|
Empress Brosephine posted:I feel like i'm playing this game wrong but going through the core and it seems 10x as hard as LOTR LCG is....I got up to the last Act of the first campaign with the Ghoul Priest, had to do 10 damage and realzied it was basically impossible with my selections (Daisy and Skids) The only thing I could say you did "wrong" is expect that the end conditions for the scenarios are a binary win/lose. They are very much role-playing lite, and resigning a scenario or losing all your health and/or sanity has a narrative result in and of itself (which can make for an amusing series of events, see my hobo posts earlier in the thread). The game is definitely pretty hard, even on normal difficulty. I've been an avid collector and player since it released, and I still don't have a very good handle on how to commit the right amount of cards/icons to checks. I would say approach this game like you would any other Arkham Files game from FFG: like an experience generator rather than a straight puzzle.
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2017 00:04
|
|
what did I do wrong
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 18:09 |
|
|
Remember, too, that you still have to adhere to the deckbuilding restrictions on your character card. If they can have up to 30 cards (not counting weakness/signature ability/signature weakness cards), then when you slot in an upgraded card, something else has to get knocked out of the deck to keep it at 30 cards. The exceptions to this rule are cards with the Permanent keyword. They do not contribute to your deck size, nor are they ever really "in play", so they can't be discarded by any encounter cards, etc. They really are quite permanent.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
In addition, a card always costs at least 1 XP. e.g. If you replace a L3 card with lower level card, even with the same name, you still must spend 1 XP to swap them. This follows the same logic as needing to spend 1 XP to swap in L0 cards for other L0 cards. The exception here is if you pick up the rogue asset Adaptable, which allows you to swap up to two L0 cards in between scenarios at no cost. e: I'm a dumb-dumb. Baron Fuzzlewhack fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Sep 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:I thought you only discounted the cost from the existing level if it was the same card and you were upgrading it? So it'd cost 3 in that case. You're right, I was thinking about it incorrectly. I edited my original post to better reflect what I was thinking of, and to point out what a dumb-dumb I am.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:I've loved Pete since my first play but man, Dark Horse is such a power spike for the Scooby Doo duo. How do you end up playing this? I took Ashcan Pete through all but the last two Dunwich scenarios but ended up skipping Dark Horse since it didn't quite fit into my build.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
Four people tends to be a little bit of a slog. I've had fun doing some scenarios with four people, but you definitely need to set aside time for it as the main event of an evening. Five or six people I think would generate too much downtime for each player and would end up making the game kinda boring.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2017 06:13
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:Do basic weaknesses, allies, etc, with scenario/mythos pack icons stay separate in their scenarios and only get used there? Or do I shove them into the basic weaknesses stack I shuffle up during deck building? You shuffle them all together. Basic weaknesses stay with your character/deck from when you initially create a deck. (Honestly though, if you want to make it more thematic or just feel like swapping them out, you can. The above points are just Rules As Written.)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
It could have been written a bit better, yeah Maybe "owns" vs. "controls" to differentiate, or "controls in play".
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:Zoey: https://arkhamdb.com/decklist/view/2733/zoey-samaras-start-of-dunwich-blind-1.0 My one concern playing that Zoey deck would be having enough resources to play things. Guardian cards cost a lot of resources, and Fire Axe burns through those precious resources pretty hard. You have 7 cards at cost 3+, almost a third of your deck. Maybe swap out 2x Physical Training (which works against retaining resources for the more expensive cards) for 2x Guts, or +1x Taunt and 1x Guts or something.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
I'm not a huge fan of the core set model, but that said, the second core set came in handy early on for repeated playthroughs. Being able to keep all three scenarios built at the same time made set up and clean up way faster. And I managed to lose the first Elder Sign token I had (pretty sure my friend's dog ate it) but had a spare from the second core set ready to go. On top of that you end up with a playset or more of every card in the core set with two, so it's one of FFG's least egregious LCG core sets.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:The lovely default Roland and Wendy decks that we upgraded over the core scenario. I'm not sure how you feel about decks that others have put together, but arkhamdb.com has a pretty good assortment of fun/interesting decks that folks have come up with. In particular, This Roland deck is pretty fun, and the person who built it has an extensive explanation as to why they made their card choices, suggestions to upgrade the deck, and the characters and types of decks to pair with it. FBones over there also has a bunch of decks made with great explanations and suggestions.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Quidthulhu posted:So is the game designed to always be a straight shot through Core -> Dunwich with scenarios & the same decks, or is it: It can work either way, and it can be pretty fun to take the same character(s) through both the Core, Dunwich, and further scenarios. Since it's an Arkham game, though, I would expect them to bite the dust in some fashion somewhere along the line. Rebooting between campaigns, or even for side-scenarios like Carnevale or Rougarou, is also a perfectly acceptable way of going about it, and is probably the intention given the new investigators that come in each deluxe expansion.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:Carcosa day! Hope a lgs has it. I completely forgot until I got into work this morning and one of my coworkers wordlessly placed it on my desk like a drug dealer who knows she has an easy mark. Yes, I will take a hit of cardboard altered reality, thank you.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
It's definitely a fun deckbuilding exercise, and you can incorporate a storytelling/roleplaying element into it to justify having or not having access to later cards. "Roland stumbled upon the lightning gun only after rummaging through the village of Dunwich, but after the events there unfolded, he found himself Lost in Time and Space. He was suddenly facing down the Ghoul Priest again, with slightly more firepower this time..."
