$20.00
$5.00
$15.00
David Goulette
United States
Santa Clara
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
So, lets say you take an Aquire Assets action and you roll two successes. Can you use the two successes to gain an asset (or assets) AND THEN spend those same two successes to move to the side board?

I ask because it is interesting that they explicitly did not use the word "spend" in the Aquire Assets action rules.

 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kenneth H
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Admittedly, I'm not poring over the rulebook at the moment, but I think it's safe to say no. You can certainly buy assets and also book passage to Antarctica if you have enough successes, but I'm certain you're not supposed to gain the benefit of your successes twice like you describe.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Krzysiek Domański
Poland
Wrocław
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
anaturalharmonic wrote:
I ask because it is interesting that they explicitly did not use the word "spend" in the Aquire Assets action rules.
Great catch! This deserves errata.
By current reference guide wording: Sure, you can eat your cake and still have it.
But I think we both know this isn't how it's intended to work.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goulette
United States
Santa Clara
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Flamethrower49 wrote:
Admittedly, I'm not poring over the rulebook at the moment, but I think it's safe to say no. You can certainly buy assets and also book passage to Antarctica if you have enough successes, but I'm certain you're not supposed to gain the benefit of your successes twice like you describe.


I think you are right in spirit and technically wrong in the "rules lawyer sense." But I am not sure and I may be missing something.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goulette
United States
Santa Clara
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
haroth9842 wrote:
anaturalharmonic wrote:
I ask because it is interesting that they explicitly did not use the word "spend" in the Aquire Assets action rules.
Great catch! This deserves errata.
By current reference guide wording: Sure, you can eat your cake and still have it.
But I think we both know this isn't how it's intended to work.


Agreed. The most brutal version of any rule is likely the correct one.

But seriously, the gain assets rule says to "gain Assets of his choice from the reserve with total VALUE equal to or less than the number of successes rolled." It doesn't say "spend." So you still have the success die/dice after you have "gained" the asset.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mathias Heilmann
Germany
Essen
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
anaturalharmonic wrote:
haroth9842 wrote:
anaturalharmonic wrote:
I ask because it is interesting that they explicitly did not use the word "spend" in the Aquire Assets action rules.
Great catch! This deserves errata.
By current reference guide wording: Sure, you can eat your cake and still have it.
But I think we both know this isn't how it's intended to work.


Agreed. The most brutal version of any rule is likely the correct one.

But seriously, the gain assets rule says to "gain Assets of his choice from the reserve with total VALUE equal to or less than the number of successes rolled." It doesn't say "spend." So you still have the success die/dice after you have "gained" the asset.
Just think of the travel to the side board as an asset then and you're golden.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goulette
United States
Santa Clara
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Heilz wrote:
anaturalharmonic wrote:
haroth9842 wrote:
anaturalharmonic wrote:
I ask because it is interesting that they explicitly did not use the word "spend" in the Aquire Assets action rules.
Great catch! This deserves errata.
By current reference guide wording: Sure, you can eat your cake and still have it.
But I think we both know this isn't how it's intended to work.


Agreed. The most brutal version of any rule is likely the correct one.

But seriously, the gain assets rule says to "gain Assets of his choice from the reserve with total VALUE equal to or less than the number of successes rolled." It doesn't say "spend." So you still have the success die/dice after you have "gained" the asset.
Just think of the travel to the side board as an asset then and you're golden.


Well that is one way to play it (and I think the one that makes the most sense) but it would create a different contradiction. If you need to play the movement to the outpost like an asset, then the word "spend" should be explicitly used in the Acquire Assets section of the base game rule book. Or the word "spend" would have to be removed from the MoM rules.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dale Wilkins
United States
Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm looking at the Mountains Of Madness rulebook and it very explicitly states under Side-Board Rules on Page 4:

...when an investigator performs an Acquire Assets action, he may spend two successes to move to the Miskatonic Outpost.

Edit: Never mind. I see your point. It does not say spend in the base game rulebook or reference guide. Even so, "double-dipping" that way seems wrong to me.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goulette
United States
Santa Clara
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
D4L3W wrote:
I'm looking at the Mountains Of Madness rulebook and it very explicitly states under Side-Board Rules on Page 4:

...when an investigator performs an Acquire Assets action, he may spend two successes to move to the Miskatonic Outpost.

Edit: Never mind. I see your point. It does not say spend in the base game rulebook or reference guide. Even so, "double-dipping" that way seems wrong to me.


