I played Scarlet Keys as Kymani Jones, and was often confused by evade and successfully evade. You explain it really clearly here, and good call on the terminology being confusing to begin with compared to other actions.
That table with Skill Test Type and Skill Test Result and comparison with Investigate and Fight tests makes so much sense to explain evade. It's much more clear now why successful evade and automatic evade are different. Awesome job.
There's even a third term for all of those three cases. When you "Investigate" you perform an "Investigation". When you "Fight" you perform an "Attack" and when you "Evade" you perform an "Evasion attempt".
It's one of those things where, well, if you're towards the end of a scenario and you need the clues to just end it, you may just want to take the trauma rather than risk running out of time and losing the scenario. And of course, for the last scenario of a campaign, feel free to just ignore it entirely :)
@@Quick_Learner Ah, all is revealed, and uncannily TCU is targeted for our next purchase. Solid content, by the way; tip of the hat (they were all the rage in the 20s.)
They should do something, at least! I think the intent is that cards like Pickpocketing "after you evade an enemy" should still count for auto-evades, so just a different word entirely would be best.
An extra note about trauma: because it's only factored in at the START of a scenario, taking trauma mid-scenario does NOT mean you take any immediate damage/horror. So if Vincent's Wounded Bystander were to die, Vincent doesn't take 1 horror.
Great video! I had to do some research to find out about some of these rules and still didn't know about one or two of them after having finished 3 campaigns. I'm sure any newcomers will really appreciate it. On the topic of uniques, would you happen to know what the last point is referring to? I'm guessing there must be at least one case for it to be written out in the rulebook, but haven't encountered anything like it so far. I can wait to discover it myself if it's a campaign-specific scenario though. Just sounds really odd.
Thanks for the video. About the card "in the thick of it". : Permanent. Limit 1 per deck. Purchase at deck creation. When you purchase In the Thick of It, suffer 2 total physical and/or mental trauma. Then, earn 3 experience. ===> do I need to suffer 2 trauma every scenerario or just when I added first time to my deck? Thanks for confirming
If you have trauma, you begin each scenario with that much damage/horror. So yes, if you purchase In the Thick of It and choose to suffer 2 physical trauma, at the beginning of every single scenario you will start with 2 damage placed on you. (Unless you find a way to heal trauma).
The "successful evasion" vs "automatically evaded" is probably best described like other card games, such as Pokemon: "doing damage" and "placing damage counters" are fundamentally different. One is a process with resolution steps, and the latter is the result of said process. So, "automatic evasion" is not "succeeding" because it skips the part of the process where there is a test at all and applies the result. "Determining success or failure," part of that process, doesn't happen. This made more sense in their head than in practice, I think.
Yeah, I agree. Unfortunately, they're stuck with the templating as is, as evidenced by new cards: the number of people who have asked if Stray Cat solves Parallel Jim's weakness is unfortunate.
I sont understand the grotesque statute ruling at all. Shouldn't the ignore just mean ignore its resolution and thus make reveal and resolve different?
Yeah, I agree that it would be nice if "reveal" and "resolve" meant different things, but apparently the ruling is that cancel & ignore tokens means "as if it had never been revealed at all". They've been consistent on this ruling, on the pages of Defiance / Baseball Bat / Grotesque Statue. It would be nice if they changed the wording of Shriveling, Blinding Light, etc. to say "If a Skull/Cultist/etc. token is RESOLVED, then.." but hey, I didn't write the rules.
These "automatically succeed" cards should be reworded. E.g. The "automatically evade" phrase could be rewritten as "disengage from the enemy and exhaust it".
I'm not sure what you're referring to. Is it the Harbinger of Valusia? It has some special rules about placing resource tokens after a successful attack or evade, nothing about damage.
@@Quick_Learner double mistake in my part: I was referring to the Perfect game interview (listened to both of them yesterday and misremembered) and I actually misheard "elite" when you were talking about "aloof" enemies. But I knew that at least, so no harm done
I played Scarlet Keys as Kymani Jones, and was often confused by evade and successfully evade. You explain it really clearly here, and good call on the terminology being confusing to begin with compared to other actions.
Thank you!
That table with Skill Test Type and Skill Test Result and comparison with Investigate and Fight tests makes so much sense to explain evade. It's much more clear now why successful evade and automatic evade are different. Awesome job.
Thank you!! I hoped it would help out.
There's even a third term for all of those three cases. When you "Investigate" you perform an "Investigation". When you "Fight" you perform an "Attack" and when you "Evade" you perform an "Evasion attempt".
Yep, you're absolutely correct. Matters for things like "For this attack..." I thought about adding that but ended up being too cluttered.
The "Reactions are optional" clarification is so helpful. Thanks a lot QL! Keep up posting such amazing and well made videos.
I appreciate it!!
This channel is a great resource for a great game! Thank you for producing this content!
The evade skill test should probably be called a "Feint" action, with the result of that action being evading the enemy.
All clutch.