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:Yep, the result is zero and you can play it. IIRC you could also Lucky! out of a tentacle in this case, as it'd count as a failure at zero. This is incorrect for both examples. The tentacles/auto-fail token effect gets applied in ST.4 of the skill check timing window before you have the chance to play Lucky!, which means you've failed. For the purposes of other card effects (like Rotting Remains) you are considered to be at skill 0 so that you can figure that stuff out. The difference with negative modifiers (-4 vs 2 skill in this case) is that they resolve in ST.5 of the timing chart, but success/failure is determined separately on ST.6 of the chart. In addition, all modifiers, including Lucky!, are taken together per the Modifiers section of the rules reference, so in the above example you would end up with 0 in the end (2-4+2). Arkhamdb.com has the rules referene in a mostly plain text webpage that is easily searchable, which is super nice and handy. Relevant sections are Modifiers and Skill Check Timing. Baron Fuzzlewhack fucked around with this message at 15:27 on Sep 19, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 13:28
|
|
|
medchem posted:This part always confuses me so I want to clarify it. A ready unengaged enemy at a location will move only if it has the Hunter keyword or if some special game rules tell it to move? This is correct. Prairie Bus posted:This is a great rundown, but the way they implemented it is very frustrating. Reading through the steps, there's no player window until after the effects of the skill test has resolved and the effects of failure have been applied. So the technical order for something like Rotting Remains would be outright fail the test, take horror, then play Lucky and rewind everything? It seems a lot better to just have a player window after the draw. I went back and edited my post to correct a mistake: only chaos token with symbols (Elder Sign, Tentacles, etc.) have their affects applied in ST.4. Chaos tokens with just numbers on them don't do anything in ST.4 and are just tallied up with everything else in ST.5. Lucky! has its own special window in ST.6 that then kind of bounces you back to ST.5 before going back to ST.6. They could probably stick a free action player window in the chart, but Lucky! is sort of covered by the general, "if a card breaks a rule, follow the card's instructions," line in the rules.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
GoneWithTheTornado posted:How does Rex's curse interact with spooky symbol effects that tell you to draw another token? You can reference the timing chart below, but you resolve the effect of the chaos token first (ST.4) before determining success or failure. In your example, you draw a chaos token with the effect that you must draw another token (ST.3), so you would resolve that (ST.4) and draw another token (ST.3 again) and resolve it (ST.4 again), then tally up the modified skill value (ST.5), then check for success or failure (ST.6). If you succeed, Rex's Curse kicks in (ST.7), you put all the tokens back into the chaos bag, go back to ST.3 and draw another token (ST.3 again) and follow the same steps. Skill Test Timing ST.1 Determine skill of test. Skill test of that type begins. ~ (free action) PLAYER WINDOW ST.2 Commit cards from hand to skill test. ~ (free action) PLAYER WINDOW ST.3 Reveal chaos token. ST.4 Resolve chaos symbol effect(s). ST.5 Determine investigator's modified skill value. ST.6 Determine success/failure of skill test. ST.7 Apply skill test results. ST.8 Skill test ends.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
I still have yet to ever actually go through the entirety of my deck during a scenario.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:Another q: if the Strange Solution upgrades require being upgraded from the discovered strange solution, that means if I want to have 2 upgraded ones I have to leave one of the basic ones in my deck if I want to upgrade one now and one later, correct? But, once the solution has been discovered once, I'm good to go, right? And I can split them around between the 3 types of solutions (if I wanted to, but I can't see why you wouldn't just pick the clear best one). All of that is correct, yes.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:As an aside, I really wish they'd reissue the arkham minis they did before. I'd definitely pick up a full set of the heroes even though they're not all released in the LCG yet. One of these days I'll get around to listing/selling the two(?) complete sets of pre-painted FFG Arkham minis sitting in giant wooden chests in the bowels of my store's stockroom. Last I checked they were absurdly expensive, though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
