Przedmiot. Broń. Palna.

Cost: 4. XP: 4.
Test Icons:

Zużywalny (3 naboje).

Wydaj 1 nabój: Walka. Dostajesz +3 i dostajesz +2 obrażenia do tego ataku. Nie możesz w ten sposób zaatakować wrogów będących z tobą w zwarciu.

Jason Caffoe
Bezwymiarowe i niewidzialne #226.

Latest Taboo

This card’s ability gains: “This attack may target a non-Elite enemy up to one location away from its standard range, ignoring the aloof and retaliate keywords.”

Springfield M1903

This card has a lot of advantages that get overlooked. First, you are going to see a lot more play out of those icons than the ones on a Lightning Gun. Second, this really takes the teeth out of a lot of treacheries. You will start to see the likes of Crypt Chill as a blessing if they can take the Springfield away. Last but not least, the ammo conservation of never being able to fire the gun puts Shotgun and the BAR to shame.

Sadly the two hand slots compete with the Kukri, but with bandana you can now take them both.

Kukri taboo when? — StyxTBeuford · 12879
That's pretty funny. All joking aside, I wonder what XP cost would make this thing worthwhile. As printed at 4, certainly not. The Taboo List knocked it down to 3--still not enough, I think. Maybe 2 XP is about right? I'm pretty confident that if it was only 1 XP (or certainly 0 XP) it would see quite a bit of play. — CaiusDrewart · 2970
I think it nees to come down to a level that off-class guardians can take it, because primary killers can never be restricted to only fighting enemies engaged with other players. This card was basically just a massive whiff, and the only card we've seen so far that attempted to synergise with it was even worse. A bizarre blind spot in an otherwise flawlessly constructed game. — Sassenach · 172
It would be indeed a good weapon for Skids! — mogwen · 252
Honestly for Skids I think it would be too expensive, and he wants a hand free for Lockpicks. I wouldn't take this in level 0 Skids honestly. — StyxTBeuford · 12879
I think 2XP is correct. Compare to upgraded .45 Auto and to upgraded .45 Thompson. For 2XP, it can be taken off-class, and works OK in multiplayer. — duke_loves_biscuits · 1204
I have one question, can Lola take taboo Springfield? — VitekS · 7
VitekS - unfortunately, no. Only its XP cost is changed, not its level - so it's still a level 4 card. — Prinny_wizzard · 251

This thing sucks.

A) You need to be firing at enemies that you've evaded, blue player's aren't very good at evading, basically requiring large resource expense or card dedication (and blue player's don't have many evade options). Besides, evading an opponent is an extra action, you'dd be far better off just throwing another attack at the intended target with a Machete or something.. B) You might also be firing at enemies engaged with your allies. A sub-optimal circumstance because now you risk friendly fire AND, as the blue player, it is your job to keep enemies occupied in the first place! If your clue specialist has to spend all his time babysitting your next intended kill then he wont have time to do his job! C) It costs 4 xp! For just 1 more you'dd have a Lightning Gun! Although it's 2 resources more expensive to play it pay's for the difference with 2 extra attack power on every attack (Hitting a rather nice sweet spot of 9 attack total on both current Blue characters.) Also it doesn't have the circumstantial clause.

This weapon sucks, plain and simple. It should cost 2 or 3 XP and be neutral, that way a non-fighter might consider taking it. Often the fighter will find himself stuck in a flood of enemies that he is tanking on behalf of the team, when the going gets tough however the clue specialist has to come running with a Shrivelling or Strange Solution to untangle the battle. A weapon exactly like Springfield M1903 would be perfect for that specific circumstance, sadly this is NOT that weapon.

Tsuruki23 · 2445
If you're playing with Wendy, she will probably evade any enemy engaged with her. Use your Springfield to shoot them... — Okami · 41
Except Wendy doesn't have access to it — Shiro1981 · 1
2 player?? — poisonjr · 2
This would be amazing if you could fight something in a connecting location — Cro · 13
@Shiro1981: I mean if other player is Wendy. It would be like in fun fair... Too bad it takes both hands. — Okami · 41


  • Moderately priced in terms of resources, at least compared to other Guardian weapons (4 resources, same as .45 Automatic)
  • +3 Combat and +2 Damage, so the Springfield will kill most monsters with a single shot
  • Great against aloof enemies


  • Expensive in terms of Xp
  • Cannot be fired at monsters engaged with you
  • Two handed
  • Massive enemies needs to be exhausted before you can fire at them

Say hello to the sniper rifle of Arkham Horror. It's a fantastic weapon if you're firing at a distance and a fish bicycle if anything comes within hands reach.

