|
Soothing Vapors posted:Spoiler of upcoming weapon from facebook: looks really good for preston
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 03:28 |
|
|
Yeah, it would be if it wasn't Illicit. Poor law-abiding Preston.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 19:14
|
|
|
Really curious what the higher level class specific versions of that card will look like. Really hoping it's not just 1 version with more combat and 1 version with more damage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 19:17
|
|
|
Wasnt there already a rogue thompson that let you spend actions to increase fight?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 19:23
|
|
|
Ripley posted:Yeah, it would be if it wasn't Illicit. Poor law-abiding Preston. well poo poo Our group finished Forgotten Age last weekend Got the best ending that didn't involve the secret scenario, which was nice. We managed to manhandle the early game so we were able to deal with the bumps the game threw at us as it went on much easier. I think if they re-balanced the first two scenarios (which the creator has said he thinks are too hard) then it would be the best campaign. We're going to do the two return scenarios next while we wait for Circle Undone to finish releasing so now I have to figure out who to play as. Thinking Mystic or Guardian, since I don't believe I've played either in a campaign before. IcePhoenix fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Feb 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
I'm organizing Return to Dunwich and was wondering if anyone has tried the new encounter cards outside of Dunwich. Were there any unforeseen consequences? I'm debating whether I want everything I need for Dunwich in the box or split off the alternative core cards to use with other campaigns.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 01:13
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:also I wish they'd do a magic-style fade on dual class cards, it just looks like a Seeker weapon I'm crossing my fingers and hoping this is future proofing for wilder multicolors. Like a card being conditionally in color (for purposes of being targeted by card abilities) or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 03:46
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Really curious what the higher level class specific versions of that card will look like. Really hoping it's not just 1 version with more combat and 1 version with more damage. Good news! It's going to be one version with +1 combat and one with +1 ammo 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 08:10
|
|
|
Aww, I was really hoping for a -1 resource cost version.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 16:30
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:I'm organizing Return to Dunwich and was wondering if anyone has tried the new encounter cards outside of Dunwich. Were there any unforeseen consequences? Our group has started using the new Ancient Evils in lieu of the original set everywhere and it adds a (usually tough) decision instead of just arbitrarily tanking the scenario when you draw it. e: it is really frustrating to me that the design of Arkham Horror really seems very tight and to have a ton of thought put into it and then, here's Ancient Evils, a set of encounter cards that shows up entirely too often and doesn't scale at all to the number of players. Playing solo, a single Ancient Evils draw basically costs you three actions in terms of the way the game timer works. In a four player game, a single Ancient Evils costs the group twelve actions, and there's every possibility of drawing more than one in a single round for 24 instead. A lot of the rest of the math in the game is keyed off of the number of investigators playing, obviously, but the existence of actions that are necessary and don't scale to player count (movement, fight/evade) means that the more players you have the more a single Ancient Evils fucks up the entire scenario, while also increasing the odds of drawing one. Rockman Reserve fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Feb 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 16:43
|
|
|
The funniest is on Essex County Express where a 4 player group can lose on the first turn. This happened to my group on our first attempt. It's dumb and I'm glad it's now fixed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 21:24
|
|
|
I actually don't mind that there's some elements that asymmetrically scale. That said, Ancient Evils is definitely junk design. I think it would be fine if it was a one of in the set it comes in, or if it removed. But we've had instances of 2 quick ancient evils, deck gets shuffled on the advance and then two more quick ancient evils and that's like...welp guess we just got screwed. And that's outside the first turn Essex County Express loss with no recourse (which also happened to our group the first time).