No worries. Yeah, my point is about the base game rule (or the fact that the two are inconsistent). I think you are correct that it is "double dipping" but, if your interpretation of the rule is correct, then (imho) the base game rule is worded poorly and needs an errata.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Davy Ashleydale
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It would, indeed, be strange if the game designers has this conversation:

Designer 1: "Okay, let's invent the Acquire Assets action now."

Designer 2: "How about, you do an Influence test and you can gain as many Assets as you want from the reserve as long as their total Value is less than or equal to the number of successes on the test?"

D1: "Yeah, that's sounds good. But they still have those successes afterwards, right? I mean, we're not saying they have to spend them. Like, after gaining the Assets, they could additionally spend those successes on something else?"

D2: "Sure, but there's nothing to spend them on right now. Maybe in a future expansion."
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goulette
United States
Santa Clara
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
randomlife wrote:
It would, indeed, be strange if the game designers has this conversation:

Designer 1: "Okay, let's invent the Acquire Assets action now."

Designer 2: "How about, you do an Influence test and you can gain as many Assets as you want from the reserve as long as their total Value is less than or equal to the number of successes on the test?"

D1: "Yeah, that's sounds good. But they still have those successes afterwards, right? I mean, we're not saying they have to spend them. Like, after gaining the Assets, they could additionally spend those successes on something else?"

D2: "Sure, but there's nothing to spend them on right now. Maybe in a future expansion."


I get your point. Note that I agree in what the rule should be (or at least what your comment implies). My ultimate point from the beginning was that there should be an errata but I did not explicitly state that in my original post.

But with that said, (I'm only bringing this up because of your comment), I actually think the problem was how they use the word "Test" in the rules. I could be convinced otherwise of course, but here are my thoughts.

"Tests," as defined on page 12 imply a binary success/fail (roll a 5 or 6 for success otherwise fail) followed by an "if success then X else Y" (where X or Y can be no effect). But Acquire Assets, Will Test, and Strength Test all do not follow this definition.

The acquire assets rule, for example, says:

Quote:
If the investigator is on a City space, he may attempt to
acquire Asset cards from the reserve. He tests his Influence
(handshake symbol) by rolling dice and gains Assets of his choice from the
reserve with total value equal to or less than the number of
successes rolled (see “Tests” on page 12)


So the acquire Asset action says "he tests his Influence," and then it refers to "see “Tests” on page 12." But the aquire Asset action never "fails" or "succeeds." There is no such concept. You roll for a value and use it to Aquire Assets if applicable.

They very carefully took the time to define "Test" but then used that same word in ways that contradict the definition. Just my thoughts.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M.C.Crispy
United Kingdom
Basingstoke
Hampshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I think that there is a misunderstanding of the Acquire Assets action. The reason that it's Influence that you check is that you aren't "buying" anything. You generate Influence and use that to persuade people to make Assets available to you. These Assets are items, services and people in the base game. In expansions that allow you to travel via the Acquire Assets action there is a "special Acquire Assets effect" (a bit like the Location special actions on the side boards) that allows you to use your influence to persuade your resources to get you to Antarctica (or wherever).

So no, you don't have any Influence available to "spend" on travel once you've called in favours to acquire that tasty weapon or whatever, you've already exhausted their patience and have no more strings left to pull.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Davy Ashleydale
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
But I think that David's main point is that the Mountains of Madness rulebook did use the word "spend" when referring to chartering a flight to Antarctica.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goulette
United States
Santa Clara
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
mccrispy wrote:
I think that there is a misunderstanding of the Acquire Assets action. The reason that it's Influence that you check is that you aren't "buying" anything. You generate Influence and use that to persuade people to make Assets available to you. These Assets are items, services and people in the base game. In expansions that allow you to travel via the Acquire Assets action there is a "special Acquire Assets effect" (a bit like the Location special actions on the side boards) that allows you to use your influence to persuade your resources to get you to Antarctica (or wherever).

So no, you don't have any Influence available to "spend" on travel once you've called in favours to acquire that tasty weapon or whatever, you've already exhausted their patience and have no more strings left to pull.


Crispy, I 100% agree that what you say here is a very nice thematic way to interpret the situation. And, after some thought, that is exactly how I will play it (I am new to the game, and this sort of thematic analysis is more clear to an experienced player).

My point is that the rules do not clearly say this. In fact there are inconsistencies with how they use "Spend" and "Test."

Aside: Even if we take the MoM mechanics out of the discussion, the base game rule book is self contradictory on the definition of "Test" which is basic to the core mechanics of the game. I discussed the base game issues with the word "Test" here:
https://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/23982063#23982063

The inconsistencies on "Spend" is the issue here (as Davy correctly points out). The base game Reference Guide took time to be very clear about what the word "Spend" means:

Quote:

- When an investigator spends a token or card, such as a Clue token,
he discards it in exchange for an effect.
- An investigator cannot spend a token or card he does not have.
- An investigator may choose not to spend a token or card he has.
- An investigator cannot spend Health or Sanity if doing so would
cause him to be defeated (i.e., he cannot spend his last Health
or Sanity).


