Jump to content

awp832

Members
  • Content Count

    875
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About awp832

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Missouri, United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hypnos was a part of Arkham Horror 2nd Edition board game, where he featured as a Guardian... er.. not in the way we know them with Guardian class in the LCG. Basically Hypnos was sort of like an anti-ancient one that helped the players out, adding additional clue tokens to the board, and making traveling through the outer worlds slightly safer.
  2. Havent played with it too much yet, but Mirror seems really good to me so far. Nice card to help Skids' sanity problems, or Leo (or anyone else really) heal the Beat Cop/Guard Dog. This card is super versatile, where something like If It Bleeds... only heals horror, with Mirror/Melody you have the choice of what to heal, and on which character/ally. You can also split if you feel like it, so I love that too. Also, the extra draw on Melody helps to maintain tempo. Easy to access, even Ursula can grab it if she feels like being a team player. I think this has a place in a lot of decks.
  3. well, in that scenario, you *must* draw up to 10 cards to complete the scenario "win" condition, so it can't be an "all-the-time" limit.
  4. So... this card says to draw until you reach your max hand size. Now ... correct me if I'm wrong here, but investigators don't have a maximum hand size, unless it is the Upkeep phase. So... technically can you draw your entire deck? Ok, so that was a not-so-serious question, but here is the serious one. Laboratory assistant says that you increase your hand size by 2 while checking hand size during the upkeep phase. So.... if you have Laboratory assistant down and you play glimpse the unthinkable... what happens? Do you draw up to 8 or up to 10? Obviously you arent playing Glimpse the Unthinkable during the upkeep phase, so... done deal, lab assistant doesnt apply right? But then again, the only time you actually technically have a hand limit is during the upkeep phase. Hence the janky question to start this post. I feel if Lab assistant wasnt supposed to work with Glimpse, they would have just said "...draw up to 8 cards." Similarly, there is a certain forgotten age scenario in which your hand size is reduced during upkeep. Does this apply to Glimpse the Unthinkable?
  5. I have not either, I dont know why it occurred to me on this card, when as others have pointed out there are other cards with similar wording. It didnt occur to me before. But either way, it's good to get a ruling if possible. Didn't want to derail the discussion too much. So let's assume it is the 1-action way. As I said in my previous post, I'm still not super-convinced that this is going to make any sort of a splash, beyond people just trying it out. I can't really think of too many situations where I would want to do this. On the other hand, if it were purely a 0 cost event that read: "You and another player each draw 1 card" would that be playable? Maybe. So... this gives you more than that, I suppose... I just dont really like the idea of stealing my partner's tools.
  6. If you happened to be fishing for events, it combos nicely with Double/Double. Just so I am interpreting this correctly, this card takes two actions, right? It says you may play, not you may put in to play... So, if you play You Owe Me One, that's an action, you look at your partners hand, you choose to play Emergency Cache, since that isn't fast, that's another action... yes? Assuming I am right about this, this seems a pretty weak card IMO. Somewhat like Teamwork, maybe a little stronger, but not by much, and teamwork hasn't exactly been rocking the meta recently. If I am wrong about this, I still don't think the card is amazing, a reasonable, average card. One tricky part is that you're not exactly allowed to ask what's in your allies' hand, meaning that what you play with You Owe Me One is kind of not entirely up to you. You could ask your partner if they had a strong asset to play, or an event that could help the situation, but other than that.... Your friend also has to include the card you want. Asking Roland to include Agency Backup in his deck just so that you can play it if you both happen to have the right card in hand at the same time, is a big ask. So even though Agency Backup seems great on paper, in practice it's probably not really something that is going to be accomplished all that much. As far as targets that are good, big weapons seem like the most straightforward. Pathfinder is slotless and great, if your ally doesnt murder you for stealing it from them (maybe they are running 2 copies and you have YOMO when they have their second in hand?). Tarot cards are in a similar spot, if you dont fancy the rogue one and an ally of yours has a tarot card in hand that is a second copy or something... Events are, by their nature, good possibilities but situational. I can see dynamite blast being handy, for example.
