Now that I’ve decided *not* to use this scam: https://blognomic.com/archive/shadowdark

you should fix this so you also can’t add familiar to Ritual Chambers

Appendix already has it covered: “Unless otherwise specified, only positive amounts can be spent, paid, lost, gained, or transferred”.

I’ll not vote on this but given that Familiar goes away after 1 run I feel like this is basically just a free rebate on room lighting costs - I can’t see that anyone would ever not take it.

so why is it needed here? both are using “spend”?

Ritual Chamber is “spend X to do Y”, which seems watertight; Enchanting is “spend X and do Y” which someone might feel like arguing as “I do these two things, the first of which has no effect”.

[Josh] Maybe. But with all the Secret Passage Maps, Ingresses and high-Energy runs in the air at the moment, having a room locked for the entire next run, just to save 1 Puissance, seems like something a player might kick themselves for.

unless you’re trying to place a Sepulchre. In which case locking it for the next run becomes a very good thing.

Right, I think the main effect of this is to make Sepulchre construction cheaper. It also lets you pay 2 to make a Dark room temporarily impassable, which could be useful if you expect someone else to construct a room in that location and don’t want to be passable; and if you want to wall off a particular square, it gives you a rebate when constructing the room that walls it off.

I’ve actually been going so far as to word things as “do X; if you do, do Y”; this is as watertight as “do X to do Y” but harder to misinterpret/argue about.

aren’t costs capped af 3?

i agree that adding familiar shouldn’t be easy, but also we’ve seen what negative shadow costs do & we patched them out of the game already!

Did we patch negative costs out, or did we just conclude that the couple of “Richardo gets a powerup” effects we tried at the start weren’t net-negative after all?

The Because we’ve been Lighting Rooms all wrong CfJ overreached and silently removed the minimum-cost-1 cap as part of its fix (I guess because we don’t have any negatives right now), but I don’t know what the actual consensus on negatives was.