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 07:12
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:I actually don't mind that there's some elements that asymmetrically scale. That said, Ancient Evils is definitely junk design. I think it would be fine if it was a one of in the set it comes in, or if it removed. But we've had instances of 2 quick ancient evils, deck gets shuffled on the advance and then two more quick ancient evils and that's like...welp guess we just got screwed. And that's outside the first turn Essex County Express loss with no recourse (which also happened to our group the first time). I forget what I was playing, but I remember getting like 7 Ancient Evils in one game and losing because I drew the 7th one after having just shuffled. I was going to win on that turn, I just needed to not shuffle exactly Ancient Evils to the top of the deck. Well I DID and ended up absolutely tilting out of my mind and mulliganing the entire game. They just kept coming up and getting shuffled back in and coming right back up. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 07:29
|
|
|
Yeah, the frequent requirements in campaigns to shuffle the encounter discard pile back in the encounter deck makes ancient evils significantly more random than it really should be. If it was just more players = more encounter cards = thus on average more ancient evils it'd be ok-ish because more players also means more specialized decks which are thus more efficient at progressing through the scenario and if a solo player draws back to back ancient evils that is at least somewhat balanced by being able to do their thing on basically an otherwise blank board. So that's still not perfect, but it's within reason. Kind of like how you could just draw the autofail token for an absurd percentage of tests in 1 game and lose without recourse. Sucks when it happens, but the trade-off is that the mechanic introduces some randomness to prevent you from being able to perfectly map out your game plan, which is an overall good thing for the game. What I don't understand is why a lot of the reshuffling happens though. If a new act or agenda or w/e needs you to add previously set aside encounter sets to the deck, I understand why I'm shuffling, but a lot of the time it's just, well, new agenda, please shuffle the discard pile back in. And honestly that's terrible even without Ancient Evils. If Daisy's gameplan for dealing with Grasping Hands is having Ward of Protection plus a bunch of card draw to get one in time then she gets screwed when those happen to be on top of the deck both before and after the shuffle and now she has to deal with 4 copies of Grasping Hands. While you could argue that this also introduces randomness to prevent you from having a perfect plan the problems here are that a) no plan to deal with the first 2 copies was perfect in the first place, so this wasn't necessary and b) the likelihood of this sequence occuring is so low that it's not a good idea to design your deck around it anyway. So in conclusion, Ancient Evils isn't even bad as long as it's not mixed with other encounter sets which add a bunch of doom and also encounter discard pile shuffling back into the encounter deck should be kept to a minimum in general and not mixed with Ancient Evils. Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 09:43 on Feb 21, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 09:39
|
|
|
Yeah, ancient evils should be remove from play after it resolves, and have no effect and gain surge if another ancient evils was resolved that turn.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 11:59
|
|
|
I attempted to deckbuild only to end in failure since I forgot half the cards are 1x and I only have one core set. This makes it really hard to tell my spouse the restrictions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 12:04
|
|
|
Aside from subbing in Resurgent Evils, I have half a mind to just leave out Ancient Evils from any scenario that uses it. There has never been a game where "lose a turn" has ever been fun or clever. Alternatively, having Ancient Evils add a doom to a location or an enemy so that it can be dealt with in a turn like it can be in lots of Carcosa scenarios would be way more interesting and actually pose a fun challenge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:The funniest is on Essex County Express where a 4 player group can lose on the first turn. Add my group to the chorus of those that failed turn one of ECE with zero chance to do anything differently to survive....with one of our players using Charon's Obol as a nice kicker.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 18:08
|
|
|
Ubik_Lives posted:Yeah, ancient evils should be remove from play after it resolves, and have no effect and gain surge if another ancient evils was resolved that turn. This is house rule worthy, I like it. Baron Fuzzlewhack posted:Aside from subbing in Resurgent Evils, I have half a mind to just leave out Ancient Evils from any scenario that uses it. There has never been a game where "lose a turn" has ever been fun or clever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 19:43
|
|
|
I still maintain that the copious reshuffling is worse than Ancient Evils is, as that's what really kicks the variance into overdrive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 20:09
|
|
|
The issue with Ancient Evils is that there's no real way to deal with it, and it actively hastens the game's end. The reshuffling thing becomes a problem with it because it actively hastens the reshuffle itself. So if you pull some early, you will reshuffle quicker and have a chance to pull more effectively snowballing itself. Honestly I think the reshuffling thing is actually a positive in most cases outside of that. The times you deal with one card 4 times will be balanced by the times you never deal with it (because you shuffled before hitting it, and it gets buried again). Again, Ancient Evils breaks that by hastening the reshuffle when it's hit the first times. It really needed to remove itself (and possibly have less in the set). I like the idea of some scenarios having a variable timer, just not sure Ancient Evils was the way to go about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
I'm thinking about getting into this since I really like Elder Sign. Is there anything wrong with getting just the core set and seeing how I like it? How screwed would I be if I wanted to play with other people, or how much would it screw over people I play with if I'm only packing the core set?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2019 03:29
|
|
|
Just trying the core set first is absolutely the way you should go. It will only support two people max, unless you proxy cards in which case you can go up to four just fine. Decks with one core set will be a bit lackluster, but it will give you a taste and will definitely give you a good idea as to how much you'll like the core gameplay and the deckbuilding.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