Note that there is no mention of "spending" successes. And the base game Aquire Assets rules do not say "spend." They used it in MoM movement to the outpost but not in the Aquire Assets base game rule.

Again, my question in the OP was not so much about how I think the game should be played. I was just trying to point out something that should probably be added to errata for clarity. Alternatively, an example should have been added to the MoM rule book that made it clear you were spending the two successes after optionally Aquiring any Assets.

I understand rules oversights in expansions will happen, but they should be careful about how they use keyword language (imho).


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M.C.Crispy
United Kingdom
Basingstoke
Hampshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
randomlife wrote:
But I think that David's main point is that the Mountains of Madness rulebook did use the word "spend" when referring to chartering a flight to Antarctica.
So what's your point? That the rulebooks aren't perfect, or that somehow "using" Influence must be different if you want to use the "special travel" option? To the first I say "well, duh!". To the second, well, I've said my piece on that one.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goulette
United States
Santa Clara
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
mccrispy wrote:
randomlife wrote:
But I think that David's main point is that the Mountains of Madness rulebook did use the word "spend" when referring to chartering a flight to Antarctica.
So what's your point? That the rulebooks aren't perfect, or that somehow "using" Influence must be different if you want to use the "special travel" option? To the first I say "well, duh!". To the second, well, I've said my piece on that one.


I was simply pointing out what I think is an inconsistency in the rule book. And I am suggesting that possibly an addition to the errata be written. If you think that it is something that should be obvious (as the "well, duh!" comment seems to suggest) then fine.

It wasn't obvious to me when I read the rule for the first time which led me to make the post. I thought I might be missing something.
1 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M.C.Crispy
United Kingdom
Basingstoke
Hampshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
anaturalharmonic wrote:
mccrispy wrote:
randomlife wrote:
But I think that David's main point is that the Mountains of Madness rulebook did use the word "spend" when referring to chartering a flight to Antarctica.
So what's your point? That the rulebooks aren't perfect, or that somehow "using" Influence must be different if you want to use the "special travel" option? To the first I say "well, duh!". To the second, well, I've said my piece on that one.


I was simply pointing out what I think is an inconsistency in the rule book. And I am suggesting that possibly an addition to the errata be written. If you think that it is something that should be obvious (as the "well, duh!" comment seems to suggest) then fine.

It wasn't obvious to me when I read the rule for the first time which led me to make the post. I thought I might be missing something.
The "Well, duh!" was a reference to the comment that I made: "that rulebooks aren't perfect". I try really, really hard to avoid telling someone that I think that they are stupid (which is what saying "it's obvious" does), it's unhelpful and disrespectful. I can be brusque, but I try to avoid being actually, intentionally, rude. For my part, I'm comfortable that I have hold of the right end of the stick - if you're still in doubt then it's easy to contact FFG and they are very responsive https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/contact/rules/
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goulette
United States
Santa Clara
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
mccrispy wrote:
anaturalharmonic wrote:
mccrispy wrote:
randomlife wrote:
But I think that David's main point is that the Mountains of Madness rulebook did use the word "spend" when referring to chartering a flight to Antarctica.
So what's your point? That the rulebooks aren't perfect, or that somehow "using" Influence must be different if you want to use the "special travel" option? To the first I say "well, duh!". To the second, well, I've said my piece on that one.


I was simply pointing out what I think is an inconsistency in the rule book. And I am suggesting that possibly an addition to the errata be written. If you think that it is something that should be obvious (as the "well, duh!" comment seems to suggest) then fine.

It wasn't obvious to me when I read the rule for the first time which led me to make the post. I thought I might be missing something.
The "Well, duh!" was a reference to the comment that I made: "that rulebooks aren't perfect". I try really, really hard to avoid telling someone that I think that they are stupid (which is what saying "it's obvious" does), it's unhelpful and disrespectful. I can be brusque, but I try to avoid being actually, intentionally, rude. For my part, I'm comfortable that I have hold of the right end of the stick - if you're still in doubt then it's easy to contact FFG and they are very responsive https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/contact/rules/


No worries.

Let me say that I agree completely that your interpretation is almost surely what they meant with the new mechanic of moving to the outpost. My suggestion for errata would clarify that your interpretation is the correct one.

Cheers!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.