Jump to content

SylvanEve

Members
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About SylvanEve

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Lexington, Massachusetts, United States
  1. Congrats on your top score for this league! We have not yet played scenario 3 - i was watching my friend's kids for the week, and there was no way we'd have had a chance to lay out the game without it getting trashed/lost/slobbered upon.... We started this evening, but I am exhausted, and it was one of the more miserable starts - items, skills, rolls, etc - that we've yet had. I also kept getting thoroughly distracted by the evil tv. Both Rita and Jenny knocked themselves silly going against a dark young, and we just were not doing well at all... we'll get back to it when we get some sleep!
  2. JerusalemJones said: We almost always have 8 players (and they are not always the same 8 players) so having someone sit at the General Store milling for the best items or staking out the South Church hoping to attend mass (which we have to do in the first scenario, pretty much) can be rather...unfun. Argonel himself asked me today if I felt that the scenarios were not scaled well for larger teams. I think that the idea is that the larger teams find themselves having to meta-game more often to win, but then again any team that is trying to maximize points is also, in its own way, meta-gaming as well. When we ran scenario 2 with 8 characters on Thursday, my husband reminded me that well, with 8 characters - some of them would be more boring than others, and some would not score as high. I tend to whine when one of my players looks like they are being useless...... It was true - my monster killer really wasn't (Joe Diamond). His Ashcan Pete had the lions share of kills, and hopee through a couple of gates. (He had great items - took on a stack of 8 monster surge monsters all by his lonesome and defeated 'em one by one.) I agree, it is more fun if you don't spend all your time camping for the good encounters - I also love exploring places where bad stuff happens frequently, but husband cautions me on such recklessness in league games. The meta-gaming helps scores, but not fun levels. I guess with two players and eight characters, it is a "puzzle" rather than a role playing game-like thing. Unfortunately, I tend to be rather obsessive about puzzle-like things, and can get caught up in score, etc. I guess that is "metagaming." Even my perinatal specialist knows I can be a hypercompetitive monsterface. He keeps cautioning me that pregnancy results in loosening ligaments and start-stop exercise puts me at greater risk of injury. I am in a tennis league and play every Monday and Wednesday, and have not yet given this up (24 weeks, all is well). At our last ultrasound, the guy mentioned that he knew my ob/gyn would be getting a call from me saying "ok, contractions are 10 minutes apart.... can i play one more set?" (He's kinda' right.)
  3. Wow, I didn't realize we've owned the game for that long! I like the artwork on the old - it makes me happy every time I set it up, all dark and brooding.... I cannot see the detail on the new one really well from the photo....
  4. 'doh! I did not read well enough..... no more posting for me! Looks like a nice spreadsheet. (sorry, btw.)
  5. tamsyn said: I guess in the end we don't have the time or inclination to keep replaying the scenario until we max out our score based on the luck of the mythos draw. If people however wish to do that then we might stop playing, as we are no longer playing on an equal field, so what is the point of comparing scores? Of course that would be our choice and we wouldn't hold it against anyone else. Tamsyn - no need to stop! I kinda' feel the same way about some of the strategies that seem contrary to the spirit of the game. We played our main team of 4 investigators twice - with moderately good scores. We could try again to maximize, but I kind of like playing it straight up, for fun, and seeing how our general game stacks up against a munchkin's game..... That being said: My husband and I played last night with 8 investigators and had great luck - we have a really good score, but might have chanced another couple of turns because we were ready to seal our last gate and there was not too much else going on. I was tired, and the game was dragging, and the terror track was still at 0, so it would've been a chancy move to keep on going. We had the Terrible Experiment up and running. The game got really boring towards the end with many of the characters running around simply exploring while we picked up a few points here and there by McGlenn killing the experimental monster and hoping for monsters released into the streets.... I think we did great on the score, but we need to submit it to find out for sure. Keep playing! It's fun to talk with you!
  6. LFITQ said: Let me know of any other suggestions and ideas! (hopefully no more errors) Aren't unpaid & defaulted bank loans supposed to be subtracted out, too? I have never taken a bank loan, but thought the formula was: Doom - Terror + unspent monster trophies/3 + unspent gate trophies + investigators alive - Elder signs used - unpaid or defaulted bank loans It may be a small thing, but I have heard alot of people do default on bank loans intentionally in order to gear up in the game.