Our group decided to do a combo of both the return to sets, back to back with the same decks all the way through. I'm using Diana Stanley and after the first scenario lemme say that whoever said she's bad has no idea what they're talking about. I will say though that I'm not super impressed with the dagger.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2019 00:32
|
|
|
What are you doing with her? Our group was actually discussing her last night and came to the same decision that she's not all that good. The player who's running her in our campaign is actually switching her out he dislikes her so much. Basically it just seems that most everything she could do, Jim could do better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2019 00:50
|
|
|
Loading up on cancel effects and then exploiting her 6-3-3-3 statline e: she also gets 5 extra cards which is nice if you aim for consistency over wombos like I do. And since her ability draws a card (and gives you a resource) it's still effectively the same size as a 30 card deck. IcePhoenix fucked around with this message at 01:38 on Mar 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2019 01:33
|
|
|
IDK the 5 extra cards seems more like a drawback. And the 6-3-3-3 statline doens't seem that impressive since it's gonna take awhile to get there. I think that's my largest issue with her-you have to put in a bunch of work to just be at the level of other investigators, and if you're lucky you may get a bonus. And that's like your ability. It's like part of the issue that Calvin has (only not to the same extent, of course). She's not non-functional, I just think she doesn't really offer anything currently anyone else couldn't do better. That said, it could be our playstyle and/or how we're building our teams and decks that makes it feel that way, which is why I was wondering how people have been having success. As I mentioned, someone played her before and wasn't too impressed in our group, and in our current campaign we're actually agreeing to let the dude playing her swap her out for Akachi.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2019 06:56
|
|
|
I somehow accidentally ordered one extra of The Pallid Mask and The Forgotten Age in a recent order to fill out what I was missing. Anyone want these for cheap? Shipping is going to suck due to the size of the FA box.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2019 08:52
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:IDK the 5 extra cards seems more like a drawback. And the 6-3-3-3 statline doens't seem that impressive since it's gonna take awhile to get there. Like I said, you just draw them with your ability, so it's effectively the same deck size. Also you can use her ability once per phase so it doesn't take five turns to get to six will. I had two turns where I was able to pop it twice (investigator phase in both, enemy phase in one, mythos in the other) so I was running strong relatively quickly. And the resource gen is really nice for getting out some heavy hitting cards quickly. Also as far as "optimal" goes, Jim may be better (haven't ever seen him played so idk) but she's still good. Not sure how they actually compare but having Guardian access up to level 2 is really nice. But you don't have to play an optimal character every time. This isn't a Rita situation where the investigator is actually bad because their ability and statline are trash. Also I know you're not throwing shade on my man Calvin, that deck was fun as gently caress to play 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2019 15:28
|
|
|
I played The Witching Hour for the first time last night, solo. It broke. Act 3 required I find 3 clues, but there were only 2 left among the five locations I had in play. Looking at the available location combinations, it’s even possible to come up 2 clues short if you’re real unlucky. It’s a bummer, because I’m otherwise really digging the tone and story of TCU so far.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2019 17:01
|
|
|
IcePhoenix posted:Like I said, you just draw them with your ability, so it's effectively the same deck size. Idk it may be a playstyle thing because everyone in my group thinks Rita is just fine (she's basically the best at handling monsters once you get the bow-her signature card kinda sucks though and her signature weakness is annoying), whereas we all do agree Diana is trash because her statline/ability are trash. It just seems you have to put in a bunch of work to get her to the point that all mystics start at naturally. The best we could think of would be to basically play her like a super support and try to abuse her knife to repeatedly cancel stuff. You can prepared for the worst to make sure you try to draw it, then go around with stuff like guard dogs, brother x, etc while getting double use out of your cancels. And I have no doubt that Calvin is fun to play, he's just basically the worst investigator in the game. That said, the design of the game is strong enough that even the worst investigator can contribute if built right (and if it's multiplayer, if the rest of the team builds with others in mind)
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2019 20:58
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:Idk it may be a playstyle thing because everyone in my group thinks Rita is just fine (she's basically the best at handling monsters once you get the bow-her signature card kinda sucks though and her signature weakness is annoying), whereas we all do agree Diana is trash because her statline/ability are trash. Now you're just trolling me. Also Diana's knife is probably the least useful card in her deck IMO. But starting with a "cancel literally anything" card in your hand offsets that so it's fine. e: the knife is also a will/fight/wild pitch card which is also useful IcePhoenix fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Mar 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2019 21:09
|
|
|
Rita is garbage tier and being able to reliably and cheaply cancel negative events is ridiculously good, I agree. Edit: I do like how the game is expansive enough that people can have such different opinions about investigator power. KPC_Mammon fucked around with this message at 22:03 on Mar 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2019 22:00
|
|
|
