Transmogrify

This card seems particularly interesting in Darrel Simmons. Not only is it a good enemy management tool allowing him to evade with his base 5, he also discovers a clue in the process, immediately moving the evidence from the enemy to his Kodak. This solves the puzzle of getting the evidence from an enemy drawn during the mythos phase and engaged to Darrel, usually in that situation the goon would start his turn first and defeat that enemy before Darrel can get the evidence.

Ramun · 698
Momentum

Outside of obvious overachieve rogue synergy, this card, being Practiced, can be very very strong for Amanda Sharpe with a bit of setup.
Sure, you need to pass a test with a base value of 3, but if you have a couple of static boosts, start your turn with an easy enough test or are willing to spend some of the other skills you will surely have in your hand (you're Amanda, after all), you will just snowball the entire turn into a series of almost-auto successes.
This card is not balanced around being able to chain it 2 tests in a row, let alone 3.
It's a shame the effect lasts until the end of the phase only, or it would be an execellent encounter protection as well.

tinybreeder · 22
Old Shotgun

Cleaning Kit Makes this much simpler to use, and opens this up as a semi-reliable primary weapon in any investigator that can take both. ( Venturer did too, but Cleaning Kit's primary advantage is you don't need to exhaust, so you can blow through the ammo much faster on the turns you need to.)

Which is most guardians, but also Joe Diamond, Jenny Barnes, Kymani Jones, "Skids" O'Toole, Diana Stanley, William Yorick and the two neutral investigators.

a +3/+3 per shot weapon is pretty good, even if you need to over-succeed. In Guardian investigators, you could even use Cleaning Kit (3) once per round for an additional +2.

Is this better than just grabbing a giant hammer? Maybe not, but this is more usable than it used to be.

jericho · 710
Great insight. And we have a new Gun investigator coming up. — MrGoldbee · 1477
@ MrGoldbee: alas, Michael cannot take "Cleaning Kit". It does not spell Firearm anywhere on the card. Ammo is not sufficient. — Susumu · 372
Black Market

This card seems like it would be super fun to play. It fits perfectly into my deck for Sefina the Gambler.

I have some questions about the rules. Sefina plays Black Market and draws cards such as:

  1. Elusive. - How many times can this card be used via Black Market? After the first use by any player, does this card go to Sefina discard? Or does it stay on the table until the end of the round and can be used multiple times by players?

  2. Dario El-Amin - Does another player use this card by playing a companion to themselves and that companion a) remains in the this player's area b) is discarded after the round? OR the player just use the action uses the action indicated on the card.

  3. Asset cards like British Bull Dog - Does another player use this card and place it in their play area permanently or does this card have to be played differently (just use the fight action from the card once?

Only set aside cards are shuffled back. — MrGoldbee · 1477
1) Just once. It will go into the discard pile of Sefina after the event has been used. 2) The right answer is a. It will remain in the player's area. 3) Same as 2. The player who plays British Bull Dog will keep control of it. — Droll · 23
Entryway

I have a small issue with this card: both 'your' and 'you' can be seen as plural.

Imagine a drill sergeant pointing at a pile of stuff and yell at some recruits "check your supplies, if you have torches you can X/Y" in this case we imagine multiple torches in the pile and the recruits will spread them. Yet if the drill sergeant yells the exact same at a specific recruit, it's singular. So grammatically speaking: both work but context matters a lot. And considering that you can have 1x torches (plurar torchES, and not torch(es) single OR plural) we can consider this to be a set of torches. As such it would make sense for the investigator to spread the torches around so nobody has to dredge through a possibly pitch black trapped and deadly ruin.

Yet considering how brutal the game is, I'd imagine that this is meant at a single investigator and only if they have it in their supply the can do the action. So unless I missed a rule regarding the supply somewhere, rules as intended vs rules as written is a bit unclear IMO. Maybe saying "if you, or an investigator in your location, has torches in his her supply" or simply "if an investigator has a torch/torches in his/her supply" would be a lot more clear, cause at this point logic could dictates that my buddy gives me one of the torches he has so I can use it in the dangerous, dark ruin xP Anyone know if I'm missing a rule somewhere that would affect this?

Psychotimo · 1
I think it's the general rule on "you" that you want here. That reads "When resolving a triggered ability , "you/your" refers to the investigator triggering the ability." This is a triggered ability , as represented by the action designator, so you in this ability specifically means the person who spent an action to trigger this ability. If they specifically have torches they get to look at encounter cards and if they don't, they don't. It doesn't make a huge amount of sense thematically, but since people without torches are unlikely to trigger it, I guess you could think of it as saying "scouting is the job of the guy who bought the torches" — bee123 · 31
Right, makes sense. — Psychotimo · 1
Wops, clicked 'post' too soon. Anyways, yeah makes sense. Adding this rule to the context of the action it's a lot more clear. We played it like that cause it fits more with the ruthlessness of the game. But it kinda bugged me that it didnt feel 100% clear :) — Psychotimo · 1