Rogue
Asset. Accessory

Item. Relic.

Cost: 1.
Test Icons:

As an additional cost to put this card into play, you must search your bonded cards for 1 copy of Guardian of the Crystallizer and shuffle it into your deck.

After you play an event: Attach it facedown to Crystallizer of Dreams instead of discarding it (to a maximum of 5 attached events). Attached events may be committed to skill tests as if they were in your hand.

Ethan Patrick Harris
The Dream-Eaters #24.
Crystallizer of Dreams
Reviews

How does this card interacts with Wendy's Amulet?? It seems to me that if you have both Crystallizer of Dreams and Wendy's Amulet you can loop events to infinity like for example:

  1. Initiate investigation test -> (if you fail) play Live and Learn

  2. Live and Learn doesn't discard but attaches itself to Crystallizer of Dreams (so Wendy's Amulet forced effect doesn't trigger?)

  3. Commit the attached Live and Learn to the same test so it lands on top of discard pile

  4. If you fail repeat from step 1.

If this is true then you can do allot of naughty nonsense using this card with Wendy, not to mention Will to Survive, Eucatastrophe, Trial by Fire...etc.

Alogon · 221
The forced effect part of the amulet is based on "playing the event", so it should trigger and put it on the bottom of the deck with forced taking priority on the amulet from this card.. — Bronze · 98
Yes, you are right, in the reference book under "Forced abilities" it's stated "For any given timing point, all forced abilities initiated in reference to that timing point must resolve before any [reaction triggered]  abilities referencing the same timing point in the same manner may be initiated." — Alogon · 221
Similar question can be asked of The Painted World. In that case I (think) the replacement is a floating constant, so again has priority over the ‘when’ my text but it’s not 100% obvious — Difrakt · 610
Is there anything stopping the Crystalizer taking the card from the bottom of your deck? — Kael_Hate · 1
‘Instead’ is a replacement effect, and can only trigger if the card is doing the thing replaced (in this case being discarded). Wendy’s amulet already replaces discarding so there’s no discard event to replace with putting the event on Crystallizer — Difrakt · 610

EDIT: Well I inserted my foot into my mouth well and good, thinking The Painted World worked with this card. I'll keep the post as it was, but please ignore the part pertaining to Sefina Rousseau.

ORIGINAL POST.

Hmm, a rouge card that synergies with event cards; now who could stand to benefit the most from that?

In all seriousness, this is a bit like Backpack in that you either build a deck around it, or you notice you have a large number of events in your deck already and might as well add it.

Any rouge that takes it will likely also want to consider Narrow Escape, Swift Reflexes, and Decoy for their symbols.

As for which investigator to give it you, signature events cards are a good place to look. Sefina get a whopping THREE extra Guts or Manual Dexterities, thanks to The Painted World, before she's even starts choosing cards, so for her, it's an auto-include. "Skids" O'Toole might want a look, what with On the Lam having the most skill icons in the entire game (counts as 4), as well as a selection of guardian event providing and icons. If you still hold out hope of Lola Hayes, two Unexpected Courages from Improvisation will be really nice, and EVERY event is at your disposal.

I personally am going to try an event heavy Rex Murphy deck, with lots of icons to proc his special ability, including Search for the Truth.

