Tibs said: Yes, all 32 current characters are spread evenly: 2 per stable location, with Kate in the Science Building and Luke in La-La Land. I am confident there will be 8 women and 8 men, 1 per stable location and 1 in some other place. I'm pretty sure there are 2 more men than women (17-15). I store my investigator markers in a 16 compartment tray divided by men and women and there's always one man who has to be in the women's side. Or maybe, I can't tell the difference anymore. When we play a normal game (not that often anymore), each player gets a man and a woman to choose from. In most cases, the female is the better investigator, because overall I think they are. I think there is only one encounter -- at the Science building-- that is gender specific but I haven't encountered it recently? Of course, you can read anything you want into the new formations in the Black Cave. Also, I hope there are some Arab or Middle eastern investigators. After all, the Necronomicon was compiled by a mad Arab and Egyptian relics figure big and at least one Ally appears to be middle eastern.

Never mind Nevermind Never you mind

Gamemaster said: I would say Environments overrule everything as it is describing a current condition. It does not matter if a Rumor or a Headline says to raise the terror level. The Environment overrules it. Nothing's more current than Today's Headlines! As for the newspapers media (radio) covering up the release of 8 monsters at the university that veteran investigators couldn't contain is probably unlikely in a town of 20,000 people. Personally, I think the cards are merely just a conflict that FFG never caught and never came up before. Both cards are meant to effect the normal events of the game. And normally, the terror level raises (at least in the basic game) when the Outskirts fill. A little prosperity might prevent feelings of terror for that. But a major event, like the the rumor of terrible experiments getting loose at the University in a small town coming to pass would be different. How many citizens have to be eaten before your extra money doesn't mean as much as you thought it did? I agree with the majority of posters that the weight of the legal arguments would indicate that the environment overrides. And I already indicated that if it came to a vote, I'd probably vote that way. I just don't think its conclusive. My main counter argument is that thematically it doesn't make sense. That is, if you read the actual background text of the two cards, there's no way a little prosperity is going to overcome a major monster breakout in the streets for anyone to see. If you saw The Mist recently, you'll remember that there were several groups in the grocery store. One group just refused to believe that there was anything unusual in the Mist (weather environment) and rumors of tentacled monsters released at the army base were just "rubber snakes". Acting upon their steadfast beliefs they entered in the environment, never to be seen again. Anyway, this has been a great discussion and I bow to the majority.

thecorinthian said: But if Happy Days DOES have a simultaneous effect, then what exactly IS that effect? It becomes a simultaneous effect at the moment the 8 monster is put on the Terrible Experiement. thecorinthian said: Sorry, I'm going to drive myself mad trying to find the words to explain this, I don't think that's necessary. Your argument is sound. It's just that the opposite argument is sound too. Sometimes that happens. Neither answer makes sense to me, so I'm OK with a little insanity. thecorinthian said: I have no problem with the idea that the players have power of veto over any rule or card they want, but I think the AH rules are written in a way which implicitly deals with the clash already. A general prohibition (Happy Days) overrides a specific permission (the Terrible Experiment clause). Logically wouldn't that be just the opposite? A general law (almost always prohibitive), such as speeding, can be overridden by a specific permission (cop car with lights blazing and siren in hot pursuit.) Another Approach: Happy Days are here again because of the rise in prosperity. The terror level raises because 8 terrible monsters that veteran investigators couldn't handle have escaped from the university. Does prosperity trump being invited to (be) lunch by aliens? Maybe this is part of the problem. The general metagame unwritten rule, indicates that the terror level doesn't rise. Reading the cards and applying it to a semi-role playing game indicates the opposite. I''m a semi-role player.

thecorinthian said: I'm gonna have to be a pain here and say that I just completely disagree. The fact that this isn't a timing issue means that the paragraph on p23 doesn't apply. That's OK because the rule doesn't refer to timing issues. Either does Fireblaze. You appear to attempting to apply terms that don't exist in our game such as "continuous state" and even "timing issue" and "choose to apply" and "authority" of cards. All that's happening is that you have two cards that affect the same game mechanism--Terror Level. I don't believe there is any outside authority, other than the author, who can tell you how its supposed to work, and chances are he's hasn't thought about it, but at least he has the power. Even though the Mythos cards are from the same basic set, they contradict. So its up to the players. The can use any criteria they want. Can't or can, or harshest, or continuous state vs trigger event. If the vote is a tie, then the final authority is the first player. This is the only thing the game adds and you don't agree that it even adds that. It not, then it gets decided on whatever basis other lesser conflicts get decided on. I know no one likes lack of clarity, but sometimes it happens. BTW, I think we'd vote the sameway, that the terror level doesn't rise, but I just wouldn't be as sure as you.

