Hey man! Love the channel and all your insight. I just wanted to say i believe the word Geas is pronounced like Gesh as it's a Gaelic word for Idiosyncratic Taboo. Can't wait for my girl Carolyn!
Reading the back of parallel Skids, it seems to me like the lower level version of the card is the one that ends up not counting towards deck size and number of copies. So, 3 Luckys in a highlander deck, 6 in a normal one. Otherwise, you could upgrade your Lucky to Lucky(3) 20 times and have the Luckiest deck in the world.
"A triggered ability can only be initiated if its effect has the potential to change the game state, and its cost (if any) has the potential to be paid in full, taking active cost modifiers into account. This potential is assessed without taking into account the consequences of the cost payment or any other ability interactions." rules-Triggered Abilities I think, but am not quite certain this means you can't test for 0 resources. But I would like to hear your opinion on it. Edit: based on being allowed to investigate on a location with no clues on it, I think making a test is a gamestate chance in and of itself so testing for 0 resources should be allowed.
Huh, there are people more rules familiar than I am, but it sounds like you're right. It's similarly valuable to be able to test up 2 as a lightning bolt, just by gambling 1. So it doesn't end up affecting my evaluation that much, but it might be the case that you cannot gamble at 0 for no (initial) reason.
@@RatherIncoherent It really depends on whether taking a test of any kind is considered a change in game state. And i have no idea if it is. It's one of the couple of terribly worded rules and one of a couple that feel like it was introduced, because they failed to give clear wording when it mattered. ongoing effects and silas is one other example. It very difficult to find out what is and isn't an ongoing effect. As if and luke can be difficult. timing interactions on cards that you have to infer based on the wording on that card is by far the worst offender by my account. (take hart and try and try gain is a good example of this for me. who would have guessed this doesn't work without looking it up?) And then there are the rules that are just incorrect, did you know you technically don't control the stuff you have in play? Everyone played lola's old weakness incorrectly, technically, according to the rules.
@@RatherIncoherent After having done some digging, according to the faq, you are allowed to investigate a location with no clues on it (of course not getting clues from that), so I guess a test is a game state change in and of itself, so you can test for 0 resources?
Sad to say the super Lucky highlander trick is not legal. The cannot of Underworld Support overrules the additional deckbuilding option per FFG rules email
Great video. Everyone likes the redemption story of normal Skids to parallel Skids. On a different note, have you considered a video series where you go over combinations of investigators and unique and powerful interactions that you can do when you have multiple decks made to interact with each other? For example, are there any decks that really pop off when you have a Sister Mary enabling bless? Or are there any deck pairs that redeem Bob Jenkins by making full use of his ability and that support Bob in return? Stuff like that.
I think this is missing how good On the lam can be (admittedly, mostly the advanced version.) Fighter was struggling and this allowed skids to drag an entire murderball of enemies away as they were still engaged with him (unlike Trish's thing), ran across the map with them, then at the end of the round he got out fine. Yeah you shouldn't NEED to do this if fighter is working properly, but if you're winning enough that you don't need to use this card, what's the problem? It's not a win more card, but it's a great "turn losing into winning" card. and if you don't have elusive in deck, the advanced version kicks ass. if you do have elusive, it works well together.
Hey man! Love the channel and all your insight. I just wanted to say i believe the word Geas is pronounced like Gesh as it's a Gaelic word for Idiosyncratic Taboo.
Can't wait for my girl Carolyn!
Reading the back of parallel Skids, it seems to me like the lower level version of the card is the one that ends up not counting towards deck size and number of copies. So, 3 Luckys in a highlander deck, 6 in a normal one. Otherwise, you could upgrade your Lucky to Lucky(3) 20 times and have the Luckiest deck in the world.
The one I've been waiting for! I want to see how Runic Axe saves Skids.
"A triggered ability can only be initiated if its effect has the potential to change the game state, and its cost (if any) has the potential to be paid in full, taking active cost modifiers into account. This potential is assessed without taking into account the consequences of the cost payment or any other ability interactions." rules-Triggered Abilities
I think, but am not quite certain this means you can't test for 0 resources. But I would like to hear your opinion on it.
Edit: based on being allowed to investigate on a location with no clues on it, I think making a test is a gamestate chance in and of itself so testing for 0 resources should be allowed.
Huh, there are people more rules familiar than I am, but it sounds like you're right. It's similarly valuable to be able to test up 2 as a lightning bolt, just by gambling 1. So it doesn't end up affecting my evaluation that much, but it might be the case that you cannot gamble at 0 for no (initial) reason.
@@RatherIncoherent It really depends on whether taking a test of any kind is considered a change in game state. And i have no idea if it is.
It's one of the couple of terribly worded rules and one of a couple that feel like it was introduced, because they failed to give clear wording when it mattered.
ongoing effects and silas is one other example. It very difficult to find out what is and isn't an ongoing effect. As if and luke can be difficult. timing interactions on cards that you have to infer based on the wording on that card is by far the worst offender by my account. (take hart and try and try gain is a good example of this for me. who would have guessed this doesn't work without looking it up?)
And then there are the rules that are just incorrect, did you know you technically don't control the stuff you have in play? Everyone played lola's old weakness incorrectly, technically, according to the rules.
@@RatherIncoherent After having done some digging, according to the faq, you are allowed to investigate a location with no clues on it (of course not getting clues from that), so I guess a test is a game state change in and of itself, so you can test for 0 resources?
Sad to say the super Lucky highlander trick is not legal. The cannot of Underworld Support overrules the additional deckbuilding option per FFG rules email
Great video. Everyone likes the redemption story of normal Skids to parallel Skids.
On a different note, have you considered a video series where you go over combinations of investigators and unique and powerful interactions that you can do when you have multiple decks made to interact with each other? For example, are there any decks that really pop off when you have a Sister Mary enabling bless? Or are there any deck pairs that redeem Bob Jenkins by making full use of his ability and that support Bob in return? Stuff like that.
I tried a Carolyn/Agnes team once and was surprisingly underwhelmed by it. Would also love to have a series on unique investigator synergies.
Probably the top of top 3 Parallel character designs imo (I think Parallel Agnes and Parallel Zoey are the other two).
I think this is missing how good On the lam can be (admittedly, mostly the advanced version.) Fighter was struggling and this allowed skids to drag an entire murderball of enemies away as they were still engaged with him (unlike Trish's thing), ran across the map with them, then at the end of the round he got out fine.
Yeah you shouldn't NEED to do this if fighter is working properly, but if you're winning enough that you don't need to use this card, what's the problem? It's not a win more card, but it's a great "turn losing into winning" card. and if you don't have elusive in deck, the advanced version kicks ass. if you do have elusive, it works well together.