Shards of the Void

Shards of the Void

As @ChristopherA said in his review, this card is good if you need additional spells in your combat mage build. Maybe you have a limited collection where you only have Shrivelling or Azure Flame

But if you have a large collection that includes both Shrivelling and Azure Flame, then Shards of the Void should probably only be considered if you're playing a chaos bag manipulation deck. The math indicates that Shards of the Void performs better than Shrivelling and Azure only if you manage to draw at least one "0" token AND you keep at least one token sealed for all the charges.

Here's the math behind my statement.
Shrivelling and Azure Flame give you 4 attacks, at +2 and 2 damage per attack.

If you don't draw a "0" token, Shards of the Void gives you:

  • 3 attacks at +2 and 2 damage per attack (if you keep the "0" sealed on)
  • and 1 attack at +0 and 2 damage
    OR
  • 4 attacks at +0 and 2 damage per attack (if you immediately spend the "0" sealed)

Verdict: That's worse than level 3 Shrivelling / Azure Flame!


What happens if you only draw one "0" token during all of your attacks with Shards of the Void? Here's the math:
if you keep the "0" tokens sealed on, spending them as your last two attacks:

  • 1 attack at +4 and 3 damage
  • 2 attacks at +4 and 2 damage per attack
  • 1 attack at +2 and 2 damage
  • 1 attack at +0 and 2 damage

Verdict: That's better than level 3 Shrivelling / Azure Flame.

OR
if you immediately spend the "0" token, draw one "0" token on your first attack and immediately use it after:

  • 1 attack at +2 and 3 damage
  • 4 attacks at +0 and 2 damage per attack

Verdict: That's worse than level 3 Shrivelling / Azure Flame.

As others have stated, remember that sealing a "0" token is probably bad for your team, as it removes a good token from the bag. So consider whether this card is providing your team with enough value to be worth the cost of sealing "0" token(s).

VanyelAshke · 181
The other minor detail is there is no backfire mechanic on shards of the void, buuuuut now we have Armageddon so I feel like shards of the void may wither down outside of specific support for it. — Zerogrim · 295
Armageddon is also more expensive AND you need a way to compensate for the -2 from the curse token you draw (in assuming you probably shouldn’t take it unless you want to trigger the curse token effect). I’d argue Shards is very good as it can refill itself, has no draw back, and no one should be counting on the 0’s to pass tests. Really the only downside is it doesn’t scale well on higher difficulties in which you definitely want those zeros — LaRoix · 1646
I think this is actually better on hard mode. Usually an extra zero in the bag (most campaigns yank the +1) — Mordenlordgrandison · 464
Right, expert is the one you wouldn’t want it. Only one 0 in some cases if I remember right. — LaRoix · 1646
So, there are 2 basic places where you have 3 0s in the bag, they are: All Non-TFA Campaigns on Hard (IIRC), and Standard TFA. With Olive and 3 0s in the bag you'll probably hit them reasonably often, especially in a campaign with a smaller chaos bag like TFA forging your own path (before Depths of Yoth), which only has 15 tokens. Maybe also Dunwich and TCU if you avoid adding tokens to the bag. — Zinjanthropus · 230

One-Two Punch

One-Two Punch

One seemingly overlooked thing by other reviews is that the upgraded version says "You may fight again" while the basic version says "you may fight THAT ENEMY again".

So the upgraded version allows you to attack two different enemies, which is really nice considering it would be easy to one shot an enemy (even a very strong one) with the first automatic success and then you can then follow up with a second attack on another enemy.

thereelaristotle · 18
Er? What? Oh my. I am one of those who overlooked this. I like this intepretation. — acotgreave · 887
Yup. I personally consider that one of the most important pieces of text on this card. Otherwise you are spending 5xp for just +2 damage. (And, yes, some accuracy but a high combat guardian running this with Boxing Gloves isn’t hurting for more accuracy.) Especially on Nathaniel, the flexibility of the two attacks and his ability lets you take out two enemies with 2/3, 3/3, or 2/4health in a single action - or even just make a big wallop for 5 or 6. — Death by Chocolate · 1489

Signum Crucis

Signum Crucis

Double Quick Learner + double Drawing Thin + Signum Crucis on a base shroud 4 for example adds 10-[base intellect] bless tokens(you might miss the fact that it's still comparing to your base value, your passive buffs or commited icons do not change this). Pretty sick.

