- NB: ArkhamDB now incorporates errata from the Arkham Horror FAQ in its card text, so the ArkhamDB text and the card image above differ, as the ArkhamDB text has been edited to contain this erratum (updated August 2022): Erratum: The purchase restriction on this card should be replaced with the keyword: "Researched." - FAQ, v.2.0, August 2022
Zeichen der Isis
Du kannst diese Vorteilskarte deinem Deck nur hinzufügen, indem du die Archaischen Glyphen (Nicht übersetzt) verbesserst, und nur, falls in deinem Kampagnenlogbuch steht, dass „du die Glyphen übersetzt hast”.
Anwendungen (3 Ladungen).
Gib 1 Ladung aus: Ermitteln. Falls die Probe gelingt, darfst du eine Vorteilskarte mit aufgedruckten Kosten von X oder niedriger von deiner Hand ins Spiel bringen. X ist die Anzahl der Punkte, um welche die Probe gelungen ist.
I like the concept of this card; playing an asset by performing an investigate test. It's a similar concept to Unearth the Ancients. Like Unearth, however, this card doesn't seem worth the deck slot (actually probably even moreso given that it's an xp card and is competing with two other types of Archaic Glyphs). It's bad in different ways than Unearth, though.
The main issue with it (apart from just the fact that you have to take a test, which is, to be fair, kind of just part of the game) is that you have to over-succeed in order to not waste your charge. Because you probably aren't going to want to use it to play an asset with cost≤2, this means that you need to beat the shroud by 3. That means that you probably need to get your to be like 6 above the shroud if you want to have a decent chance of being able to play a card. Apart from some Key of Ys double Magnifying Glass Death • XIII type of situation (I've been there, it's awesome), this means you'll probably need to commit something unless you're investigating a 1 or 2 shroud location. My feeling is that you don't want to waste precious icons on something like that that you might even still fail if you pull a -4 or
Other issues with it are its install cost, which isn't that bad (it's only a 2 cost asset, and uses the less contested (for seekers) arcane slot) but is still of dubious worth even if it you didn't have to over-succeed. There's a reason why so few decks run Unearth.
Some of the pluses of the card are that it can play an asset from any faction (not just like the aforementioned Unearth the Ancients. It also isn't a replacement effect, AFAICT, so you still get a clue for your investigation, which would give it a lot of action economy potential if it didn't suck so much (Both other versions of Glyphs are very efficient cards).
It also is an investigate action, meaning that it can be used with Ursula's ability. It also could trigger Rex's ability.
It kind of makes me wish there was some kind of reverse taboo list that aimed to make cards with cool concepts more actually playable. My recommendation would be that it allows you to put an asset into play with cost=shroud (though maybe that would be considered too powerful?). I would definitely play it then. Well, maybe anyway. The other two versions of Archaic Glyphs are still probably better most of the time, so it would probably depend on the deck, number of players, scenario, investigator, etc.
Well, it's a good secondary way for Ursula Downs to get her Moonstone into play (the preferred way, of course, being Dr. Elli Horowitz). 'Putting an asset into play' is manifestly NOT the same thing as using the 'Play' action to play the card from your hand.
For an action-intensive setup, play this on the first round, move to a location with a clue, trigger your bonus investigation (and overcommit with Inquiring Mind, if need be), pick up a clue and get your Moonstone on the board. Third action: out comes Elli, and with her, another Relic of your choice...hey, maybe another Moon Rock? That would make Ursula 5/4/1/6 on the first turn, with little to fear from treacheries OR enemies. And she's still got both hands free for investigative tools...