Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
FrostyWolf

Unbalanced for investigators to win: Story 1, Objective A, Question 2B(spoilers)

Recommended Posts

Set up for story 1 says:

Cermony Room:

Nothing of interest, Sealed Door.

Garden

2B: Clue 1, Magical Lock

 

Sealed Door Says:

...the door simply will not open.

This door is locked.

 

Objective A says:

The keeper wins if the final Event card is resolved.

The investigators win if Walter (the named maniac) is killed.

 

Clue 1A says:

Reveal Objective.  The keeper then places Walter in any room. Walter is a maniac with +4 heath per investigator.

 

Picking A for question number 1 and B for question number 2 creates a senerio that is pratically impossible for the investigators to win from the get go.

 

The keeper wins when the last even card is resolved.  This means it is a race for the investigators to kill Walter before time runs out.  The problem is, Walter does not apear on the board till all clues are placed.

I have had games with 1-2 investigators where they don't even discover all the clues (and it is still possible to win, depending on the objective) 

For them to win here, this means the investigators have to discover all the clues (the last one being in the garden) just to get Walter on the board.  Then he is summoned with a large amount of health, and if he is placed in the Cermony Room, he is behind a unlockable door clear on the otherside of the Manison.  This makes a situation that is near impossible, if not completely impossible, for the invesigators to win at all.  If your playing with 1-2 investigators it's probably impossible.  with 3-4, it would only be possible if they had just happened to split up into two groups and one group just happens to be over near the Cermony room with some way (if there is a way) to open up the door, and ready to fight a mob that is going to have a obsurd amout of health that has to be killed in a limited number of turns. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This setup was the first runthrough I ever played, and I was Keeper. It isn't impossible, and while I do admit it was challenging for the Investigators, the fact you can only spawn Maniacs in Lone Investigator spaces (not even empty ones) made them all pile up on Walter. Also, keep in mine that the Lock cards are removed from the board once Walter is in play so even if everyone piled near the Garden, they could rush through it. Mythos/Trauma helped me some, but the team was smart enough to realize what abilities I could do each game and saved a lot of their Skill Points for when I needed them to fail most :/

It really comes down to knowing how the Keeper can spawn the Maniacs. If you stay in groups of 2, you are invincible to all non-event monsters (zombies being the exception). I suppose it also helped a Shrivel spell hit Walter for 7 out of his 22 health. A few stuns, cleanup and I was done.

Advice from me on all stories is to read each of the Keeper's Action cards. Since they are placed out so everyone can see them, you would know how his/her spawning is limited (aside from possible Mythos cards).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The making of this senerio near impossible has nothing to do with spawning other manics.  I did re-go over the senerio, and the locks do indeed go away when the objective is reavealed... which could possibly happen BEFORE walter is spawned.  The issue, while slighty less impossible, still remains the same.  In the current layout if investigators are in the garden when walter is spawned (where they would HAVE to be because thats where the last clue is) the amount of time it takes to cross the board combied with killing walter, even if there are NO obsticles (other monsters, etc) is simply to unreasonable for the investigators to have a proper chance of winning.  After revealing the final clue card, they would have a shortage of time already if they spent time exploring, or they would have a shortage or proper equipment to take out walter quickly.  Unless the invesitgators took just the right combo of starting invesitgators/equipment and revealed the clues very quickly while keeping someone (or two) near the cermony room, there simply is not enough time for the invesitgators to win this senerio with these choices. 

If you THEN add in the fact that there are the potentional for other enimies to be on the board, combined with mithos and trama cards, you are pretty much sealing the deal.  A lot of mithos and trama cards can stop the investigators dead in there tracks, and causing them to waste a round.  Also, staying in groups of two AND not having all your investigators in the garden when walter is revealed is impossible unless playing with 5 total people, or having someone playing more then one investigator.  I might add that with cards like Kelptomanic and the card that makes a player make a horror check when another player enters there room, you can even still split these groups up.

I simply feel that if Story 1, with 1A and 2B picked are played X times, the investigators total percentage of wins will be extremly low.

 

I have played the following games so far:

 

Story 1

2 players B, A, A

3 players A, B, B

3 players C, A, A


Story 2

3 players B, A, B, A

 

and every single game was extremly close either way.  Anytime one team won over the other there was a clear "/facepalm if only had I..." moment.

When we did Story 1 A, B, there wasn't even a contest.  Reading over and over the cards, placements and abilities, I could never really see there being a contest, unless your investigators have prior knowlege to what can happen durring that senerio, and even then, it is still no where near a 50/50 chance.  It is unbalanced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be great if someone started keeping statistical records of wins/losses with various investigators against various scenarios.

Tibs does this for Arkham Horror so that one can see statistically which Great Old Ones are harder and easier, which investigators more and less powerful etc.  (one can see his regularly updated reports linked from the AH section of board).

Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All right, did some more research into this specific set-up and came up with these stats:

(Keep in mind the game lasts 15 total rounds, since the second to last event adds one Time Token to the final Event card)

1. Keeper selects Story 1, choices 1A, 2B, 3A; these fit your setup Frosty, with clue #2 being the furthest from the characters.

