Jump to content

varradami

Members
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Skip Arkham Horror, stick with Eldritch. My regular gaming group loves EH. We were very excited by AH (I preordered it) and loved a lot of the new mechanics - in many ways it was an improvement. Unfortunately, it's also horribly broken - at least at four players (YMMV if you play at different counts) - we played three of the four scenarios and got trounced in all of them. We put up a good fight, but all it takes is one gate burst in the wrong place and you're pretty much done. This game is just too much of a time investment for us to bother trying again. I had some slight hope they would try to fix it with the first expansion, but I don't see any mention of it so ... oh well.
  2. Excellent point, it makes sense now. :-) Thanks.
  3. The text of the encounter card Desecrated Soil reads (in part): A literal reading of this card suggests you could choose not to discard any cards at all, but that wouldn't make any sense (keep in mind there's no hand limit for encounters). The best guess I can make is you don't have to discard below five, since that would just cause you to draw again anyway - but I can't actually think of any way for you to have fewer than five cards before playing this. Anyone have any better idea? Is there any reason you would
  4. In the Quick Reference (back cover of the Rules Reference), under Hunter Actions, the Trade action is described as follows: "Choose a hunter in the same location. Then, secretly trade event cards with that hunter." [emphasis mine] In the rules on Trade (page 13 of the Rules Reference), it states "The two hunters can show each other their item cards and ticket tokens and give any of those cards and tokens to each other." [emphasis mine] This seems to be an error in the Quick Reference. (Note that Van Helsing's Leader ability does allow the trade of events - and only events).
  5. This is my biggest complain about Eldritch Horror. There's just no excuse. It's common to roll five or six dice in a single roll, and seven or eight isn't that unusual. Even then you're going to end up constantly passing dice around the table. I recommend purchasing a block of 36 12 mm dice. This gives enough dice for everyone to handle most of their rolls without passing them around, and they're small enough that they don't take up too much space. My group hasn't had any trouble reading them. These are the ones I bought: https://www.thediceshoponline.com/dice/1967/Chessex-Gemini-Black-Purple-36-x-d6-six-sided-dice
  6. Why would I be "offended" by this game? I expressed my unwillingness to purchase or play an RPG designed with the assumption that I would play as myself. If Fantasy Flight Games chooses to make that a core part of this game, then they don't get my money and I will play something else. But maybe other people will really love that decision and will happily give FFG their money, and the product will be very successful. I am disappointed they have chosen to go that direction, but it doesn't offend me, and it wouldn't affect my decision to buy other Fantasy Flight products.
  7. Why is it that whenever someone makes a complaint about an RPG, someone feels the need to say, "no one will force you to play that way", or "go play some other RPG"? If that's all you can come up with, you have nothing constructive to add to this conversation. They're not "recommending" it. That is the way the game is designed. Since we don't know much about the rules at this point, there's no way to tell how much work would be involved in playing differently.
  8. What are you basing that assumption on? Here's what Fantasy Flight has actually said (emphasis mine): Nothing I've read suggests that playing yourself is intended to be optional, or that they will provide support for other options. It would make sense for them to do so, but according to the material they've released this won't be the case. Is there something I've missed?
  9. I addressed this in the last paragraph. Everything is always at the discretion of the players and the GM - everything and anything can be house ruled. I could write my own post-apocalyptic game if I wanted to. But I am talking about the Rules As Written: anything else requires additional work and agreement among the group. It seems odd to me they would choose to constrain the game in this way. I have absolutely no problem with them presenting "play as yourself" as an option for those who would enjoy that. But why not equally support other options? Surely the themes of these games would work just as well if the PCs are all workers in the same office, or sharing a college dorm, or happen to be sitting in the same diner when sh*t goes down, or any number of other scenarios. Again, I'm sure you could make these rules work with such scenarios. But all the information I've seen so far is unequivocal in declaring that you are playing yourself sitting down to play roleplaying games.
  10. Lets see ... I can roleplay out the decision of whether to wait until my insulin runs out and die slowly and unpleasantly, or kill myself and end it quick. I'm sure that'll be a fun session. Of course, even if I weren't diabetic, I have no skills that would be of any use whatsoever in an apocalypse (unless I can upload a virus to take out the alien mothership). If the other players were smart they'd ditch my character right away - sounds like I'll really enjoy playing this game! I'm all for post-apocalyptic games where everyone plays an average schmuck; The Walking Dead is one of my favorite comics. I wouldn't even mind playing someone similar to myself. But I'd like to play someone who at least has as much chance of surviving as the guy next to me. I suppose some people wouldn't have a problem with this; but not only will I not buy this game, I would refuse to play it under any circumstances. I don't understand why Fantasy Flight would go this route. It could've been an option for those groups who would enjoy it, while leaving "play some other average schmuck" as the default option. Instead they've spoiled the whole product line by tying it to an obviously terrible idea. A shame. (Just to cover the obvious: yes, of course I could theoretically use the rules to create whoever I want. But unless the whole group plays that way it would essentially be cheating - and who wants to be the only guy at the table who isn't playing himself?)
×
×
  • Create New...