  7. Usually the first thing I do is check the scenario card for the special token effects. If there is something that has a bad consequence on failure, I want to keep that in mind. There are some really bad ones out there, that can spawn doom or monsters, or other nasty effects. So if you're in a scenario that has something like Cultist Token: -3, if you fail, draw the top treachery card in the encounter discard pile- then I really want to be up by +3 all the time. Even if that isn't the case, it's generally a good idea to be able to pass most checks that you try, unless you are planning to get something by failing. Cards like Drawing Thin, Look What I Found, or Rabbit's Foot, -even Lucky! change the dynamic a lot. That's a post for another time. So lets assume for a second that you're not doing fail shenanigans, you're not doing any -cancel a token- effects, etc., which if I'm interpreting your post correctly was the intent. Failing a check still does have some cost, mainly the cost of an action. So the next thing to do is to consider what you can do with that action. Sometimes it's just a resource or a card. But maybe you have Dario out, then you could get 2 resources for an action if you havent used him this turn. Let's again, sort of assume that it isn't a special case. Then I look ahead to next turn. Is there something in my hand that I would like to play, that I don't have enough money for, and won't have enough money for on my next turn? If I'm trying to play a 4 cost card, and currently have 3 resources, getting a resource isn't ultra important because I will get a resource during upkeep and be able to play my card anyway. But if you are sitting at 2 resources and looking to play a 4 cost card, then taking 1 resource looks very attractive, as you'll grab your resource this turn and get to 3, upkeep will put you to 4, and you can play your card next turn. Just having an extra resource can be very beneficial if you are using Talents as well. If you are using talents, resources are on-demand stat boosts, which is very useful sometimes. Resources usually don't go away (although they can in some scenarios, or with Paranoia, etc), so they might very well come in handy later. And what definitely wont come in handy is a failed investigate action. So it should be clear that I value resources.... I also value cards. It's a card game, so you're going to need cards. There isn't much else to say. If your hand is running low, if you don't have a tool that you need.... drawing cards is going to be a must at some point. You'll need to keep in mind your weakness, whether it's a good idea to draw, especially on your last action, but still... drawing cards is essential to most characters and most builds. For however much I've dwelled on the importance of resources, cards are just as important. Card icons are also on-demand stat boosts, and can sometimes be far more effective than boosting with resources, if you're willing to give up the card. If you have an action to spare, and your hand isn't at 7+ cards, and you wont be crippled if you draw one of your weaknesses, then drawing a card is pretty much always a good idea. So back to the core topic. Given that resources and cards are going to help my investigator in the future, when should I risk not getting them in order to attempt to gain some other advantage, like perhaps, a clue? Check your chaos bag. If you have a less than 50% chance to succeed, I wouldnt even think about it. For example, if it is.... I could get a clue if I draw a +1, 0, or Star.... don't even bother, just get the resource or card. Looking at the Circle Undone setup for standard, before adding any tokens for storyline or quest consequences etc, your chaos bag looks like; Star, +1, 0, 0, -1, -1, -2, -2, -3, -4, skull, skull, fail. For the sake of argument, lets just assume that star is auto-pass, even though it might not necessarily pass on all characters. So we've got 13 tokens. -2 or -3 are common values for special tokens. For this first part, lets say skull is -2. If you are +1 over the difficulty, you have 6/13 chance to pass the check. 46%. I would not attempt this check. What if you were +2? your chances improve to 10/13. About 77%. Notice the huge difference here. At 77% chance to succeed, this is worth the opportunity cost of an action, IMO. I would attempt this check. Just for funzies, look what happens if you are +3: Your odds improve to 11/13, about 85%. An improvement for sure, but an improvement of about 8% when going from +2 to +3, compared to the improvement of 31% when going from 1 to 2. Now lets do the same experiment with skull at -3. At +1 over the difficulty, your chance to pass is again 46%, I would not attempt the check here. At +2 over the difficulty, your odds are now 8/13, about 62% to succeed. This is above 50%, but it's still borderline. Some people might attempt the check here. A situational call, how badly do you need what you are going for? Is it worth the risk? Personally, I would probably not. Because... At +3 over the difficulty your odds improve to 11/13, 85%. For 1 more resource/icon/stat boost you improve your chances by 23%, a large boost. I would most likely take a resource or a card and attempt to secure the +3 over the difficulty attempt on my next try, or try to draw into something to improve my engine, rather than trying the 62% chance. TLDR: be up enough that you can succeed on the Special tokens, your odds improve the most that way. Hope that helps!
  8. if that's how you feel, then frankly, this entire thread just isn't for you.