  7. johnwatersfan said: JIM CULVER? Are you kidding me? I think my group has unanimously agreed that he is the WORST investigator ever. Now you make me want to use the guy, just to be a contrarian.....
  8. Waaah! Scores are up for scenario 2, and we haven't done our 8 investigator game, and we wanna' redo our 4 investigator one.... wah! too slow! wah! too whiny!
  9. Avi_dreader said: Ozzy said: It's not a game of chance, not really (not to the extent where I would characterize it as a game of chance). If you can control factors to the point where you have a 90+ % chance of winning, welllll, I'd say there's a bit more than chance involved in the game. And lets face it, while chance might have alot to do in this scenario with where your score is in the 20s or high 30s (if you're playing well), its role is overrated ;') and would be even less if the unique item deck and spell deck weren't effectively removed from the game. Hm. I'd characterize it as a game of maximizing your odds - a big old puzzle with tons of moving parts and a great backstory.... A game of remembering details and chosing the highest probability options.... Chance does play a big roll, but as you say, I agree, it's not a "game of chance." OK, have there been high 30 scores with 4 investigators in this one? We're gonna' have to get back to the game table if thats the case! We have yet to run the 8 investigator scenario, and the 2 character - well, hm. we may keep our 22.
  10. TroySterling said: Just curious - how could you have a score of 22 with 2 investigators and the terror track at 10? That would mean you only earned 1 point for ithaqua (11-10=1) 6 for the gates =7, 2 for the sane investigators, which brings it to 9. So you killed 39 creatures between the two of you in 14 rounds? We played this scenario 5 times scoring 16,17,19,16 and then finally 21. 'Doh. DT = 10 of 11, TT = 3 My bad, I always misspeak that. Doom does not = terror. Sorry. Michael McGlenn 14 M, 0G, 9Cl Vincent Lee 5M, 6G, 0 Cl 11 - 3 + 6 + 6 + 2 -0 -0 = 22 Rumors: Terrible experiment. Good work undone. Southside strangler.
  11. How many clue tokens are in the set? I fear that our dear Mysterious Whisper of the Fluffy Tufted Paws (a.k.a. our rescued border collie, Whisper) has eaten a few of our clues. fwiw: we played 2 investigator game last night with McGlenn & Lee, and won by closing 6 gates - score of 22, eh. It was a gossip-y town - we killed three rumors - Terrible Experiment came up second turn, McGlenn & Lee took it out that turn, then we had Good Work Undone up and down in the next turn (we had the clues after clearing terrible experiment), and then we drew Southside Strangler - which we ignored for several turns as McGlenn ran around trying to keep the terror level down, and Lee hopped through gates. Lee had drawn "Find Gate," which is extraordinarily helpful. We played super quickly - I think we're getting good at this game. There were at least 14 turns - I know we had 4 monster surges at least, & the terror track ended at 10 - but it took us only an hour and twenty minutes. McGlenn had Calvin. It was a fun quick game, but we may try again for a better score. Then again, maybe not - we really need to rock out that 4 investigator team, and try it with 8 as well. We are so geeking out on this!
  12. Hm. We played this last night with 4 characters, and did mediocre. We drew the "Disturbing the Dead Rumor" which knocked our score down some by raising the terror track to 3, and making me sacrifice a couple of gates to close it. I played Jenny Barnes with Calvin and Bob Jenkins - but I was so tired I thing I was half asleep (I did some truly stupid things - forgot how to count, it seemed, and took on a monster or two that I ought not have --> unconsciousness) (Gestating is tiring!). My husband played Gloria Goldberg and Michael McGlenn, and was the powerhouse in the game. We just seemed to have lousy luck in our rolls - Gloria got LiTaS once, ahe had an enormous amount of trouble closing a -3 gate, and it was just kind of a bad rolling night. It was fun though, and we will try again.
  13. We've been writing it out manually on the back of the scenarios each time we play..... We just added the line for clues.
  14. Avi_dreader said: SylvanEve said: It still may be easier, but it'll be interesting. You do have to give up the trophy to get the clues, don't you? No. You don't. Hmmm. That does sound somewhat easier, then.
  15. It wouldn't be AS easy if you had to trade the trophy for the clue tokens - it would drive scores down for folks who aren't being very clever with their strategy and who solely rely on clue tokens to make their roles. I would be interested to see the scores on this scenario. It still may be easier, but it'll be interesting. You do have to give up the trophy to get the clues, don't you? ETA: My math may be off, though. I don't know how many toughness points people generally collect, nor how heavily one relies on clues....
×
×
  • Create New...