Steve-O said: mageith said: But actually: "TIMING CONFLICTS If two or more game effects happen simultaneously, the players choose the order in which they occur. If the players cannot agree, the first player decides." Page 23. This isn't actually a timing issue though. The environment is already in play and has been for a little while (at least from the previous Mythos phase), whereas the Rumour is being triggered NOW. This isn't a case of two effects trying to resolve at the same time, it's a case of one effect trying to resolve when another, already in effect, explicitly prohibits it. Normally I'm in favour of ruling against the investigators whenever a rules dispute like this arises, but in this case I think I'd say the environment blocks the terror level from rising. Reason being because if one card can ignore the environment, then all cards that try to raise the terror level should, by the same logic, ignore the environment. That means the environemnt card won't have nearly as large an impact as I think it was meant to. In our group's games, the terror level rarely rises if not for a card being drawn (we're pretty good about keeping the streets clean most of the time.) Not Timing? You're using words like "little while" and "NOW". Two things are trying to happen (or not happen) at the same time. They are both Mythos Card special effects, so they are exactly equal. In addition, the environment only stops one of the effects of the rumor (Terror Level doesn't) go up but doesn't stop the monsters from being released. But if the Terror Level doesn't go up, there's other unresolved issues. For example how do you determine which of the monsters from the Terrible experiment go to the outskirts, if any? It's not really a big deal for me, since I do all things randomly anyway. But the game gives the answer and a final arbiter. But even if the game didn't give the answer, it's still the answer. The players must somehow determine what happens and go on or put the game aside.

kroen said: "Can't" always beats "can". This is how it is in every existing game, and in Arkham too. I raise your unwritten rule with "The harsher the better" another unwritten rule. But actually: "TIMING CONFLICTS If two or more game effects happen simultaneously, the players choose the order in which they occur. If the players cannot agree, the first player decides." Page 23. In my games everything is decided by the roll of the dice. Let's do say the environment (Urban) takes effect and the terror level doesn't raise, then the monster limit isn't ended and the monsters all go to the outskirts (or most of them) and then back to the cup, raising the terror level again, but then it can't. Ugh. There's no good answer.

I think the houserule s designed to make the game easier. As I read, the offical houserules, I think most of them were the alternate or original rules and playtesting caused them to be dropped, but just barely. It seems to be if monsters at the location were sucked back INSTEAD of monsters of the same symbol, the game wouldn't stretch my ability to suspend my disbelief as much. I watched The Mist last night. It really fit into Arkham Horror. There are tentacles.

I've been playing games for a long time. In the last two years, or so, pretty much the only game I've played is Arkham Horror. What makes this game fun for me? 30% cooperation required. My first cooperative game was Shadows Over camelot. I probably played 25 games of it. Only once was I the traitor. I was caught and it was my last game. I'm not sure if being the traitor was what did it, but probably I figured out the game and it became just a matter of convincing others to believe me. 30% Controlled randomness. While much of AH is made up of randomness, the randomness is controllable in that I know that the Newspaper is usually safe and Wizard's Hill is usually dangerous. There are other examples. The stuff I don't like abou AH is when the randomness is not controlled, like the Monster surges adding a doom doken with the Black Gate and the unmodifiable single dice rolls that determine my fate and certain encounters that needlessly happen without me being allowed to have a skill check. (There should be some few encounters so terrifying and overwhelming that can happen.) My first controlled randomness game was Knight's of Camelot. I wore out one copy of that game and bought another. 15% The game can beat me. Over half the time, the reason the game beats me is because I or my group made incorrect decisions. Though sometimes it beats me when I don't make mistakes, If the game beats me "fairly", that's OK. 15% The game is long enough to be significant. I have Pandemic. It's fun, but it's gathering dust. Saving the world in 30 minutes is not nearly as much fun as taking 3 hours to do it. I expect these percentages will probably change as I hear responses. What makes this game fun for you?

I have one of those. "At the Mountains of Madness". It was inspired by a similar idea on BGG. It's not really a neighborhood but a trek. It has three locations. At the end a gate can be sealed. It's an unbreakable gate (unintended consequence) in that no Mythos card calls it or can burst it. OTOH, it doesn't remove a gate marker either. Even Little Emily has not called it cute.

Little Emily thought the money was "cute". That's why she first played.