I'm a cheating bastard and choose a thematic/more fun weakness for each of my decks instead of doing it randomly. Paranoia and Amnesia are just a little too punishing for most investigators to really be any fun.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:Are there any US sites that stock this and ship reasonably cheaply to the UK? Lost in Time and Space is either out of stock or ridiculously overpriced everywhere here. I thought FFG already issued the re-print? Poking around it looks like it would be at least $20 to ship from the US east coast to the UK via USPS. I'm not sure if there are cheaper options out there. I can look more closely at it when I go into work tomorrow if you'd like to PM me an address. I run the e-commerce and shipping department for a board game store on the east coast and we have plenty of packs in stock.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
I just picked up The Unspeakable Oath pack today. Looks like Machete in one hand, Trench Knife in the other would be a good way for Guardians to deal with both swarms and individual enemies at any given moment.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Another alt-art I'll just end up proxying. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:In play -> sleeved Similarly, but slightly more granular: Binder -> unsleeved Player decks -> sleeved in Dragonshield Clear Matte, because I love love love the card backs of the player cards for this game and wanted quality sleeves that could take lots of shuffling Invesigator Cards -> sleeved in old leftover Dragonshield Clear (regular), alternatively FFG clear sleeves (silver packs), so that I could easily read both sides Mini character cards -> sleeved in FFG clear sleeves (yellow packs) Scenario cards that never get shuffled (chaos bag reference card, location cards, etc.) -> unsleeved Encounter cards/scenario cards that get shuffled -> sleeved in FFG clear sleeves (silver packs)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2018 00:29
|
|
|
I think it all comes down to personal play style. I am not a min/maxer by any stretch of the imagination, and I dislike quarterbacking, so when I'm playing a scenario with friends that I've played before (solo or otherwise), I really love to see their reactions to the gimmicks and how they deal with it. In a more explicit manner, this may involve me taking either sub-optimal moves while quietly pretending I don't know what's coming, or just not explaining the entirety of my strategy/the reason for my actions to the other unwitting players in an effort to not spoil the surprise. It helps that there's an element of light roleplaying to the game, which allows me to sometimes excuse my actions as thematic rather than strategically sound. On the flip side, I love playing scenarios solo and then introducing other players to them, because sometimes a first playthrough of a scenario can be confusing due to the introduction of new rules and mechanics and knowing ahead of time how they work makes the experience way smoother for everyone.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2018 05:25
|
|
|
I only feel a little guilty, but most of the fudging/cheating I do in solo games is to correct really obvious or dumb blunders, like, "oops I forgot to commit this card when most of the token pool is -3 or worse and I would have committed it anyway." I mostly do it in the name of fun. In competitive games of Netrunner, X-Wing, or Star Wars LCG, I'll point out my dumb mistakes after making them and most of the time my opponents offer to let me correct them, but I almost always decline since I learn way better if I take the hit then and there. On the flip-side, if my opponents ask to correct their own dumb moves/mistakes, I'm always happy to let them do it since it's all in the name of fun anyway. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2018 04:12
|
|
|
Or just play an investigator who can take Adaptable and swap in new 0xp cards between scenarios! 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2018 17:00
|
|
|
IcePhoenix posted:Started a new campaign today with a couple goons and my former roommate. I'm playing as the painter (who is very fun) and we finished the first game with 8 exp earned. Double up on Hot Streak Get it under your investigator card at the start Play The Painted World Profit
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
Funzo posted:What do people like for a good beginner deck? I may be teaching the game toa friend of mine this weekend, and I'd like to start him out with something that doesn't have a lot of moving parts to keep track of. I was thinking of using Roland for him while I use a Seeker deck. I taught a friend/co-worker using Roland and Agnes, playing The Gathering from Night of the Zealot. I let her pick her investigator after a short explanation as to how they worked, and she picked Agnes (arguably way more complicated than Roland). I didn't bother to limit my deckbuilding to just core set or anything, and she picked it up really well, and quickly. We both manage a board game shop, though, so YMMV. I used DadouXIII's Roland deck since they've put a ton of effort into tinkering with Roland. Here's the Agnes deck I built from scratch as an exercise.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2018 18:47
|
|
|
What are folks' general method for using things like Song of the Dead, .41 Derringer, etc., that have charges but are arguably worse than the "main" cards that would go in those slots during play (Shrivelling, Jenny's Twin .45s, Machete, etc.)? Do you play them out and use them until you get your main items and then replace them immediately? Or do you try to use up all the charges before replacing them?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 15:19
