Jump to content

PJimo

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    69

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by PJimo

  2. Posted

    Arcane Research is a much more no-thought, this-is-obvious-to-play card. It's incredibly helpful for Mystics to upgrade from their starting spells to the better versions. Rite of Seeking (2) is strictly better than Rite of Seeking. And Rite of Seeking (4) is nearly so with the additional resource being trivial. And Sanity is their strongest stat with a number of ways to heal it and soak it. The only question on a Mystic build is to whether to take 1 Arcane Research or live a little dangerously and select 2.

  3. Posted

    On 7/4/2019 at 4:17 PM, Allonym said:

    It's good for absolutely anyone who can take it. It's strictly beneficial no matter what your build, no matter what your investigator. There's no thought involved in how best to use it, or whether you want to replace one card in your deck with it, or whether you want to mulligan for it or keep it in opening hand, or whether it's worth playing before or after another card, or whether to use it now or later, or any of the other inherently interesting strategic and tactical elements to non-permanent cards. And in my view, that's really bad design.

    The opportunity cost is if it's beneficial enough to warrant spending 3xp. If it was 0xp you'd be right that it's strictly beneficial. But it's not. 3xp isn't something to consider lightly. 5xp cards are game-breaking. There's some very good 1xp cards. Every single Survivor card costs 3xp or less. Alter Fate can do away with any crippling card on the table: in front of you, in front of a teammate, as part of the Agenda, anywhere. A Will to Survive gives you a turn, regardless of how many actions you pile into it, without having to draw a token. 2xp gets Rogues 2 Tarots. Which, if drawn into the opening hand, can give them +1 Agility forever and on any test they choose without costing any other, regular slot. There is a trade-off. And that trade-off will force people to consider whether or not this card is worth it in their deck. And perhaps that answer changes depending on what other strategic or tactical decisions they've made with the rest of their deck and/or personal preferences. Obviously I'm not impressed with it. It would be a fringe card for me to buy with that xp. You think that it's wildly overpowered and worth double of the xp cost. I'd say that's a pretty decent design.

  4. Posted · Edited by PJimo

    On 7/4/2019 at 9:19 PM, C2K said:

    Another Day, Another Dollar is alright.  Its an auto buy for Preston, but its questionable for the other rogues that can purchase better cards for the XP. 

    Studious is pretty meh.  For that XP, I rather buy Feed the Mind if I'm looking for card draw. 

    Agreed. Trading an xp for a resource seems like the weakest way to spend it. It is a very minor benefit towards actually winning the game and an always available option. Sure, it's nice that it's in the beginning. And sure, it helps Rogues get into their sometimes expensive setup. And sure, you're guaranteed to get it. But still. It's 2 resources. It's not crazy game breaking. Lockpicks help you win the game. Lola Santiago helps you win the game. Skeleton Key helps you win the game. Pocketwatch helps you win the game. Ace in the Hole helps you win the game. Sure Gamble helps you win the game. Charisma helps you win the game. And there's good utility in Pickpocketing, High Roller, Lucky Dice, etc. 

    And Seekers have so many places to drop xp. So many. Studious has value later in the game once you've upgraded your deck with powerful cards that'll make a big impact. But it's in the last places I'd spend xp, not the first. If there's any Seeker cards which warrants an xp adjustment it's Pathfinder imo.

     

    Soakman reacted to this

  7. Posted

    On 5/10/2019 at 9:03 AM, Foxstone71 said:

    As a suggestion, perhaps offer a "Character Pack" including just the character cards from the Deluxe Expansion, so newer player can use those investigators with the Return To expansion. 

    FWIW the character cards are the easiest in the game to create your own proxies of. The Investigator card stays in front of you. So you just need to proxy their special and their weakness, which most of times are just 1 of each. Just print them off of arkhamdb. It's what I did to use Marie before she was widely available.

  8. Posted

    On 5/13/2019 at 5:01 PM, phillos said:

    Just skip to Carcosa OP.  It's a fantastic cycle and you can play the cycles in any order.  Dunwich will get reprinted eventually, but you'll drive yourself mad waiting (which would be thematically appropriate).

    One could say that Dunwich is unavailable and unseen.

