Eixodolon

Why is there victory points? It seems that no XP are get after the scenario... Nothing related to victory display in the resolutions... It's not for sending the card in victory display: this can be achieve with "Victory 0".

Novark2 · 1
It's the same with other cards in this scenario, and with the Barkham one as well. Victory Points are just meant as a scale of archievement, not for upgrading your deck. Even though Labyrinth can be played in a wonky "Campaign Mode", you are not supposed to upgrade your decks even there, but rather play different parts with different investigators. — Susumu · 371
See https://arkhamdb.com/rules#Campaign_Play : "Each investigator earns experience equal to the total victory value of all cards in the victory display plus or minus any bonuses or penalties indicated by the campaign guide for that resolution. This total is added to any unspent experience an investigator has recorded from previous scenarios in this campaign." No need to specify it in the resolutions, it's already in the rules. — Phtayn · 1
That might be. But there are still special cases, when people might not get the XP from the victory display, e.g. Agnes Baker in her special scenario "Bad Blood", if she chooses to take the XP from the memories instead. And LoL clariefies, that you are not supposed to use the scenario as a siude story in a campaign, and even its "special campaign rules" do not include upgrading decks, so the XP is void. It's just VP as a measurement of success in this scenario. — Susumu · 371
"The Golden Rule" is a bit messy. It does not clarify, what happens, if a scenario or campaign guide contradicts the rules reference. E.g. in Roland Banks "By the Book" scenario resolution, Roland gets only the VP from enemies, other gators only the VP from location (and nobody from cards like "Delve Too Deep", should you have played them). I would argue, the scenario guide takes precedence over the RR in cases like that. Would not make any sense otherwise. — Susumu · 371
Sure: the guide takes precedence. And it says "Experience is not earned or spent in between scenarios during this campaign.". Not "Experience is not earned or spent during this campaign." So the XP are earned at the end of the campaign, after the last scenario. — Novark2 · 1
Cover Up

Just in case it may be useful for someone. I've reached out FFG to clarify the following rules question: "My location has exactly one clue. I'm Roland Banks and Cover Up weaknes is in my threat area with three clues on it.

  1. If I use basic investigate action with Deduction commited to it, can I remove two clues from Cover Up in case of success?
  2. Can Daisy Walker with Research Notes asset in play, 4 uses (evidence) on it, remove all three clues from Cover Up and the clue from the location if she succeeds Research Notes' action test by 4 (she is in the same location with Roland and exactly one clue on it)?"

Answers:

  1. No. Deduction doesn’t allow you to discover clues that aren’t at that location. If your location has 1 clue at it, you can only discover 1 clue at most when you investigate it.
  2. No. Like above, Research Notes won’t allow Daisy to discover clues that aren’t already on the location. But, Daisy could discover 1 clue with Research Notes to help with Cover Up.
chrome · 59
Hello! Can you share and forward the official ruling email (including questions and answers) you received to drawntotheflamepodcast@gmail.com? This is the mailbox of Frank, the official FAQ maintainer, and he will update the verdict you received into ArkhamDB! — Jacksonsu · 1
sent — chrome · 59
Tool Belt

I was trying really hard to find a neat combo with Kymani Jones's deckbuilding options and Tool Belt, since the last expansion (maybe the previous ones too, but I haven't played the game too much prior to The Scarlet Keys) seems to have hard-to-find interactions that are both quite strong and very fun to discover and play (e.g. demolishing enemies with Gray's Anatomy, Ancient Stone and Empirical Hypothesis, you can look this up in my review of Gray's Anatomy), and I think I've found something interesting. It is not necessarily tied to Kymani at all, but I think it works especially well in some of her builds.

The idea is all about the interaction between Tool Belt and Pocket Multi Tool that allows to bypass the "Limit 1 per investigator" text on the latter. First we play one of our Pocket Multi Tools and Tool Belt, then, when we have our second Pocket Multi Tool in hand, we attach the first one to Tool Belt and play the second one, which as far as I understand becomes possible because the text on the first copy is blanked, including the "Limit 1 per investigator" line. Then we can activate the first Multi Tool in our hand and once it exhausts switch it with the Multi Tool attached to the Tool Belt to get another activation during the same round. It also works with the Spring-Loaded upgrade, but you won't be able to use both Multi Tools during the same test. This neat trick, given that we have some upgrades on the Multi Tool, lets us get two Unexpected Courages every turn (or even two free copies of Lucky!). As I've mentioned, this works very well in a Kymani Jones deck that aims to utilize Chuck Fergus, Crafty and Pilfer to grab 3 clues for one action every turn, because two instances of +2 to skill value from two copies of Pocket Multi Tool should be more than sufficient to succeed by 2 on the Pilfer test to get it back at the end of the turn. Another reason why it is very good in Kymani is how Pry Bar upgrade can single-handedly protect them from nasty treacheries, bringing their already above average (for a rogue, naturally) to a confident 5 or even 7, if necessary.

There are definitely a lot of investigators that benefit greatly from having two Pocket Multi Tools in play, and I'm sure other deckbuilding enthusiasts will mention the most interesting combinations in the comments. I'll just say that interactions like this is what makes Arkham deckbuilding discoveries so exciting.

EDIT: As it was noted in the comments, this trick does not actually work :( I'll still leave the post here, hopefully to spark the spirit of discovery to find another way to get around that pesky "Limit 1 per investigator" line.

adogface · 7
It's great idea, but I think it does not work. It is because the second copy still has "limit 1 per investigator" and the first copy is still in play. It means the restriction of second copy, "limit 1 per investigator", is not satisfied. — elkeinkrad · 499
That is similar as the question if Daisy can add The Necronomicon: Petrus de Dacia Translation in her deck due to her signature weakness. That was resolved with additional rule from FAQ about signature card. — elkeinkrad · 499
But the Necronomicon issue is tied to card name which always stays the same, regardless of the textbox, and "Limit 1 per investigator" shouldn't apply if the textbox is blanked. It's not like we're messing with some core rules of the game by having two copies of a unique asset in play. It's basically as if we had two Lockpicks, or two .45 Automatics - nothing restricts us from doing that. Same thing for Pocket Multi Tool, if we can blank that first line in the textbox, and that's what the Tool Belt does. — adogface · 7
Ohh, wait, now I get it, damn, you must be right. That's tragic :( — adogface · 7
Lucid Dreaming

A copy of a card is defined by title. A second copy of a card is any other card that shares the same title, regardless of cardtype, text, artwork, or any other differing characteristics between the cards.

If Daisy has the bad Necronomicon in play, she can use this to search her deck for the good Necronomicon. Pretty neat!

Superstar · 13
Crisis of Identity

Lola Hayes' weakness has long been part of the reason she is never played. Not only is it bad, by nature of how Lola works she is almost always her own weakness. Until multiclass came out she st any given point in time could not use half her assets, but she's still bound to the same slot pressure of everyone else.

With multiclass cards being introduced and with her weakness being substantially nerfed in latest taboo, Lola may actually soon be a viable investigator.

drjones87 · 194