  9. Some contentious picks on my list, for sure. But, what no one has tried to do yet is come up with their own bottom 5 (or 6) list. I read lots of comments saying "oh, the worst investigator is this, or it's that..." -in almost every case, these choices were on my list as well, of course- but I havent seen a full list of 5 or 6. What you'll probably find, as I did... is that it's not that easy to come up with. It's much easier to come up with 1 investigator who you dont like for whatever reason and say, well it's them. So my challenge to you, to anyone who is foaming at the mouth about my inclusion of Rita, or Carolyn is this: Come up with your own bottom 5 list. Think about the role of each character, the meta, the general usefulness of each character, and tell me... who deserves to be on the list instead. If you don't agree that Carolyn or Rita or Pete is bottom 5... then there must be another investigator who I didn't include that takes their spot instead. I think you'll find as I did that most investigators have some redeeming qualities, and you'll be thinking to yourself -oh, they don't deserve to be on the bottom- or -well, I had a really good game with this person- or -well, they were good in this campaign-, but when you're really pressed.... you still have to put 6 people on that list.
  10. I think if we are willing to say that there are good or strong, or powerful investigators, then it only follows logically that there are weaker ones too. Change the question to "Which investigator is the hardest to build a good deck for?" if you like. The essence is the same. With that said, here are my picks for the top 5 worst investigators, starting with... A (dis-) Honorable Mention: Lola Hayes. Lola gets dishonorable mention for being the only investigator on this list I have not actually built a deck and played with. I couldnt bring myself to put her in the top 5 worst for that reason. However.... there is also a reason I have not built a deck with her. Lola is a deckbuilding nightmare and while some people might feel up to the challenge, I really don't. Lola also generally wants to take all the good cards from all the classes, making her a bad partner for those who share a card pool with their group. Lola has mediocre stats, poor health and sanity, and no access to higher level cards. She only makes up for it in jank. Number 5: Carolyn Fern. Well, I'm sorry to say she does make my list. Coming in at #5 is Carolyn who suffers from an extremely poor class choice. Carolyn's stats say she wants to be a seeker, her medic role says she wants to be a survivor, but she got classed as Guardian. Most of the higher level guardian cards are utterly useless to Carolyn, making her very difficult to level. Add to that that healing is just not something you need that much of. Typically, characters include enough self-heal or soak to keep themselves alive throughout a scenario, leaving Carolyn's entire schtick somewhat superfluous. With no access to the higher level seeker cards she suffers from not being able to get clues fast enough, or team-support well enough. She can't fight, or even evade, and Rational Thought puts the brakes on the one thing she's supposed to be good at doing. Oddly, despite being a Guardian class, she almost always finds herself in need of being protected. I did enjoy playing her and she could contribute somewhat to the team, which is why she only comes in at number 5, but at the end of the day.... you probably should have picked a seeker instead. Number 4: Skids O'Toole. Skids used to be the only investigator with access to both Guardian and Rogue cards, which was a fun little combo. But he's not anymore. Skids has 2 main problems, firstly his low(ish) fight score. Being a rogue/guardian, a 3 combat is just pretty low if you want to be slaying monsters. And beyond that, if you are trying to use him as a monster slayer, his best stat -agility- often goes unused. With the release of some nice Rogue guns, he can still pack a bit of a punch, but he compares unfavorably to most other slayers. His other major problem is his low willpower and low sanity. A rotting remains can easily take away half his sanity pool in one fell swoop, and he can't really back himself up with Liquid Courage since that relies on willpower to be efficient. He can now pack Something Worth Fighting For, and that helps to keep him alive, but he still has a tough time. His weakness is pretty annoying as well, and his signature strength has got to be one of the worst signature cards in the game. More often than not, I ditch On The Lam for its icons. Feels bad... Number 3: Rita Young. We're assuming you're not doing the Rita-infinite-combo here. I suffer from not knowing what I'm supposed to be doing with Rita. Her intellect is terrible, her combat is mediocre, no access to any good weaponry to help out with that. All she really does is evade very well. But evasion just isn't something that is all that helpful when compared to murdering stuff. Sure, on occasion in the Forgotten Age or so there are times when you'd rather evade than fight, but in general... Rita doesnt do enough to pull her weight. I did play Rita with a bow and found her to be okay... but I ran into problem after problem with being out of arrows at the wrong times, forcing me to waste actions