Lucaxiom · 19
The Painted World won't attach to Crystallizer because it removes itself from the game instead of discarding, so Crystallizer can't replace the discard step with attachment (since the discard step has already been replaced). That said, she does still run a lot of events. I also really like the idea of running it with Rex Murphy. There are a lot of great seeker events with solid commit icons. — Death by Chocolate · 12
I'm still intrigued by the idea of running this in a Patrice deck once Versatile comes out. . Dunno if it would really work, but in theory it offers the chance to double her hand size. Could be worth a try at least. — Sassenach · 53
TPW interaction is ambiguous. RAW it doesn’t work because in RAW there is no timing window between ‘playing’ and ‘discarding’ an event, however RAW actually means Crystallizer (and relatedly, Wendy’s amulet) doesn’t work *at all* which means there’s an issue with written rules — Difrakt · 610
However, if changes to RAW create this timing window (this is anticipated) Crystallizer WILL work with TPW. Compare writing for TPW which creates a replacement effect, which Crystallizer can override, to Mystifying Song which never goes to the discard window because the remove from game is part of resolving the card. (Let’s pretend Marie would ever want to versatile this card) — Difrakt · 610
Even if that is an issue, and even should the suggestion you make be implemented, Crystallizer still wouldn’t work with TPW. “All aspects of an effect have timing priority over all "after..." triggering conditions that might arise as a consequence of that effect.” All of the effects of playing TPW (including the RFG substitution) have timing priority over the Crystallizer’s ‘after’ ability. By the time it resolves, the discard ‘timing window’ has already been replaced and there is nothin for the Crystallizer to replace anymore. — Death by Chocolate · 12
That’s for consequences of an effect, it doesn’t override priority for later conditions. — Difrakt · 610
Hard to give a relevant example here. If TPW was play an event and draw a card’ you couldn’t trigger Double Double until after you had already drew the card, but that has nothing to do with the creation of floating conditions (the situation we’re dealing with here) — Difrakt · 610
Right, but one of the consequences of ‘playing TFW’ is the floating replacement condition. See the FAQ on Wendy’s Amulet for the example involving Lure. Lure’s effect causes it to not be discarded at the end of resolving it. TFW does the same. The same principle applies if Wendy plays TFW (using “You Owe Me One”). YOMO would got to the bottom of her deck (after TFW was fully resolved), but TFW would not go to the bottom of Sefina’s deck. It would still RFG. (In contrast if Wendy played any other average event, that event would end up at the bottom of its owners deck, and then they’d draw cards and then YOMO gets bottom’d.) — Death by Chocolate · 12
You’re confusing applicable rules, Wendy can’t send *any* card that she doesn’t own into her deck because it’s not her out of play area, but that has nothing to do with timing priority. The rule you’re talking about has to do with trying to nest a triggering condition in between effects listed into a card, it has nothing to do with effects created once the card has resolved which is the situation we’re dealing with here. Since TPW has fully resolved its text before it hits the ‘after playing’ window there is no timing priority, and we’re back to standard conflict of timing windows, which Crystallizer of Dreams can override. — Difrakt · 610
Lure is even simpler and has nothing to do with timing priority: Wendy doesn’t bury lure into its deck because it never hits the replacement effect. If lure was ‘instead of discarding, attach’ then Wendy’s amulet would override the lure text as usual. — Difrakt · 610
Okay, first of all I never said Wendy could put *any* card into her deck. The forced effect would trigger, but since she doesn’t own the card, it would go to its owners version of that out of play zone. But that’s not the point here. In a standard conflict of timing windows ‘after’ effects resolve last. Both TPW’s actual text and the hypothetical Lure text you propose create a floating effect that has already replaced the future event of discarding with a different game effect. When Crystallizer resolves, there is no conflict because Crystallizer can’t replace an effect that has already been replaced. TPW’s replacement clause isn’t ‘waiting around’ to trigger, it has already changed the future steps of its play resolution during the resolution of its game text. — Death by Chocolate · 12
No that’s not how AHLCG works, the game is designed around a static set of timing windows and triggers that react to those timing windows. Lure doesn’t work with Wendy’s amulet because attachment prevents discard from ever occurring (read section on ‘attach to’). Wendy’s amulets forced conditions only fails because the FORCED effect only interacts at a specific point (after you play) and has a replacement condition (instead of discard) since the FORCED window expires without ever having a discard to replace that’s why amulet fails to affect lure, but again none of this applies to Crystallizer. — Difrakt · 610
You need to review the ‘instead’/replacement effect section. They don’t change future conditions intrinsically, they create a floating trigger. In this way there isn’t a distinction between TPW and Crystallizer — Difrakt · 610
Jesus Christ Guys. What happened while I was away?! — Lucaxiom · 19
Thank you for directing me to the ‘instead’ entry. So, TPW would need to specify ‘would’ to ensure itself. Without that, the Crystallizer is the most recent replacement and thus takes precedent. — Death by Chocolate · 12