The first addition uses two different names for the same thing, causing it not to work.

The second addition uses “they” to refer to a singular entity (an effect”; “they apply” … “they were” should be “it applies” … “it were”.

Also, I’d recommend allowing Vampire Lords to only Enchant/Imprint once per Expedition. Otherwise, we’re likely to end up with nonsense like surrounding all four sides of the entrance with “Richardo von Nestor is moved back to his previous location”.

Thanks; amends made

Oh, another fix: Darkness got renamed to Shadow.

Changed, thanks

Sorry I didn’t see this sooner, but “may spend the Shadow cost of a Feature and add that Feature to a single room as a temporary effect” looks like the classic “may do one thing but not the other” scam to me. 

Hm, I don’t see it in this case! I feel like “and” is, like, “and”, you know?

Goodness I should probably not be doing blognomic if that is the level my arguments are pitched at today

I think it’s arguable that “may do x and y” can be interpreted fairly as “may do x and may do y.” “May do x to y” is different! But maybe I’m just being too jumpy.

I think this is safe because in this case, if you don’t do X, Y attempts to add an undefined Feature (which wouldn’t work). You “may spend the Shadow cost of a Feature”; if you don’t, there’s no “that Feature” to add because “that” has nothing to refer to.

The grammar does seem to be ambiguous, though, although I think the “may (do X and do Y)” reading is much more obvious than the “(may do X) and do Y” reading.