Crystallizer of Dreams

Can we get an official ruling on whether The Painted World can be placed under Crystallizer of Dreams? I understand the arguments for and against this in other reviews, but there still seems to be some uncertainty.

My take is that according to the section "Play" in the Rules Reference, TPW is played after you choose a card to copy and pay the appropriate number of resources. You can then activate Crystallizer of Dreams, and only at this time. Then the Painted World/copied event effects are resolved, including a new "Instead of discarding..." effect. Then according to the "instead" section of the rules reference (see below), the most recent replacement (the one on TPW) is used. So the combo doesn't seem to work.

"The word “instead” is indicative of a replacement effect. A replacement effect is an effect that replaces the resolution of a triggering condition with an alternate means of resolution. =If multiple replacement effects are initiated against the same triggering condition and create a conflict in how to resolve the triggering condition, the most recent replacement effect is the one that is used for the resolution of the triggering condition."

jmmeye3 · 224
TPW does the replacement effect while playing, Crystallizer’s replacement is *after* playing, therefore is the more recent effect — Difrakt · 688
I like that interpretation because I want to try the combo, but the "play" section of the Rules Reference seems to suggest that the card is "played" after its cost is paid and any restrictions and conditions are met, but before resolving the effects of the event. Here's the quote: "Any time an event card is played, its effects are resolved and it is then placed in its owner’s discard pile." This seems ambigious, but to me fits better with playing being separate from both resolving the effects in the text box and separate from discarding the event. — jmmeye3 · 224
It's been debated back and forth and no one can come to a solid ruling right now- strong arguments exist both ways. It's literally just going to have to be FAQ'd. Until then, play this in Sef however it makes sense to you, or just don't play it with her. — StyxTBeuford · 975
i don't see, where can be any confusion. Apendix I. clearly states, that the card is considered played AFTER its effects are resolved — Adny · 1
I really do not think this is the place to settle FAQ disputes. Threads upon threads, even here, have already gone back and forth over the card. Just wait for it to be settles officially, there's little point in continuing these discussions on DB. — StyxTBeuford · 975
Mists of R'lyeh

I just finished reviewing the level zero version of this card (see Mists of R'lyeh), so figured I'd take a look at the all-grown-up variety. On its own, I think it's pretty great -- for two resources, you get an asset that almost guarantees you five successful evade checks, and some additional mobility to boot. But of course, the real question is not whether this card is good, but whether it is so much better than the original Mists that we'd pay 4xp to upgrade into it. And I think the answer there is no.

This card is identical to the level zero version but for two changes: you get an additional charge, and you get a hefty +3 to the evade check.

Let's take the extra charge: how often are mystics going to need to evade five times in a scenario? Rarely, I would think. So while the insurance is nice, I think I'd prefer to use my xp on other things.

How about the +3 boost? Obviously that is much appreciated. A 4 on 3 check feels very different than a 7 on 3 check. But again, I wonder if it is really worth a massive 4xp. I feel like I could keep the original Mists make do with some static will boosts and the odd pitch from the hand.

In short, this card seems a little TOO premium. I might opt for a trim that provides, say, a +2 to the will check and no extra charges for 2xp. But this one tries to sell me more than I really need.

Though if you're taking Arcane Research then it only costs 2 XP, which seems fine if you already took the level 0 version anyway. — StyxTBeuford · 975
Yeah, and if you have two AR's (and resulting mental trauma), you may be steering clear of Shrivelling anyway, thus opening up a slot for the Pea Soup Fogs of R'lyeh. If I were playing a seekerly mystic mainly looking to stay out of harm's way, I'd feel very safe indeed with this in play. — Mordenlordgrandison · 78
For anyone who has access to both (which is just Akachi and Marie I think), I prefer Suggestion. Suggestion [1] is 3 fewer XP for a comparable skill bonus, and Suggestion [4] has that nifty attack-cancellation ability. Of course you do lose out on the free movement, and the extra buck isn't nothing. — Yenreb · 1
Mists of R'lyeh

If you're a mystic on an awkward date (this ghoul does NOT look like his eHarmony pic...), the Mists will get you out of it more times than not. It's a great level 0 asset. Not too expensive at 2 resources, and with impressive longevity at 4 charges. How good is the ability to use will instead of agility? For Agnes, Akachi, Patrice, and Jim, that's a +2 on the check, with the skills unmodified. With Mateo, Marie, Daisy, and Luke, it's a +1. For Diana, variable. And for Norman, a hefty +3. And that's not counting the many will icons your mystic likely has in hand, or the odd static boost from David Renfield or Holy Rosary.