Locations with green diamonds are stable. Monsters and gates will never appear in these locations, although it is possible for monsters to move to them in certain circumstances. Locations with red diamonds are unstable. Monsters and gates can appear in these locations, sometimes even as a result of encounters. These locations should be approached with caution. The Naacal card seems to override these rules.

jhaelen said: He also laid them out so they could just be read from top to bottom in order of operations (gate opens, clue appears, monster movement, card text) This is something I've always wondered about: Why is the layout of the mythos cards so counter-intuitive? I think they originally planned the cards to be read the way they are laid out. Then decided, for some unknown reason or maybe it was just a mistake, to read it in a different order. As an experiment, We tried a few games of reading the card: text, clue, gate, movement. It seemed to work fine. Everyone adapted to it almost immediately, except me. I don't think I ever read the card as it was laid out. Or maybe, just maybe it is the way it is so we can feel just a little bit of insanity. New players, especially, look at me nuts when I read the card out of the obvious order. If you read the headline first, then monsters are laid out that will move and only monsters that were out in a previous turn are picked up. Clue. Sometimes it might get picked up after its laid out, but I think that probably won't happen. Gate: no effect Movement: monsters just brought out from the headline will move. This will be more dangerous, especially with respect to green monsters. We quite doing after 2 or 3 games and no one missed it. Still though I can't see any compelling reason for them to have changed the obvious order.

MrsGamura said: Location is well a location in Arkham... but if you look in the AH Rules book pg. 10 the Monster Movement example 2... it shows a Dimensional Shambler in Merchant District street area but 1. it says it moves out of its current Location... even though its in the street! "1. The Dimensional Shambler, with its square symbol, follows the white arrow leading out of its current location. Then, because it has a red border, signifying that it is fast, it moves one more time (2), again following the white arrow." Two responses. 1) This is not a rule,but an example. 2) The term "location" is not capitalized making me think its a generic use of the term. I'd hate to think that FFG will FAQ this to RAW (rules as written). But based on prior FAQs, they'll probably use logic and common sense.

i523.photobucket.com/albums/w359/mageith/Corruptionred.png

Introduction: There are less corruption cards (2 per investigator per color). Actually there were even less in the play testings. I rolled 3 dice. The bottom and top dice were the green cards and the red cards was the middle dice roll. But that was too variable. The design is to entice the players to keep the green cards because they are so good but once they get into the red cards, the time is short. In addition, an invesitgators must have at least one corruption card in order to have a cult encounter for the alternate victory conditions. I'm estimating that about half of the Corruption cards will be drawn with cultists, though this will vary. If players then just discard them at the first opportunity they will probably not be corrupted into the red, which cannot be discarded in any way. But then they won't be able to have the cult encounters. Many of the Cult encounters require, as a penalty, to discard your corruption cards, so you'll probably need more than one to eventually find and succeed at the subversion of the cult. i523.photobucket.com/albums/w359/mageith/CorruptionGreen.png

skree said: Mageith, I can read the rest of the Cult encounter cards "quotes" but not the "quote" on the top of the Questioned Loyalty card. Could you please post what it says. Questioned Loyalty: "New members often struggle with total commitment," says a senior cult member. "But, a few honest answers about your recent activities would assure us" Discard 2 Clue Tokens, if able. You may reduce this loss by 1 for each Corruption card you draw. Or you may refuse and discard 1 of your Green Corruption cards and move to the street.

lemmingsunday said: Mageith, if it isn't asking too much, would you be willing to share you super nasty corruption cards? They're not super nasty. They are super corrupting. They've worked twice at conventions as players, despite my warnings, become uncomprimisingly corrupted. However my home group is no longer foolish enough to risk corruption. I'll attempt to post them and you decide.

jgt7771 said: Oh, I'm sure you could use the Streets. And I'm sure you can't use it in Other Worlds. Because we can all see what is supposed to happen here: some brave soul in a town space is supposed save everyone else on the board a lot of trouble at the cost of his Sanity. Because that's what makes the most sense, right? Even though it's worded in a way that's just begging for a clever player to rend it to pieces? FFG needs to realize that we Arkham players shave with Occam's Razor, and start paying extreme attention to what words they use and in what order they use them. I agree with your house ruling. It does make sense. You decided "location" didn't really mean just "location" (because literally location excludes street areas), but actually means "Arkham" and of course Arkham doesn't actually mean Arkham. It means Arkham and all the expansion boards. Except Arkham doesn't mean that when determining monster limits. It all makes sense! It really does! Doesn't it? Plink! There goes another Sanity token. But I don't think Arkham players shave with Occam's razor. There's no need to. I love it when a player comes up with a novel, but questionable use of some item or rule in the game. Unless it's clearly against the rules, I usually say nothing. Arkham Forum members might shave that close and probably should because this is where questions come to be answered. I remember when I first considered buying this game, but first read the FAQs. They were almost all common sense interpretations. Let RAW go hang itself. That was the straw that opened my wallet. Since then I've devoured dozens of Old Ones and dozens have devoured me, but there has been no new facts/faqs come forth. The rumored FAQ project falling further and further into obscurity. I'm comfortable with MY game now. I'm not sure I want a FAQ.

jhaelen said: Hmm, looks like this turned into a Great Debate! Which investigator's ability is better? Gloria's vs. Jim's! Or which is less worse.

