Existential Riddle

I love playing "big hands" seeker (or other classes with access to seeker cards) decks so when I see this card I don't consider that it's a wwillpower / intel (8) test but a potential (0) test (and a (2) would already be great).

For me the best use is on a hunter enemy in a Trish Scarborough deck: you now have an aloof enemy that follows you and give you an extra clue each round thanks to Trish abiity ! And it allows combo with Eavesdrop if the enemy has a low evade value (a Hunting Nightgaunt for example).

AlexP · 251
Thieves' Kit

I think it compares somewhat well to Lockpicks.

Pros:

  • No xp cost
  • Doesn't exhaust on use
  • Gives your investment back and then some
  • Ability to commit icons to investigation tests (which are more common than in Rogues)

Cons:

  • No bonus to skill test
  • 6 uses only instead of potentially unlimited uses

One thing needs to be said is, if you are banking on Lockpicks to have unlimited uses, then you can mentally add 2 to each skill check difficulty. Then Lockpicks is only better when you have 3 or more (with static boosts added).

Let's also take a look at Flashlight:

  • Better than Thieves' Kit if your character's ( - ) score is less than 2.

  • Better than Thieves' Kit against less than 2 shroud locations.

  • Has half the uses

  • Cheaper by a single resource

I wouldn't choose Thieves' Kit if:

  • My investigator only needs to assist clue getting occasionally.

  • My investigator has less than 4 base

  • I will have both and static boosts and I plan to have some over-success thing going on

I think Thieves' Kit will see at least as much play as Lockpicks without dethroning it, which is great.

Just don't bother with its upgrade, 3 xp is so expensive for what it provides (+1 skill value and +1 resource return on success).

Aesyn · 571
The upgrade provides more value than you think - it goes from 4 uses to 6, bringing a lot more value. I'm not sure if it'll edge out Lockpicks (1) in terms of value and experience, but the two extra uses are a big deal. — DjMiniboss · 44
Leaks I saw and the image here shows Uses (6 supplies) for the base version too. I think 4 supplies is a mistake on arkhamdb's part. If the base version turns out to be actually 4 supplies, then I'd rate it lower. This review was made thinking it's 6 supplies. — Aesyn · 571
I think you should consider "rich" decks (with Well connected) that are always interested in resource generation. And in these decks I will use the level 3 version if the deck is the vlue getter. — AlexP · 251
Ah, very good point! I didn't look at the actual card. — DjMiniboss · 44
Also Note that ecache 3 adds 4 more uses to this. It also works with flashlight and all of them can be found with backpack 2. — Django · 5078
Sharp Vision

Not really so much as a review, it's a really good card, but I just tested Darrell(proxy), I had this in his deck. I never thought that could of been him in the art, and it might not be. But he tests at a 8 for it, you know he's getting those clues.

I want to believe that's him. And it certainly is very good in his deck, it naturally slots in with the True Survivor that you want to play for looping Gumption and Resoruceful anyways. — Fogshaper · 1
"I'll take that!"

Normally rogue succeed by cards at level zero have a limit: succeed by two get a card from the cigarette case, keep your lockpicks, or do extra damage with one-handed weapons.

This card, by contrast, is an economic buffet. Compared to the standard emergency cash one action and one card for three dollars, this is zero actions for one action and many dollars saved.

The caveats are major: in a campaign without many humanoids, this is less effective, and if you can’t investigate well, it’s not a good pick. BUT: —Almost every rogue who can this can take lockpicks(1), and succeed by ridiculous amounts. — “I’ll take that” doesn’t require a standard evade, so even Sefina could use a magic spell to combine her willpower and agility.

Obviously, Rita loves this to get out a sledgehammer, old key ring, or catalog to help the team.

One unforeseen drawback is people confusing this card with “you owe me one”, which my group calls “let me see that.”

MrGoldbee · 1460
0 cost, fast, play an asset at no discount is the worst this card can be, and that' still pretty good. — Zerogrim · 292
It also gives the Illicit trait, which seems uninteresting ... unless you discover the Hidden pocket card. Hidden pocket gives an additionnal accessory slot for an Illicit card when attached to the Jacket vest and "I'll take that!" allows you play to Decorated skull (3) and give it the Illicit trait. So you now can have Decorated skull (3) AND Lucky cigarette case (3) without Relic hunter. — AlexP · 251
Or the Crystalizer. — MrGoldbee · 1460
Can I use this after evading to play level 2 .25 automatic and then use it to attack the evade enemy for free? I think so because this is a "when" and .25 is an after, but not sure — hun · 1
Something to consider. Play "I'll Take That" to play a Backpack, which then attaches to backpack along with three Item or Supply cards. Now that it's attached to backpack, you can play it again using Backpack's text "Cards attached to Backpack can be played as if they were in your hand". Double the usefulness of "I'll Take That" with this one fun trick! — Jackster · 16
... I can't believe it but that actually does look like it works. — HanoverFist · 721
@Jackster Hahaha I can't see any reason why that doesn't work. Definitely not how Backpack was intended to work but it seems to check out. — snacc · 988
Does playing the Crystalizer of Dreams with this card make it skip the "paying its cost" so the Crystalizer would come in without the guardian? — techoatmeal · 15
This card reduces the cost of playing a card, it does not skip the "paying its cost" — Fitzy · 1
Does the attached item keep the Illicit trait after being discarded? It would be useful for Finn's card Smuggled Goods — Alysso_Rooder · 1
Nope, they're no longer attached. — MrGoldbee · 1460
@JacksterQ: If you use "I'll take that!", it ends up attached to Backpack. Can you then play "I'll take that!" off of the Backpack by virtue of Backpack's play rule? A: The ability on Backpack is only intended to apply to cards attached to it via its ability. Please treat Backpack as if it said “Cards attached facedown to Backpack may be played as if they were in your hand.” (September 2023) — tasman · 1
How does this card interact with Fence? Say 8 have 1 or even 2 fence in play, prior to the playing of "I'll take that", would Fence be able to lower the X succeed by requirement to be able to put into play an item? — Quantallar · 7
You can Take the Crystallizer, but you cannot Crystallizer the Take. — AlderSign · 291
Seeing I cannot find any answers of the Reddit forums and Boardgame Geek forums; does this card work with pay X item cards such as Jenny's Twin.45's? Say you over succeed by 5, could you get 5 ammo free, or even add 3 resources to put 8 ammo on her pistols? — Quantallar · 7
Quantallar, I believe the answer is in the Rules for [the letter "x"](https://arkhamdb.com/rules#The_letter_X): "For costs involving the letter X, the value of X is defined by card ability or player choice, after which the amount paid may be modified by effects without altering the value of X." To me, this reads that you would declare the value of X on Jenny's Twin .45s, then satisfy that value with X from "I'll Take That!" plus an additional number of resources from your resource pool. — RampantC · 1
Curse of Yig

You'd think that sometimes the Serpent trait would work in your favor, but no. This is the card that demonstrates that Evil Overlord Rule 34 (no, not THAT rule 34) applies to Arkham investigators too. ("I will not turn into a snake. It never helps.")

Staffan · 3
More than that, it almost does nothing at all - positive or negative. It's a weird effect. — Maseiken · 1