Apart from benefitting from Dilemmas, I don't see why George wouldn't want to make the encounter- or his own deck thinner by placing hidden treacheries and weaknesses under him. Heck, some treacheries can even randomly snipe a weakness out of your hand, letting him simply react to it to prevent it from being shuffled back after the deck is empty (which will happen more easily with this investigator).

So long and have fun in Carcosa ;)

EDIT: Transfigurating into George from Patrice Hathaway let's him get rid of the Watcher for good - and that's a guarantee, since in this case Cast Adrift is not in your deck.

Question about this card: If paired with Double, Double, then am I correct that the second instance of Thorough Inquiry would cost an additional 2 resources AND an additional (one) action because of the clause on the card "As an additional cost to play Thorough Inquiry, spend an action"?

If yes, then you would need to have 3 actions available to play a Double, Double'ed Thorough Inquiry.

(also, I'm not sure where to post questions on ArkhamDB. If I'm not supposed to ask questions in reviews, then please tell me where I can post questions. Thanks!) :)

I actually like this card. There are a few scenarios where you want to dig through the encounter deck to find an objective that's hidden near the bottom. Admittedly, that's not many scenarios; certainly not enough to justify taking this card in a vacuum. To be worthwhile, it's going to need extra support--and I'd argue that rather than encounter deck manipulation, what you really want is curse tech.

Although digging for a special location or scenario objective is rare, VP enemies hidden in the encounter deck exist in the vast majority of games. Antediluvian Hymn helps you push those juicy mini-bosses up to the top and add up to 5 to the bag in the process. (Literal bonus points if you find a VP enemy, order it to go to your fighter and then fish it out using Delve Too Deep.)

So who wants this card? No, not Gloria--it fits best with Mystics who use curses to fight:

Dexter Drake armed with Armageddon and Skeptic.

Kōhaku Narukami with Manipulate Destiny and Rod of Carnamagos.

Agatha Crane with Olive McBride and Gaze of Ouraxsh.

...you get the idea. This card isn't Scrying and you're not using it to fail less. It's win-more tech to help you locate what you WANT out of the encounter deck, and the curses you generate are going to help you flatten it when you find it.

This is more of a question then a review but can you spend evidence from other cards or just from Alton with the player window action?

Can anyone confirm or refute this idea? Thank you all in advance

"[A]nother instance of one of its skill icons" doesn't have to be one that's relevant to the test, correct? I have a silly idea of using Relic Hunter / Occult Reliquary to pair this with Crystallizer of Dreams.

I want to play an event from hand (dreaming of Blood-Rite in George Barnaby, but any event with pips works), use Crystallizer's discard replacement to tuck Blood-Rite, then commit Blood-Rite from under Crystallizer to the next test I'm likely to fail (or planning to fail with Drawing Thin / Artistic Inspiration / Quick Learner).

Then, I'll exhaust Grisly Totem to add an irrelevant pip, fail the test, and add the event back to hand, to be used again.

Does this work the way I want it to?