KrisWall

Members
  • Content count

    938
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About KrisWall

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Recent Profile Visitors

1,260 profile views
  1. I will add the comment for those who are not aware... FFG has a history of releasing the Lord of the Rings LCG Gencon standalones as Print on Demand retail packs. My local store has most of them. There is a very high likelihood that we'll see this as a retail product down the line, just like the much anticipated Labyrinth of Lunacy. Unlike LoL, this one is a 1-4 player standalone, so it should slot into a campaign just like Curse of the Rougarou and Carnevale of Horrors.
  2. I'm assuming that this will EVENTUALLY be available for general sale, like most of their other Gencon "exclusive" stuff. "Event registration closes at the listed event time. Participants will be free to form their own groups to play through the scenario, there will be support staff on hand to help put people into groups. The special Gen Con scenario deck "The Eternal Slumber" will be provided to each participant. Something strange is happening in Cairo, Egypt. Seemingly random victims all throughout the city have fallen into comas, leaving doctors baffled. When Jessie Burke comes to you desperate for help, you find yourself obligated to assist, even though you may never again wake from a night of sleep. In this special event scenario for Arkham Horror: The Card Game, 1–4 investigators must search throughout Cairo and the ruins of ancient Egypt in order to find a way to lift this curse… and in the process, unveil a sinister machination between two forces far beyond our comprehension." https://www.gencon.com/events/129372
  3. I tried to do the same. They got zeroed on their pre-order and then I asked them to order it again after release date when it was still in stock. They ordered it again and then got zeroed on that order. Super frustrating. I think it's because they're low volume on FFG LCG stuff, so the distributor prioritizes other stores.
  4. Sent you a PM. Thanks.
  5. Hey... I'm hoping you guys can help me. I live on the east coast of the US. I preordered To Fight the Black Wind from my local store only to find on release date that FFG's lone distributor zeroed the order. I went straight home to order from FFG's site to find that it was already sold out. Does anyone have a local store with these in stock? I'd be happy to pay you via PayPal or whatever if you're willing to buy one for me and ship it. Any takers? I just signed up for the Team Covenant subscription. I hate paying them for shipping and would rather buy from my local store, but it seems that FFG makes so few of these books that the subscription is the only way I can make sure I get one.
  6. 400 Point Rebels Tournament List

    400 points is super restrictive for the Imperials, given how expensive Vader is. Realistically, you're giving him Saber Throw and probably something like Force Reflexes to keep him alive while he slowly moves across the board. Let's call that 225 points. You're really looking at 175 points for the rest of the list. If you take even two units of Stormtroopers, you can't afford a unit of bikes. You're really looking at Vader and three barebones units of Stormtroopers with 43 points leftover for upgrades. I think you're better off calling the starter set a 500 point tournament. It gives you the ability to take everything in the starter along with reasonable upgrades. At 400, it's the starter with almost no upgrades for Imperials.
  7. Personal House Rules

    Exactly. If it was just house rules, I don't think anyone would have cared. It was more of a "I'm not changing any rules, I'm just interpreting the rules differently based on my interpretation of the author's intent... which directly contradicts the actual rules... which I'm not changing... even though I'm changing them." I didn't actually care about the house rules. I was challenging the interpretation of intent.
  8. Imperial Equivalent of Commandos?

    I could see us getting ISB Infiltrators as well. They could be a Special Forces unit. Free move at the beginning of the game. Built in Cover 1. Something like that.
  9. Personal House Rules

    Not only is it not official, but quite a few players simply don't follow enough random interviews, podcasts and blogs to see these sort of "oh yeah, we wrote that wrong" comments. If it's not in the RRG, it hasn't been fixed.
  10. Personal House Rules

    This is how I feel. I don't see an obvious reason why melee attacks WOULDN'T give suppression tokens. I'll need to check, but I think you can still rally and it would impact the whether or not you get the second action to aim/dodge in addition to what would presumably be an attack action. Panic would still cause you to break and run (or withdraw?). Unless I'm missing something, I don't see any game breaking mechanic issues.
  11. Personal House Rules

    I don't feel like I'm being hostile either. I'm also interested in the reasoning, which apparently won't be forthcoming.
  12. Personal House Rules

    I actually wouldn't dismiss it out of hand. You just haven't provided any actual evidence yet of why your opinion is correct over the written rules. You've provided some anecdotal evidence for the suppression bit, but only your own opinion for the aim and dodge bits. I can't dismiss out of hand what you aren't saying. It's one thing to say "I don't like how the rules are written, so I'm making a house rule". It's another to say "my opinion is that most everyone is wrong and that the authors actually intended for aim and dodge to only work with ranged attacks". The first I'm indifferent on. The second gets a challenge. WHY do you think you're opinion is correct? You have yet to provide any supporting evidence.
  13. Personal House Rules

    As I said, the only way we can know RAI is if the author opines. You have unconfirmed, anecdotal evidence that the author may have opined. If that's enough for you, awesome. It's definitely interesting, and if true, I'd expect to see an errata sooner than later. I would need to see something official and in writing before implementing a rules change. Do you have similar reasoning for your aim and dodge rules changes?
  14. Personal House Rules

    He's literally arguing what he thinks is the intent of the designers versus what is actually written. I'm not sure what thread you've been reading.
  15. Personal House Rules

    If he just said "hey guys, what do you think of these house rules", I don't think there would be an issue. Instead, he said, and I quote... "FWIW, here is a list of house rules I will be using." "Please note, I am not seeking to change the rules." "In fact I'm seeking to avoid including any value judgements." "... in my opinion..." "That's how I think..." "My opinion..." "I'm trying to be impartial and simply address the RAI." "I am looking at it from the rules structure standpoint, in order to discern the designer's intention." He may not be seeking to change the text of the rules, but he is seeking to change how they're interpreted. He also says that he's avoiding value judgments and then riddles his posts with value judgments. He's not trying to be impartial. He's trying to apply his opinion to a rules as written interpretation. He's also providing no backup for his "rule structure standpoint" inspection, instead only giving opinion. This is the issue I have. It's pretty much an indisputable fact that we can never, ever know the author's intent without getting a direct comment from the author in the form of an FAQ or designer's commentary type breakout. All we have are the rules as written, which need to be interpreted without preconceived notions (aiming only works for ranged attacks, dodging only works for ranged attacks, etc.). It's usually best to avoid RAI vs. RAW debates. They tend to go nowhere unless the actual authors are involved, in which case, they end immediately with an absolute answer.