Seeker
Asset. Hand

Item. Tool.

Cost: 2.
Test Icons:

After the last clue is discovered from your location: Place 1 resource (from the token pool) on this card, as evidence. (Limit once per game at each location.)

While Hawk-Eye Folding Camera has ...

- ... 1 or more evidence, you get +1 .

- ... 2 or more evidence, you get +1 .

- ... 3 or more evidence, you get +1 sanity.

Robert Laskey
The Wages of Sin #154.
Hawk-Eye Folding Camera
Reviews

In a number of ways, this suffers from the same problems a number of assets do: the Hawk-Eye Folding Camera becomes a less useful investment for every turn the game lasts, because of the slow buildup.

If you have it fully powered up, it's not a bad package deal: +1 , +1 , and +1 sanity is about the same as St. Hubert's Key, at half the price.

But most seekers don't really benefit from said package deal. Between naturally high sanity pools, a surplus of allies with decent sanity soak like Dr. Milan Christopher, Charles Ross, Esq., Dr. William T. Maleson, and Mr. "Rook", and Higher Education, they can afford to take most tests on the chin, and spend their way past everything else. So, in practice, what they really want is that +1 .

How long does it take said +1 to come online? Well, to some extent, you can cheat around the condition. If you play it when a location has 1 clue on it, clear that clue, Pathfinder over to another location with 1 clue on it, then clear that location too, you could theoretically do it in three actions. However,this is both unlikely, and is discounting the prior effort involved in discovering clues at said location.

A more useful measure might be "how many investigate tests will this card help me with, if I play it the second I draw it?" The best measure for that would be the act deck. The number of clues needed in a given scenario tends to hover at around 5 to 6 clues. In turn, the minimum number of clues at a location is usually 1. That means if this is played in your opening hand, it will only help you for 2/3rds of the game. And if you draw it, say, halfway through, it'll only help you on the last 1 checks.

Let's compare with the venerable Magnifying Glass. Sure, you only get the +1 if investigating. But the list of things a raw boost helps with besides an investigate is actually pretty small, consisting of the following:

Most of these are rare enough that you can afford to commit to them instead, or pay your college debts to make them go away. And Magnifying Glass is fast, cheaper, and provides that key bonus to investigation attempts right away. Even if you draw it on turn 14, and there's two clues left to discover before the last act advances, it will still help you for those two clues.

For most seekers, the Magnifying Glass is a superior option, which competes for the same hand slots. In order to really make good use of this camera, that +1 boost needs to be meaningful, because it's the one that turns on first, and the one that offers a niche over other cards that would boost now instead of later. So, who wants it?

  • Daisy Walker can use it for spells. But her hand slots are already highly contested by books and other tools, to the point where even Magnifying Glass doesn't always make the cut.
  • Marie Lambeau has the right statline and cardpool to make use of it. But she also has in-class access to St. Hubert's Key, and with only 5 off-class cards to work, a card that duplicates benefits already available from other cards isn't high on the priority list.
  • Carolyn Fern can also use it for spells, and likes the boost for Hypnotic Therapy. But she only has 3 base and no access to the 3+ XP spells or Spirit Athame. She's not going to be good enough at it, because she needs 3 or more boosting assets in play to have a reliable baseline.

Now, I'd say the one investigator who really likes this card is Norman Withers.

  • His awkward card pool, with only 5 level 0 cards, sharply limits his access to the cards that would make this card redundant.
  • His special ability heavily discourages skill cards in his deckbuilding, making him more reliant on consistent stat boosts.
  • With his choice of XP cards being instead of , that +1 gets used for everything, instead of just treacheries.

In short, this card tends to be overshadowed by Magnifying Glass for pure seekers, while competing for highly contested slots in either deckbuilding or play area in other investigators.

Abodmuthkat · 174
No love for Joe Diamond? — Vittek · 1
I would argue that the card is excellent in Marie. As a 4-willpower mystic with extra spell actions, Marie desperately needs willpower buffs. The camera does that, and does so without occupying the accessory/ally slot. It adds consistency and stacks nicely with other willpower buffs. — ak45 · 414
Not to mention it buffs her Willpower first, which is definitely more valuable for a Mystic. — StyxTBeuford · 12738
It's better in 1-2 player cause you can clear most locations in one turn. Clue events are also pretty cool to power it up, like scene of the crime or drawn to flame. I'm currently using it with carolyn fern and the will 5 together wtih huberts key is a great encounter protection. — Django · 4286
I think that what holds this card down is that you get first the willpower and then the intellect boost. In standard difficulty though this t be a big problem — Alogon · 887
I meant, *shouldn't be a big problem :D — Alogon · 887
I want to add the point that Hawkeye is definitely not a bad card, and a diect comparison to Magnifying class just isnt appropriate, you see 2/3rds of the card is all about defense! +Willpower, +sanity, a bunch of characters loves them some horror tank and treachery resistance. — Tsuruki23 · 2324
The comparison to Magnifying Glass is more in regards to the alternatives Seekers could run for hand slots. I think people in general agree that most Seekers would just prefer the cheaper and faster Magnifying Glass in their hands over the Cameras. Running both is a bad idea since the Cameras want to stay in your hands and need to be brought in early to really pay off, so you wouldn't want to replace either tool with the other. For non-Seekers who pull from Mystic (Marie, Carolyn) and Seekers who lean Mystic (Norman, Daisy) I think the camera is a solid card. — StyxTBeuford · 12738
Joe Diamond is basically in the same position as Daisy, exacerbated. He's trying to be both a Guardian and a Seeker, which are full-time roles. — Abodmuthkat · 174
Regarding the camera being defensive, part of my point is that the defense being offered is redundant for most Seekers. So what they want is the intellect boost, usually. — Abodmuthkat · 174
And Marie definitely is one of the better users of the camera. But for her, it's two cards out of the five she can take from the Seeker or Survivor cardpool, both of which have very strong options. For Norman, it's two out of twenty five cards, which is a much easier sell. — Abodmuthkat · 174
The biggest reason that I want to use this is that it gives an investigator the same benefit as Hubert's Key but occupies a different slot. That turns a 3 intellect investigator into a potential 5 (or 6 both are powered up). This is the biggest benefit for Mystic/Seekers imo instead of a reason to not use it. I am planning on running this in a Jim deck sometime. In Marie it is even better since she can get to a 6/6 relatively easily. — TWWaterfalls · 850
Say there are two investigators at the same location. Each investigator has 2 cameras in play. One investigator clears the last clue. How many evidence tokens can be placed on the cameras? One (one per location), two (one per investigator per location), or four (one per camera per location)? — mbooradley · 6
Since it's "Limit" and not "Max", each camera counts the limit separately -- you can place a total of 4 evidence tokens in the scenario you've given. — Thatwasademo · 44