So, is the Springfield a good weapon or a bad one? Well, it's not awful but its situational as heck. Since its twohanded, you'll either stick to this gun alone or invest in Bandoliers. And by the time you have paid for those bandoliers, you might as well have just bought a Lightning Gun or a Shotgun.

Who can make best use of the Springfield, then? Zoey probably, since she's not that reliant on weapons. She can use her fists and Cross to murder monsters engaged to her, and then shoot anything else from safe distance. It's a really bad fit with her ability to gain 1 Resource when she engages an enemy, however.

olahren · 2893
To me it's as simple as this: Don't play this card when playing solo, it sucks in solo play. But is does fit a playsyle in wich you plan on babysitting a dedicated cluehound in a multiplayer game. — Heyenzzz · 6080
But why not just use another weapon and engage the enemies yourself..? Yes, you can let the cluehound engage every spawn/hunter, but you have to stay at her location each encounter phase and you risk friendly fire. Daisy can't take much friendly fire. — olahren · 2893
Even if your goal is merely to protect a "dedicated cluehound," the Springfield is massively inefficient compared to the other big weapons. What if you draw a high-health enemy yourself? Then your options are 1) evade it and then shoot it (even in the best case scenario this wastes an action), or 2) have your Seeker buddy come take the enemy (this wastes one of their actions and they risk massive damage on friendly fire unless they waste another action evading). Sorry to say it, but this card is just worthless. Fork out a little more cash for the Lightning Gun. — CaiusDrewart · 2970
Also, a correction to OP: the Springfield is NOT effective against aloof enemies. It cannot attack them when they're unexhausted and unengaged any more than any other weapon can. It's actually worse against aloof enemies, since you'd have to spend an action engaging it and an action exhausting it, and THEN you can use the Springfield. — CaiusDrewart · 2970
Worse than that - Aloof enemies can't be attacked at all when they're unengaged, whether they're ready or exhausted. So aloof enemies are completely untargetable by the Springfield (barring losing aloof e.g. with Mind Wipe) — LeonardQuirm · 33
Ah yes, that's absolutely correct. Ouch! — CaiusDrewart · 2970
Caius: You are totally right about Aloof! I really misread the rules there. Wish I could edit the review, but that's not possible :( . — olahren · 2893
I Said the Springfield "fits" a certain playstyle, I didnt say its currently the best option for that playstyle. In the early state of the lifespan of this game the developers are laying the foundation for different build-archetypes and this card fits the archetype I described. Not the best card at the moment, but with the card pool ever growing, this could turn out to be a more solid archetype in the future. — Heyenzzz · 6080
Honestly, i feel like this weapon needed a FAQ/Eratta to be worth taking: Fight. You may attack an enemy up to one location away. Cannot be used to attack enemies engaged with you. — CecilAlucardX · 10
This not only makes it worthwhile, it actually fits thematically; the M1903 has an effective firing range of about 1000 yards. That should be well within most location distances. If i can chuck Dynamite that far, surely this gun can shoot that far... right? — CecilAlucardX · 10
"Honestly, i feel like this weapon needed a FAQ/Eratta to be worth taking: Fight. You may attack an enemy up to one location away. Cannot be used to attack enemies engaged with you." - Yes, exactly. I'd also like to see it able to attack non-aloof enemies at adjacent locations, or aloof enemies at your own location. Then we have a real niche for this weapon to fill. At least there's (faint) hope that they will release a 5-xp version with this text at some point. — Low_Chance · 13
This card got a smidge better with the release of Marksmanship. Still, 2 Resources and 1 XP just to be able to reliably use the Springfield ONCE is not a great deal. What we really need is a weaker talent (asset) version of Marksmanship or an upgrade to the Springfield that would allow you to shoot 1 zone away. — Daerthalus · 14
Aloof enemies can be damaged from effects that damage enemies at your location such as Dynamite or Agnes' free trigger ability. I think the rules do confirm that you can't shoot them with the Springfield, but it seems nonsensical when there are effects that do damage enemies at your location, Aloof or otherwise. — LaRoix · 1626

