Isabelle's Twin .45s
Loaded with Vengeance

자산. Hand x2

Item. Weapon. Firearm.

비용: 4.

생존자

Isabelle Barnes deck only. Uses (6 ammo).

Spend 1 ammo: Fight (). You get +1 and deal +1 damage for this attack.

After you resolve the above ability, spend 1 ammo and exhaust Isabelle's Twin .45s: Fight (). You get +1 and deal +1 damage for this attack.

Pixoloid Studios
Core Set (2026) #14.
Isabelle's Twin .45s

FAQs

No faqs yet for this card.

Reviews

I have a question regarding this card's ability: if you attack an enemy with the elusive keyword with the first attack, does the enemy disengage instantly so that you cannot trigger the second attack during this action?

warlock000 · 2
Both use the timing word “after”, so you decide which one to resolve. So yes, you can get in the second shot before resolving the Elusive keyword — An_Undecayed_Whately · 1444
I disagree. The rule “For any given timing point, all forced abilities initiated in reference to that timing point must resolve before any reaction abilities (see below) referencing the same timing point in the same manner may be initiated” prevents firing the second shot at an Elusive enemy. — Eudaimonea · 9
But the elusive keyword is not a forced ability. — AlderSign · 469
Nor is it a reaction. All of the rulebook allowances for players to order simultaneous resolutions pertain to effects of the same type with identical timing. This is neither. The rules suggest (but do not clearly dictate) that “must” goes before “may,” and it’s reasonable to infer that “immediately after” (Elusive) is before “after” (Twin .45s). So there are two leaps of faith you have to take before you start stacking these to your advantage. Go for it if you want to, but nothing in the rulebook allows it. — Eudaimonea · 9
Like you just said yourself, nothing in the rules reference prohibits it either. Your argumentation is a ruling, not a rule. — AlderSign · 469
The wording of elusive also is not "immediately after", but "after that attack resolves ... immediately" which does make a significant difference. Otherwise I would have agreed with you. — AlderSign · 469
I agree that my first response reads like “this interaction is conclusively prevented by the rulebook” whereas it’s more like “this interaction is not permitted by the letter of, and is prohibited by the spirit of, several rules in the rulebook.” — Eudaimonea · 9
I think one two punch was already ruled to fully resolve before the enemy runs away, so I think it isn't too much of a stretch to believe this would work the same way — HeroesOfTomorrow · 98
Indeed, following the ruling on One-two Punch, I would guess attacking an elusive enemy with the first part of the ability would cause it to move, but then you can still target it with the second one. Unless there is a difference between One-Two Punch and the pistol's reaction, but eh ... — MarTom · 2
Q: If I initiate a skill test at a given location, then trigger an effect that causes me to move before that test finishes resolving, what happens to that skill test? A: Once you initiate a skill test or ability, you’ll resolve that test or ability as completely as possible, regardless of your location (unless another effect cancels or interrupts it). For example, if you attacked an elusive enemy with One-Two Punch, you could attack that same enemy with the card’s second fight, even though it has moved to a connecting location. (Official FAQ v2.5, February 2026) — MarTom · 2
how does Pushed to the limit interact with its respond ability? — Lumina637 · 10