And why would I wanna do this you ask? Because Ancient Covenant is extremely strong, and the more people in your team that can take it the more attractive this gets.

Erdjo · 328
And a mere 20XP +2x per Covenant! — MrGoldbee · 1487
With the new August 2022 Taboo List, Signum Crucis is two less experience to purchase, so you can include 2 copies of Signum Crucis in your Level 0 Survivor deck. Add in a copy of In The Thick of It for a copy of Drawing Thin, and you'll only need 15 experience for 2 copies of Quick Learner, your second copy of Drawing Thin, and Ancient Covenant. You can earn 15 experience by the end of the 3rd or 4th scenario in most campaigns, so this combo is ludicrously easy to pull off. — Telosa · 71
Correction: Make that only 13 EXP (8 EXP from 2x Quick Learner, 3 EXP from Drawing Thin, and 2 EXP from Ancient Covenant). — Telosa · 71

Dark Bidding

Dark Bidding

Just a quick rules question. If you pull this card before the Hunting Horror emerges for the first time, it whiffs, right? As far as I can tell, the Hunting Horror starts in the encounter deck. While he's technically "out of play" while in the encounter deck (I checked), I'm aware of no mechanic that lets you attach a card to another card in a deck.

I only ask because Arkham, as a rule, HATES it when encounter cards whiff; in a "Return to..." set, those occasional lucky breaks for the players are usually revised away... But it looks like here that Matt, whether intentionally or not, may have introduced one!

Mordenlordgrandison · 464
That's how I play it. I certainly don't see any way to attach it to the horror in the deck — NarkasisBroon · 11
I can't see how this doesn't whiff, my logic was always that even it could attach it wouldn't stay attached given it only prevent detachment from being in the void. — Zerogrim · 295
you could still 'attach' the card virtually. it says you should attach it even if the HH is out of play and in the encounter deck is certainly an out of play area. just set it next to shadow spawns for the time being. it's at least how I play it. — PowLee · 15
@PowLee, I admire your grim ruling with this one! But I've dug more in the rules and I'm more confident that this is a whiffer. The rules say that an attached card MUST be placed "beneath and slighly overlapped by" the card to which it is attached. That's obviously a physical impossibility if the card in question is in a deck. The rules go on: "The “attach to” phrase is checked for legality each time a card would be attached to a game element, but is not checked again after that attachment occurs. If the initial “attach to” check does not pass, the card is not able to be attached, and remains in its prior state or game area. If such a card cannot remain in its prior state or game area, discard it." Clears it up for me. — Mordenlordgrandison · 464
I don't know. For me this is still unclear. Since the card states "even if it's out of play" I would argue that it overrides the normal attachment rules (golden rule). So it remains ambiguous to me and I will continue to grim rule it until MJ says otherwise. That being said, this is an edle case which doesn't happen too often, and the effect of this card is usually quite marginal, so I don't mind it too much. — PowLee · 15
It whiffs. The card must still find it's target to be attached to, even in an out of play area. if it cannot, it is discarded — Adny · 1
FAQ (written more recently than these comments) says it does whiff! Just hit this situation myself. unfortunately, the AI I was using picks up the opposite meaning; hopefully, this comment will help reinforce the real answer! — mrspaceman · 13

A Tear in Time

A Tear in Time

So, I'm sure I'm not the only one who has figured out that this card is an amazing target for Deny Existence (5)! Yes, I will take 3 extra actions this turn, thank you very much. The only problem is that it's hard to guarantee that you'll fail it if you're a primary Mystic investigator. Might be an interesting application of Olive McBride. Conversely, just make sure you draw this while you're at Chapultepec Hill (the version that gives you -2 ). I guess Mystic does have some tools to try to help you do that (could be Scroll of Secrets, Parallel Fates, or Alyssa Graham). Probably easiest to pull off as Gloria in any case.

Zinjanthropus · 230
Ha! Love this. You could pull the same shenanigans in the Miskatonic Museum, against Ephemeral Exhibits. And you're resting lore there, so easier for mystics to fail hard. — Mordenlordgrandison · 464
Good idea! — Zinjanthropus · 230
Dark prophecy is also a nice way to dig for bad tokens — NotSure · 22
I assume if you have no actions Remini — kevbotron1000 · 1
CORRECTION. I assume if you have no actions remaining, you MUST pay the cost in terror? — kevbotron1000 · 1