|
|
|
My store is going to try to do a full 12-player game in a few weeks. Three of us play regularly and picked up the scenario today and decided to just use our copies for the event. When we did the first Invocation event we had a great turnout, so we're hoping we can fill up all three games. We looked over some of the agendas and acts, and they look bonkers. I'm really looking forward to playing it!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2018 00:35
|
|
|
Richmond, VA. You can still visit, though!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2018 01:47
|
|
|
In general, unless the investigator or deck gimmick works around it, avoid having too many assets in your deck. A maximum of maybe 10 assets would look good (e.g. 2x Flashlight, 2x Machete, 2x .45 Automatic Pistol, 2x Beat Cop, 2x Magnifying Glass), as that's already 1/3 of your deck, and they take time and a lot of resources to put out. Similarly, don't go too crazy with Skill cards, maybe 6 maximum (and they should really be worth it). Those tips have generally worked for me, regardless of which investigator I'm playing. IcePhoenix posted:my #1 rule is to emphasize your strengths instead of trying to shore up your weaknesses. This is good advice and should be considered when adding anything to your deck. If your main goal is to get into monsters' faces and pummel them, make sure your assets help you do that, your events help you get those assets out and get into monsters' faces, and your skill cards boost your ability to do so. The same goes for investigating, evading, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2018 00:27
|
|
|
TipTow posted:Roland Banks That deck looks really good! I would recommend the following changes: -1 Blackjack -1 Knife +2 Machete Blackjack isn't amazing, and is mostly in the game to remind you of the rule about missing attacks on enemies engaged with other investigators. Machete, on the other hand, is a real workhorse when you're playing at lower player counts (which means fewer simultaneous enemies). You'll often be engaged with only one enemy anyway, and it will go a long way towards saving you precious bullets. -2 Beat Cop +2 Dr. William T. Maleson Beat Cop is good, don't get me wrong, but Maleson has a really great interaction with Roland. He lets you ditch treacheries that test your crappy willpower/agility in favor of, ideally, grabbing enemies from the encounter deck. The cost of dropping a clue is almost laughable when Roland is going to pick it right back up after whacking the enemy you drew. This also synergizes well with Inquiring Mind's clue requirement. -2 Seeking Answers +2 Shortcut Shortcut is a little more versatile than Seeking Answers. It's great in a pinch when you need to move, engage, and attack twice in the same turn to rescue your buddy. Without it, you could only move, engage, and attack once. It also lets you move yourself and enemies engaged with you without provoking attacks of opportunity. Consider that, instead of spending 1 for Seeking Answers and investigating a connecting location, you might use Shortcut to move with an enemy engaged with you onto that connecting location with a clue to then whack the enemy and collect the clue, all for a 0 cost fast action. -2 Emergency Aid +2 Deduction Healing is meh (unless it coincides with something you're already doing, like with "If it bleeds..."), your time is better spent doing other actions. Deduction will help strengthen your investigate actions even further. None of those changes are strictly necessary, it just brings the deck closer to what I've played as Roland in the past, which has worked decently well. If you have any roleplaying/fun/just because reasons for including anything in your deck, though, go for that instead! One of the reasons I love this game so much is that you don't have to build finely-tuned decks, and instead can build thematic or "believable" decks.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2018 01:38
|
|
|
If you want a REALLY comprehensive look at Roland for both solo and co-op, check out DadouXIII's extremely detailed efforts to play a finely-tuned Roland deck over on ArkhamDB. Here's the most recent version, up to Black Stars Rise, the second-to-last Carcosa cycle pack. He includes suggestions for card substitutions based on what packs you're "missing" compared to him. Alternatively, here is a previous version of his guide, which was written after Lost in Time and Space, the last pack in the Dunwich Cycle, was released. This is a nice snapshot based on just owning the Core Sets and the full Dunwich Cycle.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2018 01:50
|
|
|