Staple. End of review. Thanks FFG. Now how do I make it 200 characters long? I'll maybe say that it is even better, when playing seekers that like magic. I'd play it on Roland also. One handed weapons, coupled with xp dynamite tend to be enough.

Onetribe · 274
It's a staple for Marie as well. Draw it early and she can get to 5/5 very quickly. Couple it with St Hubert's Key for 6/6. All of a sudden she's a monster. — Sassenach · 168
I think it works well for investigators who have 3+ willpower and 3+ intellect already and want to use both. Otherwise I tend to think that Magnifying Glass works better- seekers would rather have that +1 intellect now rather than later, and having to clear 2 locations first decreases the net benefit of the intellect boost quite a bit. The glass also has a more relevant seeker icon, is fast, and costs 1 which means you can put it out alongside Milan and get going turn 1. Plus there's the upgraded glass which is just an easy discount. So I think Marie likes this, Carolyn likes this, and Daisy likes this. Ursula might, but I think I'd still rather take Magnifying Glass with her since she doesn't have access to Mystic cards. — StyxTBeuford · 12738
I'm also torn with this and magnifying glass for Carolyn. The Will boost helps with her signature card (Will test VS 2), but the tempo loss in turn 1 is an issue for me. — Django · 4286
@Django Her signature card is Int test VS 2, but the camera still helps (once it has two evidence) while magnifying glass does not. — Death by Chocolate · 1229
Thanks, for some reason i thought her signature was Will based. This makes it a lot better and nearly auto success when building her as cluer. — Django · 4286

I need some clarification for the text "Limit once per game at each location".

The clarification is very significant, because Darrell Simmons gives HEFC a new relevance.

The rules say:

"Max X per " imposes a maximum across all copies of a card (by title) for all players. Generally, this phrase imposes a maximum number of times that copies of that card can be played during the designated time period. If a maximum includes the word "committed" (For example, "Max 1 committed per skill test"), it imposes a maximum number of copies of that card that can be committed to skill tests during the designated period. If a maximum appears as part of an ability, it imposes a maximum number of times that ability can be initiated from all copies (by title) of cards bearing that ability (including itself), during the designated period. If the effects of a card or ability with a limit or maximum are canceled, it is still counted against the limit/maximum, because the ability has been initiated." [arkhamdb.com](https://arkhamdb.com/rules#Limits_and_Maximums) How do I have to understand this? Question A: If there are two copies of HEFC in play and the last clue ist discovered at a location where the players controlling these assets are. Is an evidence placed on each copy or only on one copy? Because the rules say "If a maximum appears as part of an ability, it imposes a maximum number of times that ability can be initiated from all copies (by title) of cards bearing that ability (including itself), during the designated period." I would read this as "It needs 6 individual locations cleared to stack up two copies." Question B: If I have 1 copy of HEFC in play and get an evidence at a location. Then I play a second copy of HEFC. Can I - if a clue is placed on that location again - get another evidence for the second copy of HEFC? I would read this as "No." Question C: If I have to discard my copy of HEFC from play and get it back to play (e.g. by Scavenging). Does the limitation of this copy reset? I would read this as "No." Therefore the total number of evidence that HEFCs can provide to a group is limited to the number of locations in a game. What if a location leaves play and later enters again, like e.g. locations in "Before the Black Throne"? Are they treated as new locations?
Hawk-Eye Folding Camera isn't "Max once per game at each location", it's "Limit once per game at each location". That means that each camera individually can only get one evidence from each location, but different cameras, including the same camera if it's left and re-entered play, can get evidence from the same location. — Thatwasademo · 44
That said, (and this would hold even if it was "max once per game at each location"), "each location" counts any location that leaves and re-enters play as a new location. — Thatwasademo · 44
(To track *the same* card as it leaves and re-enters play, they'd use Max instead of Limit; to track *different* cards as they leave and re-enter play, they'd need something like "at each location (by name)") — Thatwasademo · 44
er, having just realized that wording is slightly wrong, by "the same"/"different" above I mean the card the ability is written on or other cards, not, like, a card leaving play and a different card entering play — Thatwasademo · 44