kroen said: There's actually an encounter at the bank that lets you buy a retainer for $5. It's where I got the idea from. But yeah, making it permanent is probably not a very good idea... although I do believe the Dunwich expansion should have came with this: (a little off topic, but still) I have it in mine, but you can buy the pass at any depot. Few do. Always with the reason that they don't intend to go back Dunwich, etc. again in the game. At Bexrath: In order to get into someone else's box you'll need a key to be traded somewhere. Also, it will be used as a way to avoid losing items to the loan collector.

jgt7771 said: Find Gate has similar wording, but it doesn't have a clause like "before ending your movement". Without that clarification, there is nothing to prevent anyone from deciding that means, "any time during the movement phase". Except it breaks the cardinal unwritten rule that you are 'deciding' to take the interpretation the favors the investigator instead of the harsher the better.

Tibs said: @mageith: I happen to think that mathematical balance really is fairness balance. You just have to implement it correctly. That said... I think any "better" or "worse" characters in the base game come not from their numbers, but from their abilities and possessions. Mary's blessing is overpriced, Mandy's ability works better than it was intended, I'm sure. Vincent is just not well liked. I still like you, Vick. My grandson is always making investigators for this game. They all have 6 fight and 6 will, 2 or less lore and low sneak. It will all add up to a balanced character (though strange eons will go crazy). In other words, within certain limits, mathematical balance might be fairness. Overall a stat of 3 is weak, a stat of 5 is good. There are some sixes, as you point out and random skills can change that. Trying getting an injury that lowers your speed to 2 or one of these rumors that raises the cost of movement. Perhaps another way to look at it. Is that droping from a 3 speed/movement to 2 is a 33% drop, while dropping from a 4 to 3 is only a 25% drop. Or maybe correctly implementing mathematical balance is not so very easy. It's perhaps only proven in the play testing. I used to be a big player of Warhammer and was a major proponent of mathematical fairness. Now I'm on the other side. Go figure. And finally, I gave Rita as an example of an excellent character who's special ability is of little or no consequence. Her stats are excellently arrayed and her retainer is underpriced (which sort of supports your point. I agree that possessions make a big difference. Most weapons are underpriced (or everything else is over priced). Especially weapons that have no cost to use. All stats are useful. Are you saying over the length of the game, they are all equal?

Several points on buying the retainer 1) You're not buying the retainer. It's termed an investment. You're just using the retainer card rules. So if there is ANY possibility of return on your investment, you're ahead. Past performance is no indicator of future returns. 2) The lower limit of the return on your investment is $4 or a $1 loss (and 2 turns of buying power and 1 turn to buy it). The upper limit is infinite (though unlikely). 3) Money earned and spent in the beginning of the game is more valuable than money spent in the middle or late in the game. How many of us have been devoured with a fat (virtual) wallet? 4) Money is overvalued in the game as it is life. In summary, most players, I would wager, would pay the $5 for the retainer at the beginning of the game. I would become a boring and almost mandatory stop along the way. Any amount of $6 or more, would require weighing the value and some would still do it and many others wouldn't do it. For $5, I'd even take out a loan to do it. $8 would probably make it as rare as taking out a loan itself. Also, I'm not even for doing it or changing the rule because it isn't in the spirit of the game, IMO. We're being invaded by alien beings from other worlds and I'm stopping by the bank to make an investment?

Tibs said: 1) I actually don't agree with your assessment on stat balance. The base game characters all had their different levels of each stat balanced perfectly (as stated above) and the number of characters with a stat that goes to 6 seem to be even, including all expansion characters so far. The number of "holes" missing in certain levels for each stat adds up to 16 exactly to accommodate the Innsmouth characters. Which leads me to believe that the nuttiness factor comes in only with all the extra focus. I proposed some explanations for bonus focus, but something is definitely up with Joe Diamond and Daisy Walker. They would probably be better if their focuses were dropped by 1. Obviously the original game was very mathematically even. It resulted in uneven or unbalanced characters. Some of the least effective characters are from the base game as well as one of the most effective. Mathematics doesn't always translate into balance. Since then, or somewhere along the line, FFG started going in a different dirrection. It may have worked even worse. They'll probably go in even a new direction in the massive addition to characters. 2) I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment on Daisy (in fact, I thought I said as much but apparently wasn't clear). I have made a "fairer" Daisy pretty much upon your lines of thought but so far no takers. Thanks.Tibs said: I don't think Speed is better than Luck. Speed sure seems to get used the least in random encounters. Getting around town fast is awesome, and I would always be happy to see a Speed stat boost rather than a Luck one—but not falling down stairs or landing in traps or picking the wrong path is relieving. All the stats are useful. Are you saying over the length of the game, they are all equal?