Dadajef said:

 Thanks Prodigee, Professor, Jhaelen, et al. for your invaluable input. This game has a great community of gamers, which really helps make this game what it is. (And as a side note, I couldn't imagine doing as you do in French, so doubly thanks.)

I hope FFG makes a new FAQ soon.

Hi FFG,

I have a rules question.

In the FAQ it clearly states that when an action (an event or a card ability) has the template ' "do x" TO "do y" ' the "do x" part is considered an (additional) cost to play the card / use the effect.
As an example: when playing Pulled Under, one should pay the card cost (0 in this case), and then exhaust one character TO blahblah. Since exhausting the character is part of the cost, that implies that if the effect is canceled, the cost is still payed.

Does it also imply that you can only exhaust a character you control to pay the cost ?
The answer to this question is nowhere to be found in the rulebook or the faq, and even though i think the answer is untuitivly clear (that you cannot use cards that someone else controls to pay for your own effects), an official ruling would be very helpful, not only for Pulled Under in partilcular, but for the 'Do x TO do y'-template for additional costs in general.

In the same vein:

What to make of Bootlegging Operation ?
When I opened the pack and saw it for the first time I was like "Wow, a good way to get rid of, say, an opposing Guardian Pillar, and drawing a card in the process as well !"
(also see Professor's post indicating the same, here: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=35&efcid=4&efidt=362424)

However, now i'm thinking that, because of the "do x" TO "do y"-template on this card, you can only use the ability from BO when it's attached to a location you control ... Am I understanding this right, and does BO only make sense when playing it on a location you control ? That definately makes BO less playable, than for example Forced Foreclosure, which simply steals a location.

Was this intentional / Is this the way we should play BO ?
Or did it follow the 'Do x TO do y'-template 'by accident' and should it be erratad to make the 'exhaust'-part' and the 'draw one' part to be two seperate effects (like: Exhaust BO to exhaust attached location and draw one from the bottom of your deck') ?

Kind regards,

Thomas

Bootlegging Operation

Type: Support
Cost: 2
Subtype: Attachment
Game text: Attach Bootlegging Operation to a Location support card.
Action: exhaust attached location card to draw 1 card from the bottom of your deck.

Pulled Under

Type : Event
Cost : 0
Subtype :
Game Text : Action: Exhaust a character with at least 2 T icons to choose and destroy an exhausted non-Ancient One characte
 

I have been asking the same six rules questions for a month using the Rules Question link on the bottom of this page.  Why can't general question be answered in a timely manner?  The playerbase should not need to wait for a FAQ update to receive basic rules clarifications.  Please provide us with an actual working mechanism where we can get answers to critical rules questions.  If FFG can do it for AGoT then...

Hey Mr. Hata! I request that you explain how Doppleganger works. There seems to be some argument over whether it can copy coming into play abilities. This needs to be addressed officially. Thank you.

In the current FAQ there's a firm definition of what it means to 'Win'.  I could use the same treatment of 'Lose'.

Specifically, can a player Lose a given struggle if he has not commited any characters to the Story?

Regards!

K xx

www.fantasyflightgames.com/ffg_content/coc/support/coc-faq%20Ver%201.3-print-friendly.pdf

faq 1.3 Agree 100% with the modifications and explanations. 

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=37&efcid=4&efidt=431736

Quite open discussion on how to apply lowered costs.

Secrets of Arkham:

The Greatest Fear...

Spawn of Madness

The Greatest Fear

See the difference? Despite my total willingness to abuse this by playing 6x The Greatest Fear last week if SoM were legal I assume that this was a mistake and the reprint was supposed to have the "..." and is actually supposed to be the same card.

Magnus Arcanis said:

To be honest, I am a bit irritated that they didn't replace the SOM cards that have already been reprinted for the LCG with something new (or a different reprint...). What am I supposed to do with them?

jhaelen said:

decorate your room with them?

... Just a suggestion.

jhaelen said:

Build 2 decks that use them?

Eldrich Nexus proxies?

Donation to a new player?

Prizes for a small local tournament?

Shoebox liner?

Arts and Crafts? Oh... I know. Cut/fold it in a way so it looks like a monster miniature with a floating title above it to scare you're opponents with their greatest fear!

Brilliant!

 So is there no more Restricted List? Or will there be one?

As far as I know, the restricted and banned lists have not been changed.

I see no Restricted List here, but I see Aspiring Artist as a banned card which is new for me. 

javascript:void(0);/*1319203288798*/