drawn with Delve Too Deep when you're about to advance the final act. For this reason, Ghastly Revelation is only going to be good when discovering three clues at once is going to close out a scenario, and you didn't have some other easy way of gettining those clues (or if you were otherwise sure to be defeated before you could win).

But Ghastly Revelation is a Seeker card - the class already filled with high intellect investigators and many other ways to gain clues quickly - the same problem "I'll see you in hell!" has by being a Guardian card. Heck, Ghastly Revelation's two intellect icons would help you get at least one of the three clues playing it would. At least it's still good for committing to a skill test! On top of that, even if you do mitigate your investigator's defeat, you are burdened with a trauma for the remainder of your campaign. This is a tough sell, but it might be worth it to take a trauma to finish a crucial scenario - and unlike it's Guardian counterpart that can't defeat Elites, Ghastly Revelation will actually end some scenarios by discovering the last clues your team needs to advance.

All this means Ghastly Revelation is likely to only be played by everyone's favourite gay Survivor and I'll certainly try it in Calvin for those moments where I can help my team close out a scenario. Would've loved this for my Doomed Calvin run of Forgotten Age to keep me from advancing that weakness - alas, his final hour came during the very last scenario.