And the good news doesn't stop there. After the mists cease to swirl, where are you? Well, you could just be right where you were -- but you don't have to be! If you pass the evade check, you get a free move as well to an adjacent location. If you use use all your charges (probably not likely, granted), that's an impressive four free actions.

Like lots of mystic cards, there's a side effect if you draw one of the ugly tokens, but it's not too bad -- you lose the least important card in your hand.

It may be handy to compare the Mists to your other evade options as a mystic. They are mostly events:

Blinding Light: The same cost as the mists, but single-use. It dings your ditched enemy for a damage, but the side effect is a bad one -- a lost action. This makes evading on your second action a risky proposition. Even if you succeed, you could lose your third action, meaning that you'll start your next turn right back where you started: engaged with an enemy and needing a card to help you evade it, which card is now in your discard pile.

Banish: With this event, you don't just evade your enemy -- you punt it to the other side of the map as well. In many situations, that's as good as defeating it. But it costs you an XP. And even if it didn't, Ethereal Form and the Mists seem better to me -- Ethereal Form gives you a better shot at the check itself (without succeeding which, nothing matters), and the Mists give you four uses instead of one, while still letting you put some distance between yourself and your befuddled foe.

Bind Monster: If you enjoy watching flipped turtles try to right themselves, you'll probably like this card. But if you aren't evil, the 3 resource, 2 xp cost will likely turn you off. Sure, it theoretically lets you pin an enemy down for the whole scenario, but given all the various checks you'll have to pass, all the resources and experience, you may as well just put the poor thing out of its misery and shrivel it a couple times!

Ethereal Form: Not enough to swathe yourself in mist? Then BECOME the mist instead! When you let your too too solid flesh melt, thaw, and resolve itself into a dew, your evade check is almost guaranteed to succeed, since you ADD your will value instead of swapping it in. And you disengage with everything else, too. In fact, if you're mobbed, this card gets BETTER, because you can choose the enemy with the lowest evade to target. If your arcane slots are likely to be taken up by other spells, this is a good event to have in your back pocket.

Summary: None of the mystic evade events really impresses except Ethereal Form. If you're running a lot of other spell assets, consider a copy or two of Ethereal Form for your evasion needs. If not, it'd be a high-stakes mistake as a mystic to miss on a take of the mists... and that pun-spree's going downhill fast so time to sign off!

The main issue with Mists of Ryleh is that most Mystics can't not run 1-2 combat spells and 1-2 investigate spells in the Arcane Slots in their deck. This card is great but you will probably have to run Sign Magick to get it into play. — TWWaterfalls · 361
I disagree with that. Mystics often run 4-6 spell assets and Mists is perfectly fine if you have other ways to get clues or do damage. In solo this card gives you move compression as well which is really strong. I really love this card in Luke for example because he can just use events to get clues. In fact with Dream Eaters events this has become more true. I've run Mists with Patrice, Luke, Akachi, and Jim, and I think it does incredibly well without Sign Magick. There's really no issue with Mists in my mind- it's an incredibly strong card and it's probably underplayed because people focus too hard on using Shrivelling and Rite instead of other options. — StyxTBeuford · 975
I'm running this in Zoey for TFA. The only contest for arcane slots there is Enchanted Blade. And there are plenty of enemies you'd rather evade and leave behind in this campaign, rather than kill. — Yenreb · 1
I'm playing mystic and off-class mystics these days that dont focus on weapon spells, so the spell lineup is Investigation spell + Evade spell, rather then the usual Rite + Shrivell. I'm very impressed with the results. — Tsuruki23 · 946
"Fool me once..."

"Fool me once..." offers a similar promise to Mystic staple Ward of Protection of protecting you and your party from dangerous treachery effects. I say "staple", but actually I've recently gone a little cold for Ward because it turns out taking a horror along with spending a card and a resource is a fairly steep price against most treacheries, although it sometimes is worth it to protect vulnerable teammates or to just cancel the harsher treacheries, such as Ancient Evils. How does "Fool me once..." compare?