With the latest taboo, this can be a fantastic card, in a multiplayer scenario with a well-connected place for sniping. We confirmed this in a four-player playthrough of Return to Night of the Zealot. In the last scenario (Devourer below), Mark Harrigan was sitting in a hiding spot at the main path, with an extra hand for holding a side-arm, reloading the Springfield regularly. Never have the forests felt so tranquil... Cultists spawning aloof and getting headshotted, while others just walk past was, well, satisfying, to put it mildly. The fact that the sniper never had to move saved a ton of actions to him. We had 3 doom to go when we disrupted the ritual.

It's true that a sniper has to take the risk of hurting allies, but e.g. Mark, with only the rifle and his base stats, was fighting at skill 8. We playing on Normal, most of the time only autofail was the risk.

Elite monsters will be an issue (good thing the big boss didn't spawn), but you usually know when there will be one, so you can plan ahead.

Probably needless to say, but the new taboo ability saves practically no actions in scenarios with a linear map: in such scenarios, typically all investigators have to walk to the end of the linear map, also the sniper. But off the top of my head, I would say such scenarios are a minority; most have at least a somewhat central location good for sniping; maybe not as ridiculously OP as the main path but still.

pestis · 10
Completely agree. I just saw it with Mark in Guardians of the Abyss and it was incredible. It's super fun being able to move around knowing that you're still safe within mark's sphere of influence. The biggest downside to the card now, IMO, is the possibility of Mark missing and hitting you for 3 damage. — Jack · 49
There's an expensive solution to that risk: Eat lead. In case you have extra ammo but fellow investigator cannot take that bullet. — pestis · 10
The main danger is Elites, since the Taboo clause doesn't work then. With a massive elite enemy, you basically can't shoot it unless it is evaded or you're adding Marksmanship. If it is non-massive, it needs to either be engaged with your seeker which is not ideal, or it again needs to be evaded every time before you can shoot. So basically the team needs to adjust and pack evasion if you want the weapon to be any use against bosses. — ChrisIsMyMiddleName · 275
Synergizes well with Gene Beauregard. Seeker moves to where enemy is, Gene kicks enemy to third location, Guardians snipes at it. — MindControlMouse · 14

Question for all our rules lawyers out there:

Does the latest Taboo stack with scope?

“This attack may target a non-Elite enemy up to one location away from its standard range, ignoring the aloof and retaliate keywords.” Taboo basically reads "Standard Range +1 Location away".

Scope as a reaction allows a Firearm to target adjacent location. Would that be considered the new standard range then and allow the Springfield plus Scope to target two locations away? WHich would be awesome and very unique

If not it would mean, you could gain basically the same effect but better with sticking the newly tabood scope to your shiny 4 or 5-xp-firearm. you would only ever take the springfield to save on some xp as the BAR or the Lightning Gun are still better in their own right. You could always take a higher value two-handed firearm and stick a scope on it for whatever xp your weapon costs +3xp for the scope. And lets face it, which guardian skims on the xp concerning the primary weapon?

Don't get me wrong. This new version stands head and shoulders above the old one. But XP should not be a concern for the guardians primary. So I would always take the best or most flexible base weapon and stick scope to it, if wanted to target adjacent. But targeting two locations away by adding a scope on top? That would really allow some unique camper playstyle in MP where you guard your team by sitting at a center location and picking everything off from a distance.

Skeith · 2175
Yes, this is the explicitly intended reaction. The article announcing and explaining the latest taboo made it very clear that the Springfield and Scope effects were designed to stack. — Death by Chocolate · 1326
And you could add a Brand of Cthugha for enemies at your location and if you are Leo a Cat Burglar to change location and snipe. That would be really clunky but fun! — Valentin1331 · 47371