to evade, reload, and attack. Rita is the first of this list to suffer from a simple issue: the survivor card pool. On its own, survivor cards just arent good enough. They can be great when combined with other classes, but when you are restricted to a pool of almost exclusively survivor cards, you have problems. In the survivor pool you find yourself very hard-pressed to find a decent weapon, or a way to get lots of clues easily. With no access to high level cards, Rita falls behind pretty fast. If all that wasn't bad enough, Hoods is a brutal weakness that Rita has a lot of trouble dealing with by herself. Her signature strength, I'm Done Runnin', is also weak. This is very reminiscent of Skids, at #4. It's easy to get Rita up to so much Agility she is an absolute ninja, but the problem is simply that that isn't good enough. Number 2: Ashcan Pete. Again, we are looking at Survivor problems. Pete's card pool is limited to exclusively Survivor + Neutral+ 5 other level-0 cards. It's not good enough. This alone drops him to #2. No good weapons, no good way to secure clues, especially at higher XP levels. Duke can make up for it a bit, but once bigger damage numbers are needed, Duke doesn't cut it. And if Duke ever gets knocked out, Kidnapped, or whatever, Pete finds himself in a lot of trouble. While Pete is a decent solo character because of his ability to both fight and find clues at least a little bit (though he's not the only investigator who can do this), on teams he is a liability. Even with Duke around, he struggles to get the raw numbers he needs to hit a high-combat enemy, or find clues at a high-shroud location. This is getting to be more and more of a problem as things like Retaliate and Haunted start to show up more. Number 1: Calvin Wright. It's hard to argue that it is a difficult task to make an effective Calvin deck. He has to be on death's door to before his stats are anything good, and you spend most of your deck slots trying to mitigate this crippling weakness of his terrible statline, rather than doing anything good. Your deck is going to be stuffed full of cards to try to keep Calvin alive, and cards to try to get calvin to the point where he has 4-5 stats in everything. You're left with a deck with very little useful deckspace. On top of that, add Survivor Problems. No good weapons, hard to get multiple clues, hard to spend XP on somethat that improves Calvin in a meaningful way. Calvin takes a very long time to set up, and once he is set up, he still has to be able to somehow make use of the statline you worked so awfully hard for. Any scenario where you need to move fast, deal with an early monster, or get early clues, Calvin is pure dead weight. Oh, and his weakness gives trauma. Are you kidding me? Even if by some miracle everything seems to be going well, a single mythos card, a bit of bad luck, and its TKO for this guy.
  11. late to the party on this one so I will pass on most of my opinions, as similar things have already been stated by other community members. I will add though that I played with a couple of these cards today for a few games. My wife was playing a seeker and eventually got up to 2x Studious. She seemed pretty impressed, she likes permanent cards in general, and enjoyed having more options out of the gate. She also pointed out that a selective mulligan of 7 cards is much stronger than a selective mulligan of 5 cards, so you're nearly guaranteed to have a lot of what you want in your opening hand. Synergies with Tarot cards also were very nice. For my own deck, I had an opportunity to give the Mk1 Grenades a try in Zoey. I really liked them. We were playing 2 player and did the scenario The Secret Name, in which multiple enemies spawning at your location can be a common occurrence. The grenades were great, cheaper than a flamethrower, slotless, and very nearly as effective. I got them up to a a pretty staggering ammo count after dumping a few extra on them with Venturer and then playing Contraband. I used almost all of them. They are also an undeniably fun card. Every time I tossed a grenade and blew through a bunch of enemies it was amazing. Really handy against aloof enemies. Let me reiterate that slotless is very good on this card. Sometimes you have a weak enemy (or several, the more the better!) hanging around but you really dont want to use an ammo off of your shotgun or lightning gun to deal with them. A grenade is a wonderful answer, so in an indirect way this card helps you keep your big guns stocked with ammo, since the weaker enemies can be grenaded and the stronger ones hit with a shotgun/lightning gun. Card performed beyond my expectations.
  12. Esoteric Atlas: Sure, you might not have Pathfinder. But if the only defense of this card is "What if you don't own Pathfinder?" Then I think my point is made. KiP: Well, I did point out that in some cases, mainly when you can use it for shriveling, it might be worth it because of its fast action, primarily because there are some situations where dealing big damage to a powerful enemy quickly is something you very much want to do. That was pretty much the single exception I listed, so no... I'm not overlooking any of that. I'm standing my ground here. Other than that.... This one-time use card just isn't worth 1/15th or 1/30th of a deck.