  11. Posted

    I'm confused what you're saying. The Meat Cleaver does say what you inserted. It was just a copy/paste images thing on my part. And the relevant bit is the second sentence anyways.

    As an additional cost to initiate this ability, you may take 1 horror to have this attack deal +1 damage.
    which is worded exactly the same as the Enchanted Blade
    As an additional cost to initiate this ability, you may spend 1 charge to empower the blade. If you do, you get +1 [COMBAT] and deal +1 damage for this attack.

    I agree that it isn't consistent with how they've done it in the past.

    E.g., Fire Axe:  [Fast Action] During an attack using Fire Axe, spend 1 resource: You get +2  for this skill test. (Limit three times per attack.)
    M1918:  Action: Spend 1-5 ammo: Fight. You get +X  [Combat] for this attack. Instead of its standard damage, this attack deals X damage. X is the amount of ammo spent as part of this ability's cost.

    But the Cleaver and the Enchanted Blade from TCU are certainly consistent with each other.

  12. Posted

    9 hours ago, Faranim said:

    It is a bit odd though.  Prior to TCU, all of these such cards would use a quantifier such as:

    • If you do...you get +2 [COMBAT] instead...
    • If you do...you get an additional +1 [COMBAT]....

    Enchanted Blade is the first card to not use the word instead or additional and I guess the word additional is implied.

    I can see the argument. But it's basically the same as Meat Cleaver.

    Fight. You get +1  for this attack (+2  instead if you have 3 or fewer remaining sanity). If this attack defeats an enemy, you may heal 1 horror. As an additional cost to initiate this ability, you may take 1 horror to have this attack deal +1 damage.

  14. Posted

    Or say I'm swinging a weapon at a group of rats and I'm at +6 Fight. Ping Drawing Thin and take the test at +4 instead. Same chance of success. Free money or card.

    Basically I think of it as there's some cases where you're hopelessly (or close enough) that you're going to fail. And some tests that you're inevitable (or close enough) that you're going to succeed. All it takes is one of those for Drawing Thin to earn back its cost. And given that basically the whole game is taking tests it's not that rare to find one where +2 difficulty doesn't make a difference.

    And even better, Drawing Thin doesn't take a slot of any type.

  16. Posted

    18 hours ago, Buhallin said:

    And yet of literally 20 or so cards that you cited as counterexamples, all but I think 2 had ammo or charges.  Heck, you even went so far as to throw in multiple events and skill cards, which are the epitome of limited use.

    My counterexamples were to this

    On 4/30/2019 at 4:50 PM, Buhallin said:

    Guardians should be better, but should they do double the damage that everyone else does from the very beginning? 

    You just chose to blow up against a point that I wasn't making.

    As far as limited vs unlimited uses, it is a nice perk. One of the main reasons I'm so high on Timeworn Brand. But there are ways to minimize the drawback of limited uses. Survivors have Scavenging (and Yorick can pull out of the trash any Item as a reaction). Rogues have Sleight of Hand and Contraband. Mystics have Book of Shadows. Guardians have a whole slew of things. And everything has access to Emergency Cache. And there's always the option of just playing out another weapon.

    Machete is a good L0 weapon. It's not hands down the best L0 weapon. It has a nice perk. It has a disadvantage. Other L0 weapons also have nice perks and some disadvantages, especially the ones that just came out in the current cycle. The primary reason that Machete was such the goto is that in general the other L0 options weren't that great. And now there are some that are. I believe Arkhamdb is going to put in an option to use in your deck the Machete, 2xp version. I expect to see very, very few decks made with it. No matter how much you rant in here about how awesome it is.

  18. Posted · Edited by PJimo

    2 hours ago, Buhallin said:

    They do have several though, just not an unlimited one.

    I'm also not sure I agree with the base premise though.  Sure, Guardians should be better, but should they do double the damage that everyone else does from the very beginning?  Or should their strengths evolve and shine from the higher XP weapons?  I'd compare them to Seekers, who don't have a permanent way to get 2 clues an action (now that Rex has been hit, anyway) but can grow into cards that enable big multi-clue grabs.