My store's Labyrinths of Lunacy event is this Sunday. I'll be building two decks and lending out some cards, so I wanted to build a deck that was, a) a challenge, and b) didn't use a lot of the oft-used cards in case my friends (or the other, easier deck I'll be making) needed them. So, I settled on Skids for some reason  :Skids - Labyrinths of Lunacy 07/01/2018 posted:"Skids" O'Toole (up to 19 xp, currently 16xp) We can build up to 29xp, but I want to keep it at 19xp or below, preferably. The only things I'm dead-set on are Lupara, Gold Pocketwatch, "Let me handle this!"/"You handle this one!", and Sleight of Hand. Taunt and "I'll see you in hell..." are emergency, last-ditch options specifically for the scenario because there are so many things that outright kill you, I may as well go out in a blaze of glory. Any suggestions? Skids is really hard. Baron Fuzzlewhack fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Jun 28, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2018 17:00
|
|
|
Japanese Dating Sim posted:I have a stupid question - how do people print out things like these - https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/143040/arkhamesque-vertical-dividers ? Do you just print out the PDFs and paste them onto vertical dividers like these https://smile.amazon.com/BCW-Trading-Card-Dividers-Quantity/dp/B001PHZGJC?sa-no-redirect=1 ? I use those plastic dividers for larger, important blocks of cards, like scenarios or groupings of encounter sets (usually per cycle: Dunwich, Carcosa, Forgotten Age). I just print the fancy dividers on thicker cardstock and they hold up well enough on their own without attaching them to plastic. Sometimes I use both printed cardstock and plastic because I'm indecisive, and I usually just put them next to each other and don't worry about it much.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2018 00:04
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:IIRC they make the dividers horizontal and vertical. Mine were definitely vertical anyway. They're talking about the Return to the Night of the Zealot box and dividers. They are a bit weird, and honestly the fan-made ones are way better. I'm actually really tempted to just toss the box. This should have just been the same size as Labyrinths of Lunacy.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2018 05:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 18:09 |
|
|
Labyrinths of Lunacy Trip Report (spoiler-free) We had 11 of the 12 players who signed up show, so we split into groups of four, four, and three. We told everyone to build two investigator decks to make grouping them up easier, without running into problems with duplicate investigators. We ended up with the following: Group A Leo Anderson Mark Harrigan Agnes Baker Carolyn Fern Group B Leo Anderson Daisy Walker William Yorick Father Mateo Group C Leo Anderson Minh Thi Phan Sefina Rousseau (me) I was the only investigator to die, and early, due to having to finish my group's objective completely blind because Group A (which featured two of my store co-workers...) didn't read the super obvious card text that would have told me exactly what to do. They will hear about this endlessly for the next week. This was fine, though, since the scenario requires you to do End of Round effects simultaneously, and to start each round with all three groups in synch. I spoiled the scenario ahead of time in order to be able to answer any questions folks might have, so biting the dust early made it way easier to facilitate the flow of the game, and, more importantly, didn't knock out any of the folks who came from out of town to play in my store. All three groups trudged through their particular objectives, sometimes coming very close to death, but ultimately achieving all of their goals. No one else died, and all three groups beat the scenario for the best resolution you can get! It was pretty harrowing, but it was cool to sit back and watch each group hum and haw over the weird story assets and objectives that didn't seem to do anything for them, but might help out another group if they could trade it away. Most interesting plays/combinations of the day: --My co-worker's Carolyn Fern deck was purpose-built to keep everyone's sanity topped off, and boy did it do it's job. No one was ever suffering from sanity loss in their group. This was an insanely cool deck and I'm really glad he got it working fluidly --Group B cobbling together JUST enough actions at the last possible moment to keep one of their group members from dying from scenario effects not once but TWICE during the game --My group's Leo Anderson loading up around 10 ammo on a Shotgun over the course of the game and unloading a total of 38 damage on our group's copy of the end-boss, Eixodolon. We were able to send 14 extra damage to Group B's copy of Eixodolon, which is just shy of half the damage needed to kill him in a full 4-player group. --Every group's Leo Anderson player competing for most allies on the board at one time This is an insanely cool scenario and I'm really glad we got to run it with a full complement of players, all with wildly varying decks (except the Leo) that all ended up working pretty well together. My only gripe is that if one group is even one person smaller than the others, they will end up spending a good portion of each round just waiting for the other groups to finish, but it's a minor gripe when you consider all the fun scenario effects the game throws at you. I highly recommend you all play the epic multiplayer mode with all three groups going at once. It is extremely unique and well worth the time put into it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2018 22:20
|
|