  13. Nice write up, can't say I always agree, but I've not played with them. Here are my first impressions Warning Shot - 3/5 I do like the idea of spending an ammo to flush a non-hunter enemy into a location that you don't have to deal with them. Also, It doesnt matter *what* ammo you spend, just 1 ammo. So an ammo off of your cheap .38 colt or .32 Derringer is just as good as a blast from a lightning gun. That makes the card a lot better. I think warning shot might get played in characters who want to run the weaker guns, like William Yorrick. Could be a nice card for the first couple of scenarios. Maybe getting replaced later on, but handy early campaign for sure. I like this. Telescopic Sight - 3/5 I'm rating this much higher than SamWeiss did, because it enables a new play style, a sniper build. And I think that's super cool. Guys, remember Marksmanship and how good it is? Well.... this is repeatable marksmanship. That seems super strong. Maybe strongest in 3-4 player where you can have this on a secondary fighter. Unfortunately the extra text of making the weapon unable to be used on enemies engaged with you anymore... stinks. Because of that, I just can't rate this any higher than 3/5. Knowledge is Power - 1/5 I can see an argument here for Jim to just smash somebody once with a level-5 shriveling as a fast action at 0 cost. Seems allright. On anybody else, 1/5. Even doing something like Panakotic Manuscripts, this just isn't worth a deck slot for a one-time use. Esoteric Atlas - 1/5 Number of time I want to move to a *revealed* location exactly 2 spaces away? Pretty much never. I'll tell you what, for the same cost in resources, the same cost in XP, in the same faction, and not taking up any slots, I'll just play Pathfinder instead and use it as much as I want. Seriously, why does this card exist when Pathfinder is superior in every way? One of the worst cards so far. Investments - 2/5 I dunno. I'll take Dario or Lone wolf over this. Maybe it's a replacement for Lone Wolf in a 4 player game, but it is much slower and the resources you get aren't immediately available. SamWeiss, you wrote: "Oh, and the card text reads: "Exhaust and discard . . ." Because . . . if you don't exhaust it before discarding something happens? Hmm . . ." Actually this is rather important. Otherwise I could exhaust the card, add a resource to investments (say, bringing it up to 10) , and then use the action on investments to take the money. Since I can't exhaust the card again, I must wait until the next turn to take my money. This delays the card's payoff an extra turn. Decoy - 2.5/5 I'm sure Preston will get a lot of use out of this. I played the similar Cunning Distraction and found it to be very good in his deck. Might be a nice Wendy card too, if she can bank enough resources with drawing thin. Anyone else though... meh. De Vermis Mysteriis - 3.5/5 This is... pretty cool. Right at this moment I am not sure how best to take advantage here. But I am sure it can be done. It turns all your "event" spells into repeatable spells. Or you could play Drawn to the Flame like... a LOT. I dunno. Seems like all sorts of jank is enabled here. I love that. But like I said, right now I am not sure exactly the best use of this. Guiding Spirit - 2/5 I dunno. Competing hard against Peter Sylvestre here. I just don't know how useful the +1 lore is on a survivor? Who likes this? Fortune or Fate - 3/5 This seems to be directly reflective of your opinion on exile cards. If you like them, Fortune or Fate seems like a really nice one to have. If you don't.... you're not going to be including this. Therefore I am rating it somewhere in the middle. Personally I dont like the exile mechanic too much.
  14. I am in agreement, after playing with it quite a lot. I'm not entirely sure that "not game breaking" is the bar that we need to be setting, but there it is. Currently I am playing it in Preston. Since he rarely needs the resources I am usually using it as card draw. I'm playing Carcosa campaign so: no haunted, maximum brokenness. I also am running Rabbit's foot, so with everything down I can draw 3 for an action. I'm not using Take Heart or Live and Learn. It's very useful to have since I tend to quickly deplete my hand with everything that I'm playing, and of course I can search for answers. My Preston relies on Intel Report, Look What I found, and Lola to get clues, so it's important to be able to dig for those. But perhaps it's even more powerful in someone else. 2 resources are generally speaking more powerful than 1 card, just not for Preston. Back to my experience, it's very strong, but it's not like it makes the game un-loseable. In fact, I even sort of lost a scenario once because of it. I was at like 2 remaining horror with a Moment of Respite in my hand, took my first action to use drawing thin + rabbits foot to draw 3 (looking for some help for a team mate who was in a spot), but pulled Stubborn Detective, which I was unable to evade or kill. I could easily take his damage, but it meant I couldnt play my Moment of Respite. Pulled Horror damage on the next mythos card and was defeated. D'oh. Ok, sure I admit that's a corner case and most of the time it's well worth it, I just thought I'd share an amusing story. Fact of the matter is still that it's very undercosted. At 0, it's a no-brainer for anyone who can take it. The value of the card is far beyond what it costs. It's not game-breaking... but it's far, far ahead of the bell-curve. Maybe it's that way because the designers felt that Survivor class needed some help (I certainly do). Currently it's super-strong. If any card (post-taboo list) is too strong, I'd certainly say it's this one. At least by a cost/benefit analysis.
  15. Personally I only like Calling In Favors in decks that run seeker allies. The idea being to maximize their "comes into play" abilities. I have run Calling in Favors in Leo before, and haven't found it to be that useful.
×
×
  • Create New...