    IMHO I think it's better - Guardian/Seeker has always been the go-to pairing, because each was so good at their primary role they more than made up for the other half having none of it.  Toning down those two out of the gate, while leaving them better and with the option to be the best once they evolve into it with some XP, weakens that best pairing a bit and makes playing the other classes less of a self-imposed handicap.

    We could debate to whether that's a better design until the heat death of the universe, although I think that discussion is impossibly colored by the fact that the ability existed previously - humans respond notoriously poorly to loss.  This entire discussion is colored by this from the very beginning - every one of these cards would be respectably good in their new versions, but half the people out there seem to be refusing to accept the changes.  If Machete(2) were the only thing released people would think it was a great pairing with Blackjack, and a great option because it removed the ammo limitation that damage-increasing weapons typically had.  But we've had it, take it away and everyone loses their minds.

    So riddled with errors.

    Baseball bat does 2 damage. Fire Axe does 2 damage. Shriveling does 2 damage. Enchanted blade does 2 damage.  .41 Derringer can do 2 damage. .45 automatic does 2 damage. Meat cleaver can do 2 damage. .45 Thompson does 2 damage. Colt vest pocket does 2 damage. Knuckleduster does 2 damage. Survival knife does 2 damage as a reaction. Backstab does 3 damage. I've got a plan can do 4 damage. Jenny's twin .45s do 2 damage. Joe Diamond's Colt does 2 damage. Roland's .38 special does 2 damage. Finn's .38 does 2 damage. How the duck does machete do double the damage everyone else? Literally every class has a way to do it. The majority of weapons do extra damage because that's why you'd use them.

    Seeker & guardian pairing are effective as much as much for the breadth of their cards as they are of the power of them. That when they draw their hands and draw through the game they know they're going to be able to do their job. Since every card in their deck be directed at it. Investigators flail when their hand won't let them accomplish what they want to do. Which happens with the joat builds sometimes. They need to kill something and draw all their clue getting cards. And out of the gate seekers have magnifying glass, Dr. Milan, fingerprint kit, connect the dots, working a hunch, deduction, true understanding, vantage point, shortcuts, flashlights, and high investigate in order to vacuum up clues. They can grow into even more absurdity but they start out as double the clue getter of any other class. 

    Machete at 2xp would only be gaga'ed by idiots who don't know of any other cards. Save up 4 and buy shotgun. Or save up 5 and buy Timeworn Brand. Or use the Thompson and spend 6 xp on stick to the plan to make it affordable. It's not that awesome. Really.

    Trying to drop back to armchair psychology to bolster an irrational argument is sad.

  19. Posted

    2 minutes ago, Buhallin said:

    And each has limited charges.

    It's not really hard to see the design thinking here, and no amount of "Well, I didn't use it in that one deck that could have so it's fine" is going to change that.

    The argument being put out is that Machete is such an awesome L0 weapon that it becomes the default for everything, and moots any interesting decisions. I would say that it's relevant that in the deck that I'm currently using I'm not even including it, much less deeming it the L0 weapon superior to all others.

    Yes. Each of the .45 and the EB have limited charges. Having put them into the card pool creates the exact type of interesting decision and deck construction that people have been saying is needed. The EB is a Relic. That matters sometimes, and may push it ahead of the Machete for some people and some campaigns. The .45 uses ammo, which matters for a lot of cards these days, and may push it ahead of the Machete for some people and some decks. The Thompson guarantees its extra damage and doesn't rely on being engaged with that, and only that, enemy to do it. And that may matter to some people and some campaigns. The Thompson is more expensive. That may matter to some people and for some decks. The Thompson takes 2 hands (which isn't always a bad thing). That may matter to some people and for some decks. And that's just the Guardian weapons.

    They didn't need to severely reduce the value of the Machete to encourage diversity and decisions. They had already done it by finally coming around with some decent and interesting L0 weapons.

  20. Posted

    15 hours ago, Iuchi Toshimo said:

    I mean, maybe I'm misinterpreting the tone here, but, it sounds like these totally optional rules that were introduced to essentially change default settings aren't for your playgroup in that case.

    Sure. And we've already decided that. But unless I'm misinterpreting things, this is a forum dedicated to talking about the game and a thread dedicated to talking about these specific changes.

  21. Posted

    10 hours ago, SamWeiss said:

    I think that's sort of the point. Which is to say, not reinventing gameplay, but just finding a new default.