I made my life harder by resolving basic weaknesses with revelation that were put from deck to discard during Dunwich.
Yes! Another great video
I always go with Roland's weakness first. Good to know it's optional
It's one of those things where, well, if you're towards the end of a scenario and you need the clues to just end it, you may just want to take the trauma rather than risk running out of time and losing the scenario. And of course, for the last scenario of a campaign, feel free to just ignore it entirely :)
Very good, thanks.
I've been playing for 2 years and didn't know the one about 1 copy of exceptional cards. Doh!😊
Thankfully the most recent expansions (The Circle Undone and after) have only included one copy of Exceptional Cards in the box!
@@Quick_Learner Ah, all is revealed, and uncannily TCU is targeted for our next purchase. Solid content, by the way; tip of the hat (they were all the rage in the 20s.)
Great video! #9 was a great reminder/clarification
Glad it was helpful!!
Great video thank you
I wonder if they should change the language on the auto-evade effects so it reads "the enemy becomes evaded" rather than "evade the enemy"
They should do something, at least! I think the intent is that cards like Pickpocketing "after you evade an enemy" should still count for auto-evades, so just a different word entirely would be best.
Good to know about the trauma
Excellente vidéo. Merci !
I think "Avoid" could have been the result of an Evade skill test (Avoid) to make it simular for the other checks.
An extra note about trauma: because it's only factored in at the START of a scenario, taking trauma mid-scenario does NOT mean you take any immediate damage/horror. So if Vincent's Wounded Bystander were to die, Vincent doesn't take 1 horror.
Yep, although you immediately go insane in the unlikely event you already had 5 mental trauma. More relevant for Calvin!
Great video! I had to do some research to find out about some of these rules and still didn't know about one or two of them after having finished 3 campaigns. I'm sure any newcomers will really appreciate it.
On the topic of uniques, would you happen to know what the last point is referring to? I'm guessing there must be at least one case for it to be written out in the rulebook, but haven't encountered anything like it so far. I can wait to discover it myself if it's a campaign-specific scenario though. Just sounds really odd.
I can't think of anything off the top of my head... maybe future-proofing?
Probably refers to Necronomicon. Daisy's weakness is an encounter card version of it, and there's also player card versions of the card.
The necronomicon is not unique!
I thought #4 was pretty clear for everyone 🤔😂
Thanks for the video. About the card "in the thick of it". : Permanent. Limit 1 per deck. Purchase at deck creation. When you purchase In the Thick of It, suffer 2 total physical and/or mental trauma. Then, earn 3 experience. ===> do I need to suffer 2 trauma every scenerario or just when I added first time to my deck? Thanks for confirming
Just at deck creation. So only once, before the campaign starts.
@@Quick_Learner i maybe explain wrong, i meant: every new scenario the character will have 2 damages ?
If you have trauma, you begin each scenario with that much damage/horror. So yes, if you purchase In the Thick of It and choose to suffer 2 physical trauma, at the beginning of every single scenario you will start with 2 damage placed on you. (Unless you find a way to heal trauma).
The "successful evasion" vs "automatically evaded" is probably best described like other card games, such as Pokemon: "doing damage" and "placing damage counters" are fundamentally different. One is a process with resolution steps, and the latter is the result of said process. So, "automatic evasion" is not "succeeding" because it skips the part of the process where there is a test at all and applies the result. "Determining success or failure," part of that process, doesn't happen. This made more sense in their head than in practice, I think.
Yeah, I agree. Unfortunately, they're stuck with the templating as is, as evidenced by new cards: the number of people who have asked if Stray Cat solves Parallel Jim's weakness is unfortunate.
I sont understand the grotesque statute ruling at all. Shouldn't the ignore just mean ignore its resolution and thus make reveal and resolve different?
Yeah, I agree that it would be nice if "reveal" and "resolve" meant different things, but apparently the ruling is that cancel & ignore tokens means "as if it had never been revealed at all". They've been consistent on this ruling, on the pages of Defiance / Baseball Bat / Grotesque Statue. It would be nice if they changed the wording of Shriveling, Blinding Light, etc. to say "If a Skull/Cultist/etc. token is RESOLVED, then.." but hey, I didn't write the rules.
Man I love this game but boy do the convoluted rules make it more difficult for me to introduce new people
Yepppp :(
These "automatically succeed" cards should be reworded. E.g. The "automatically evade" phrase could be rewritten as "disengage from the enemy and exhaust it".
So, I cannot damage and echausted elite because...?
I'm not sure what you're referring to. Is it the Harbinger of Valusia? It has some special rules about placing resource tokens after a successful attack or evade, nothing about damage.
@@Quick_Learner double mistake in my part: I was referring to the Perfect game interview (listened to both of them yesterday and misremembered) and I actually misheard "elite" when you were talking about "aloof" enemies. But I knew that at least, so no harm done
Ah okay. :)
Background music way too loud. Hell ... I would rather listen to you talk without any music at all
I'll turn it down.