"Fool me once..." still costs a card and a resource, and while it doesn't deal you horror out of hand like Ward does, it does demand you actually resolve and discard a treachery in order to prevent a future copy of it. Now, you'll still count as having resolved the Revelation ability on a treachery that you passed a skill test for; the good news is in theory "Fool me once..." sometimes costs you merely a card and a resource, but this means you'll have to suffer at least one Ancient Evils in order to cancel the next one. Additionally, this card demands that you resolve the treachery to be cancelled, and not a teammate - so you have to draw it before they do if your intentions are selfless.

On top of that, not all treacheries with dangerous Revelation effects actually discard themselves until they're already done hurting you pretty bad, such as Dunwich encounter spoiler and Circle Undone encounter spoiler. Ward of Protection does better against those, and is generally much more flexible in what it can cancel. It has been pointed out that you can "trap" a treachery attached to "Fool me once..." by keeping it in play so that it doesn't shuffle back into the encounter deck, but unless you were highly likely to draw that treachery twice again during the scenario, you were just as good if not better cancelling a second copy with "Fool me once..."'s reaction.

So, when is "Fool me once..." good? I think much like Ward of Protection, this card isn't going to be something you spend experience on for all investigators for whom it is available. You ought to have a good idea of why you're buying "Fool me once..." and the kinds of treacheries you intend to use it to fight. You might for instance take this if you or a teammate is particularly weak to willpower treacheries. Notably, "Fool me once..." is likely to overperform in The Forgotten Age (perhaps this is being alluded to in the art?) due to the Explore mechanic allowing you to dig for treacheries early in the scenario.

Additionally, the more teammates you have, the greater the likelihood that the same treachery is drawn repeatedly before the scenario ends. In a 3 or 4 player group, "Fool me once..." goes especially well with First Watch and "Let me handle this!" to really control the Mythos phase and improve the odds of you drawing the treachery you want to cancel before someone else does. Obviously this synergy is going to be most effective in investigators equipped to take on multiple encounter cards, which typically means those with high willpower - so Zoey Samaras, Leo Anderson, and particularly Diana Stanley who loves that magic word "cancel".

Even if this card is as situational as I believe it is, it's still nice to see the Guardian archetype of protectively tackling encounter cards continue to be fleshed out, and I'm definitely a fan of the concept and theming.

aeongate · 37
It's a very hard card to maneuver around in my experience. Ancient Evils even requires that you draw one of the copies. I think it works best in Guardians who can Stick to the Plan and increase the number of encounters they see with this "in hand". — StyxTBeuford · 975
This is good in TCU cause the encounter deck mills itself to trigger effects when it runs out. Also fool me once can be used on treachery weaknesses — Django · 2365
I actually find it's really bad in TCU despite the encounter milling because so many of the treacheries are sticky to begin with. The discard clause just doesn't activate nearly as often as you think it would. Hitting a weakness in your deck to keep it from cycling is good, but only if you're playing a very cycle heavy deck, which in Guardian or sub-Guardian right now I think is mostly limited to Roland? — StyxTBeuford · 975
Joe can draw lots with access to seeker 5 — Django · 2365
Sure but I don't like this in Joe for several reasons. As a hunch it's near useless since it's not in play during the Mythos phase. As a maindeck card you're still reliant on finding this card (easier in Seekers sure) and then discarding the treachery while this is in your hand, which, the lower your willpower, the harder that is to do. Sure, you can counter one Rotting Remains if you happen to draw two of them, but you could just as well throw in another ally or some healing into your deck. Take the Initiative works better than this in most cases. — StyxTBeuford · 975
Note that you don't have to be the one to *draw* the encounter the first time; you have to be the one to *discard* it. For treacheries that go in the threat area and are cleared with an action, you can play "Fool me once..." as long as you're the one to discard it, regardless of who drew it. — Yenreb · 1
Yes, but realistically Joe still can’t do much with that. — StyxTBeuford · 975
Moonstone

I haven't seen this mentioned much, but Occult Lexicon/Blood-Rite can also discard the Moonstone from your hand, meaning Seekers with Moonstone access, Ursula, Minh, and Rex, have an additional option to get Moonstone out, the main way for Seeker still being Elli. I'd say Ursula benefits the most from this combo. Also, don't underestimate a Seeker's ability to play Moonstone by exceeding max hand size. Card draw is all over the place in the Seeker faction.

Soloclue · 1129
Finh and Marie can also play both — Django · 2365