    Or, and indeed, as you mention 3 different weapons, eliminating the default weapon altogether, and opening things up so there is no weapon is the default at all.

    And, as that goes, so other cards are not defaults either.

    As for the method being negative, with or without warrant, that's a bit different. And why I noted the potential for that list to be modified, including dropping the Machete (2) to a Machete (1) when the .32 Colt (2) becomes available.

    Well first, it's not the case that Machete is the current automatic default. Right now I'm running a Yorick deck that doesn't even include it. TCU introduced a number of good L0 weapons and three I mentioned have already made inroads in replacing it. Machete has been because the Guardian L0 alternatives just weren't very good. And it could stand in as a decent option until the Guardians paid xp for better options and would just leave Machete as the backup. The best L0 Guardian weapon will be .45 Thompson and the Enchanted Blade; yet more L0 weapons from TCU. And each have their own individual benefits & drawbacks which would already contest Machete as the preferred L0 weapon of choice.

    Basically, Machete had already lost its place as an automatic default due to the introduction of other, interesting L0 weapons. But to the extent that someone fears of a choice becoming most preferred, it's always going to be the case that some weapon gets included more in decks than others. And continually removing the leader doesn't solve that, it just moves it to something else. As something being most preferred isn't inherently a problem. And moving Machete to 2xp decreases the decision tree, it doesn't increase it.

    Machete (1) could be fair. But I still see increasing its xp as a solution looking for a problem. It's primary benefit is as being relied upon when xp isn't available and other options aren't in play.

  22. Posted

    All that'll happen is that something else like Enchanted Blade or Meat Cleaver or Baseball Bat will become the new default weapon. The gameplay hasn't become reinvented. It's just that 1 particular has changed. In an unwarrantedly negative way imo.

  23. Posted

     

    8 minutes ago, Buhallin said:

    I'm not sure how?  You said:

    26 minutes ago, PJimo said:

    I'm just going to ignore the extra xp now and altogether. But for future campaigns probably use the Mutated list of errata (including making the Key of Ys exceptional). 

    The thing is that you would want to use the Machete forever is when you don't have anything better to replace it with...

    its main advantage is having it when you have 0xp.

    I'm disagreeing with both these things pretty explicitly.  It's a one-handed increased damage weapon with a fight boost.  It's still a solid choice at 2XP with interesting advantages and limitations compared to the other weapon choices at 2XP, and I rarely replace it, rather supplementing it with other options.

    So yeah, pretty sure I'm not agreeing with any of that.

    Replace = replace in play, not replace in your deck.

    Its main advantage is being able to put it into play, and then not replacing it in play, when you have 0xp and haven't bought any better weapon. As you get other and better options which you would then play over it, its value diminishes. Its value would diminish further if you then have to spend 4xp to put into your deck the 2 copies you had previously been putting in for free versus something like a Shotgun or a Lightning Gun.

    So no. You misunderstood what I was saying. You weren't disagreeing with what I said.

  24. Posted

    2 minutes ago, Buhallin said:

    I disagree with this (and I know I've seen plenty of other discussion that I'm not alone in this).  A non-limited, one-handed, 2 damage weapon has carried lots of people all the way through the campaign.  At a minimum when I've added weapons as a Guardian it's always been on top of the Machete, never replacing it - I typically hope to have the Machete early and save the big guns for big fights.

    You're not disagreeing with me.

     

  25. Posted

    1 hour ago, SamWeiss said:

    Well, maybe when Return to Carcosa comes out, the Taboo list will be modified to reduce Machete (2) to Machete (1), or even just drop it off the list altogether.
    That's a benefit of an optional list that can be regularly modified.

    Of course it should be noted that it requires an action to replay the .32 Colt (2), something the Machete (any) does not require.

    I'm just going to ignore the extra xp now and altogether. But for future campaigns probably use the Mutated list of errata (including making the Key of Ys exceptional). 

    The thing is that you would want to use the Machete forever is when you don't have anything better to replace it with. But as soon as you have 5 or 6 xp, you generally do. So its main advantage is having it when you have 0xp. Having to pay xp for it destroys its value.

×
×
  • Create New...