Secret Files

Play Secret Files only if you control an Injustice Gang character.

Each player searches his deck for an affiliated character card, reveals it, puts it into his hand, and shuffles his deck.

Can you fail to search? If you can explain how and please give me an example or a link cause I need this ruling for are tounry that is Sunday and I am having a hard time finding it.

What do you mean, fail to search?

You must search.

Your search may fail.

Please hold for another poster to give the whole ruling. :D

how does a search fail?

From the Comprehensive Rules, last updated Feb 5/07

708.10 Search

708.10a A player searching a zone may fail to find, either by choice or absence, any card or cards that he or she is instructed to find by a modifier. The player does not have to state whether the failure to find was by choice or by absence.

Example: Faces of Doom reads, “Search your deck for a card named Dr. Doom, reveal it, and put it into your hand.” You play Faces of Doom. You have a Dr. Doom, Diabolic Genius in your deck. You may choose not to find this card.

You "search" your deck and find nothing. Yes you can do that.

Consider this---your deck is not a public zone, and neither player is allowed to look at it unless some modifier tells them to. Even while you're searching, your opponent isn't allowed to look over your shoulder; if you tell him that you failed to find a character card, he really doesn't have a mechanism to question you.

that just seems like cheating, like in spades when diamonds are led but you play a spade even though you have a diamond in your hand

i think a change in terms will help. You must search the deck... for things like Time Trapper to take effect.

You may however fail to find a card from that search, as stated in the rules post.

SO if you play Secret Files, Time Trapper would still effect a disacrd, but you can fail to find, to keep your hand size small, especially against IG Burn.


as a side note IG Burn with Time trapper in play? Hmmmm

How is it cheating...for example...

if you have a sentinel deck and dont want to increase handsize, you can search for a card youknow isnt in the deck. Say for instance Professor X.

Since Secret Files doesnt require you to target a card or name what you are searching for, it is legitamit that you are "searching" for a card not in your deck.

the wording of secret files and the game rules allow this to occur.

Its not cheating if its allowed in the rulz!!!!

The "fail to find" allows you to fail even if the card exists in your deck. So you can even use Enemy when there is another card with a different printed affiliation in your deck and still "fail to find" it.

It's a weird rule that has roots in MtG but "fail to find" doesn't mean you couldn't find it... it just means you didn't.

Just search for Longshot, you prolly won't find him.

this is a loop hole that needs to be closed.

"Each player searches his deck for an affiliated character card, reveals it, puts it into his hand, and shuffles his deck."

but basically, if you search and fail it SHOULD mean you have NO more affiliated characters in your deck. So if you search for one and dont find one that means there ISNT one. If you then PLAY one that means you LIED. And as far as search for __________ character, that doesnt work because you are searching for an AFFILIATED character, not one you name.

also, what OTHER things can i fail to do? basically it sounds as if you are trying to decide whic effects you can and cannot follow

Kang Lord of Limbo -- At the start of the combat phase, the controller of target visible character moves it to his hidden area"
can i fail to move the targeted character?

Its loopholes like this that are making the game harder for new people to pick up and cards to be used in unintended ways which gets them banned

it shouldnt take a 169 page book to explain everything

would it be better if they had put a 'may' clause in it for you? There is no way to prove your opponent had no characters, since you are not allowed to see the opponents' deck unless otherwise stated.

But the 'may' clause will hurt cards that trigger off of the search (time trapper).

imho

yes, MAY would have allowed you the option of searching or not searching