Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Soakman

  1. Can't wait. Finally the pupperinos have their day. Scoot over Ms. Doyle! 😛
  2. Yes, the older books were tied to the characters (but they're not canon as far as the LCG is concerned). It's the new novels that aren't tied to existing characters (from Aconyte publishing) as far as we can tell. I know that of the old books, Ghouls of the Miskatonic had Rita and Amanda. One of them also had Diana and Mark. I never read Signs of Glaaki, but the description mentions Houdini and Dennis Wheatley as the author an escape artist so I don't know who is in that one as far as characters go.
  3. Nice! Happy to see Patrice making her way into the fold.
  4. Thanks, those are great points. I entirely missed the 'charges' angle, which makes a great deal of difference.
  5. Yes, it'll be very interesting to see what they decide to do when they don't have to tailor their stories to pre-existing story beats or personality types. That being said, I do think the newer LCG novellas are supposedly being written with characters chosen by the authors rather than assigned to the authors. So at least they probably have some creative direction in mind. I'm interested to see the new novellas. I wonder if Dexter was technically one of the 'newer' batches.
  6. Neat, a few cards that I hadn't yet seen. The sophist brings... another way to add secrets to things (but no Mr. Rook unless you are charismatic or dual seekering...what else do we like secrets for)? I suppose with bless tokens coming, righteous only makes sense to be included. And, though I don't know what it does, I'm always down for some B&E shenanigans.
  7. Soooo I had no issues printing read or die, but for some reason, Skids pnp seems to only print one card per page. I cannot figure out what I'm doing wrong or how to scale them to be regular card size. Anyone have a clue?
  8. I would probably take Jacqueline if you are aiming for the secret scenario at the end. There are some tokens (I think tablets or elder things) that were very bad in the original. If that hasn't changed, she will masterfully circumvent those I imagine. They are something like -3 if you fail, place a doom or something, and there are at least 3 of them maybe 4 by then. And she'll obviously need backup. So either Winnie, Stella, or Cho. With the emphasis on evasion, I'd go with Winnie as rogues have some pretty great weapons available now if you need to put some enemies down.
  9. Those are good points. It could be mildly important in some contexts, but I always thought asset weaknesses went into your play area. But you're right; the Necronomicon does, in fact, state that it goes in your threat area. Now I'm curious if that is an exception because it says it on the card (and on the King in Yellow), but Baron Semedi does not make this distinction. It just says to put him into play as part of the revelation. But yes, I am still pretty sure you can assign Dendromorphosis damage.
  10. I'm definitely not trying to convince you, just sharing my opinion. But also, there is a leaked card that will help with this as well. I believe it is coming with Jacqueline.
  11. It's an asset, so despite being a weakness, I'm fairly certain it does not get placed into your threat area. I believe it goes into your play area. Otherwise, people could trigger weakness abilities such as the one on Daisy's Necronomicon despite it being an asset.
  12. Survival Knife (2) has really made me reconsider some things.
  13. Bandoliers are an excellent safeguard for one handed weapons. I don't guardian much, so that's a welcome solution as well. The blob didn't get my hand, just my (Agnes's) soul. 😁 Nobody could tell the difference.
  14. Right, but honestly, I wouldn't be worried. It's easy to get rid of, and it's not horribly efficient to play 2 sign magicks anyway as you're just dropping 6 resources for nearly no effect. I've used the beta version of this card, and if you get it, you have to adapt. Dexter can also take adaptable, actually, so just drop the sign magicks for something else. It's much more of a pain when you have no access to weapons or tools to investigate except by hand items. Even then, it makes you dump a card or two in play. It hurts, but you should develop strategies and upgrade paths to deal with it. It's easy to get rid of, and you can use it as an extra damage sponge, so it's not all bad. I'd rather have a damage sponge on a mystic who isn't using her hands anyway than nearly any other weakness. Depends on the deck and when you draw it.
  15. Much better on a mystic that can use arcane slots than your average guardian though. Imagine dropping your 5 Xp lightning gun.
  16. We just played both scenario 1 and 2, and I somehow missed that treachery encounters do not start in these decks (though we were still adding them after successful explorations!). I was so confused when I was supposed to add encounters from the expedition set when it is replaced by doomed expedition. No wonder it was so hard. We've lost both scenarios so far. Probably for this reason.
  17. Yes, I am quoting myself. Sorry 'bout it! Just an update, despite the USPS tracking, looks like I got mine today.
  18. My team covenant RttFA looks like it should be arriving Monday per USPS tracking. They have a notice on their page too that says shipping is taking longer due to COVID than their usual. To be expected.
  19. It’s half the level rounded up so it would be 1 clue, and you’d have to exile rite of seeking to remove the doom (otherwise it’s just the 1 clue) as I understand it. It’s not a terrible card by any means but it’s not great. The big miss for me is just theme because of the “reading” in the title of the card.
  20. Sure in some respect, but at least it’s still something you could physically throw with act of desperation. You can use burn after reading on any card... so what exactly does it mean if you are burning “brute force” after reading for instance? To me, it feels like the title of the card is referring to the physical card in hand, which you “burn” for the effect and breaks immersion. Just a nitpick but I don’t know if this was discussed at all because I wasn’t there. Again, conceptually interesting but leaves me a little bamboozled if I really think about it.
  21. This card feels a little too wonky to me if you compare it to Working a Hunch. It's really oddly conditional as you don't get clues at all if you target a lvl 0 card as far as I can tell. And for some reason, I can burn a lvl 1 ally for the effect, or an old hunting rifle, etc, which is at odds to me with the flavor involved in the name of the card. I hope the final version is a bit different when it makes its way into a released expansion/pack. I kind of like the flex, but it's a bit of a miss for me in general.
  22. I thought I read something about donations somewhere though in addition to that. I may be wrong. But my primary point was that people asked for it, so I wouldn’t call it a cash grab. Just don’t buy it if you don’t want it?
  23. It was an April Fools thing that people clamored about making a real thing. And they listened. Also, proceeds from purchases were going to an animal charity last I knew, so, no, not a cash grab.
  24. Team Covenant processed my Return to FA yesterday.
  • Create New...