I've still never understood some people's low opinion of Rita here. She basically can deal with any enemies, while being able to do the same fail into clues poo poo that the other survivors do. Evasion is super strong, and she's flat out best at it. And Diana isn't really any better at cancelling stuff than any other mystic (without using her knife). She gets a minor rebate for playing those cards, but that's much different from them being discounted. And her increased deck size means you have less chance of actually drawing them. The only thing that stops her from being just less reliable than other mystics from cancelling is her extremely powerful special card she starts with. On top of which you're stuck using some subpar cancel effects just to try to get to the same spot that every other mystic starts at. I do wonder what a tier list would look like here though since it's obvious there's a lot of different ideas. I do think you'd also have to separate solo vs. duo vs. larger group, since I think power level can vary a lot for some of those.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2019 00:43
|
|
|
While I am interested in trying out Rita(and probably wouldn't call her trash tier), I also acknowledge that she is a niche character. She's bad at finding clues with her 2 intellect. Survivors got some trick cards to find them, but they are also shared among the rest of the survivors. The biggest hurdle (  ) for Rita is Wendy - especially with a bow. With much less restricted deck building, she can almost do anything Rita can, but she can also use stuff like Lockpicks (even though the bow is 2h) and has a much stronger ability. Wendys 7/7 health is also preferred over Ritas 9/5.This sort of leaves Rita in a corner because: * If you want combat/cluever/utility - go with Wendy * If you want combat only - go with Yorick * If you want combat and evade - Rita might be slightly better than Wendy
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2019 08:29
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:I've still never understood some people's low opinion of Rita here. She basically can deal with any enemies, while being able to do the same fail into clues poo poo that the other survivors do. Evasion is super strong, and she's flat out best at it. Evasion is super strong when you can reliably follow up on it. You mention failing into clues but what happens when you start getting resource poor, or when you fail by more than two (which will start to happen at shroud 3 or higher with that stellar 2 lore)? Fighting with the bow is neat but what if you don't kill the thing? Or what if you don't draw the bow? It's only two cards (max) in your deck, it's not super uncommon to just not draw it. I've said it before but relying on a specific card to make your deck work leads to bad times when you don't get it. I'm also super not a fan of her unique card. Three actions to do three damage feels like a level zero card (maybe a level one), not an investigator's unique power. As far as Diana goes, you seem really hung up on the cancel gimmick which I'm not sure I've ever sold as being what makes her good. And yes, tier lists would definitely have to be separate for solo/duo/3+ IMO. IcePhoenix fucked around with this message at 15:10 on Mar 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2019 15:07
|
|
|
IcePhoenix posted:Evasion is super strong when you can reliably follow up on it. You mention failing into clues but what happens when you start getting resource poor, or when you fail by more than two (which will start to happen at shroud 3 or higher with that stellar 2 lore)? Fighting with the bow is neat but what if you don't kill the thing? Or what if you don't draw the bow? It's only two cards (max) in your deck, it's not super uncommon to just not draw it. I've said it before but relying on a specific card to make your deck work leads to bad times when you don't get it. I'm also super not a fan of her unique card. Three actions to do three damage feels like a level zero card (maybe a level one), not an investigator's unique power. She follows up on it by doing damage to the evaded enemy or by re-positioning so she can be somewhere else to deal with enemies. The failing into clues thing is more a sideline, but the same issues you bring up are there for basically all the other low book survivors. It's also not something I think of as a main selling point, just something that allows you to contribute when there's no enemies to deal with. I did admit her unique card is very bad, and her unique weakness can be quite punishing. And as for Diana, you mentioned a 6-3-3-3 statline as being what makes her good, but nothing besides the 6 there is really stellar, and even that's not that impressive when it takes half the game or more to get there, all the while you're either a really bad mystic or a mostly bad guardian. Basically the cancel gimmick is all she is, because if you just want a 6 mind grab Akachi/Agnes and a rosary and you're already there. You don't have to spend a bunch of cards/actions/turns building up just to be as good as every other mystic starts out from the gate. At least with being able to double up on cancels with the knife/her elder sign ability, you offer something that nobody else really can. As an aside, has anyone messed around with Preston yet? I got charged to play him in our current group, and it was definitely a mixed experience. I'm going more big money over dark horse which I'm still not sure is the right call.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2019 19:21
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:And as for Diana, you mentioned a 6-3-3-3 statline as being what makes her good, but nothing besides the 6 there is really stellar, and even that's not that impressive when it takes half the game or more to get there, Dang what kind of games are you playing where you finish in 8 turns or less?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2019 19:32
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:As an aside, has anyone messed around with Preston yet? I got charged to play him in our current group, and it was definitely a mixed experience. I'm going more big money over dark horse which I'm still not sure is the right call. Not yet, he seems to get quite a few support cards this cycle, so I think I'm going to wait, but he's currently my top pick for who I want to try. Regarding Diana, I think she'll be quite a unique Mystic, just based on her deckbuilding rules. The 0-2 secondary class investigators are all very strong. I haven't tried building an end-game deck for her, but I can see it being quite powerful and reliable with both cancels and spells + weapons. Top it off with some guardian cluefinding and it would be a pretty fun build.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 03:28 |
|
|
We have a Preston in our group and he's an interesting character for sure. I've seen theorizing about him being good for dark horse decks but I don't think I agree, our player was leveraging well connected and the sheer amount of money he had generated for one very good test per turn, and with Fire Axe he was doing well enough in combat. I worry that Dark Horse would hinder him a bit even though he would still have his four resources per turn. Could very easily be wrong on that, though. Though this was all just on the first scenario so we'll see how it holds up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2019 20:11
|
|