2. Assuming players choose Investigators that group well together like the manual suggests, they would probably pick allies that pair nicely as groups (maybe 2 combat types, 2 intelligent types). Also assuming the players read the Keeper's Action cards, they know he can only spawn monsters in a lone Investigator space. That being said, the only thing they need to be worried about are room obstacles and Mythos/Trauma cards, and of course keeping an eye on the Keeper's threat to avoid a mass Urges/Maniac/Move combo. With this knowledge, you start the game. (This is also assuming that ALL player's read the rules of the game. I know I always like to know the rules of the game so I don't get cheated).

3. Assuming the players can easily understand clues, which aren't TOO difficult, they get Kitchen right away. Player 1 moves 3 to Dining, Player 2 does the same. Players 3 and 4 perhaps wait out in the hall, perhaps expecting the Keeper to spawn something with his cards or some story based thing. Group is well split, and are prepared to fight something. This split also stops the Urges from messing up players to much. I doubt the Keeper would move an Investigator into the clue room the first round since he doesn't have threat to spawn monsters, and just sets them up for next round. Overall the Keeper could do something this first round with his 1 Mythos and Threat, but it is really a long shot.

4. Keeper draws 4 threat. Has 5. Can't do anything but draw cards or save threat this round. Urges costs 2, which stops a Maniac spawn this round. Let's say he fills his hand with 4 of each, using 4 threat and discarding one Mythos because he started with 1. 1 turn ends. Investigators move.

5. Player 1 moves into Kitchen and gets clue 1. Which makes event number 1 almost useless except for the zombie in the hall who dies from burning if not dealt with. The Keeper has 1 threat, and since he can only play 1 Mythos card per player's turn, he can at most do some Horror, considering almost all the cards are Horror for this Story, and none can spawn monsters. Regardless of what Trauma or bad event befalls Player 1 (him being the example of course), Keeper is out of threat. Player 2 moves into to cover him. Players 3 and 4 understand the next clue and dart up stairs, ending in Hallway 2 outside of the Master bedroom. Since Keeper only had 1 threat, the most he can do is use Mythos cards that cost 0 threat, which the tests can hurt, but not really. More than likely the Investigators will be in the spots mentioned above, but not necessarily true.

6. Keeper goes, gets 4 threat. Again, best he can do is Draw cards, or move investigators (which I assume he cant move them through Locked Doors because that doesn't make sense in anyway and rules don't verify this). But if he moves them at least once, Maniacs are again out this round. Turn ends, 1 more event.

7. Players 1 and 2 move into the Foyer outside the Dining, and again, Horror and other ill happenings may befall these players, but very rarely (at least when I was playing this Story) does something just completely unlucky happen to the Investigators until later. Anyways, player 3 attempts puzzle into Master Bedroom. Lets just assume for purposes of making an example they pass the Lock test, and Player 4 passes the Puzzle, and gets Clue 2. You have clue 2 and are sitting on turn number 2 only, keeping in mind there are 15 total.

Overall, this example is assuming the Investigators play a perfect game, passing all Lock tests on their first attempt and then some. While this is very rare, it still shows that even if the Keeper saves threat and spawns a few monsters and moves Investigators, it isn't so much a problem if you split the team correctly. Don't get me wrong, there are MANY things that can happen, but as you said, most other Stories come down to a "If only I had.." This one is no different in my opinion. If depends how the cards are played, and how the Keeper plays as well. Still, sitting at turn 2 with 2 clues makes the Zombie the only threat in the hall, and assuming they leave the Bedroom by that point, Event 2 is useless as well. Overall, you have plenty of turns to reach Walter and finish him off.

Since most players play this Setup or Story 1 first, it's probably why it seems almost impossible, because it ALLOWS the Keeper to make a few mistakes here and there, but not always the Investigators because they race against time. Anyways, you are titled to your opinion of course, but I just feel this "Story" is meant to be easy on both sides, more so for Investigators.

UPDATE: If anything, Walter should only be allowed to spawn in "Empty Rooms", which according to the rules are "rooms without any Obstacle, Exploration or Lock cards." This would seem to balance it more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your entire senerio is bassed around player with 4 investigators for a full 5 person group, while I am saying the game is unblanced in groups of 1-2, tops 3 investigators.

Also, there are numerous things I would question in your senerio.

If your keeper has 5 threat, why isn't he doing anything first phase?  If he cant spawn a minion he would either uncontrable urges or get his FREE trauma + mithos, not blow them all on cards forcing himself to discard one.  He wouldn't leave him self with one threat.  Also, a TON of mithos cards cost 0, meaning it is obsurdly easy for the keeper to play mithos cards as long as he has any, followed by the corisponding trama card provided they fail the roll (if they get one.)

Out of all the games of this I have played with all the diffrent people I have played, I have never had a situation where the investigators are DASHING thru the house unimpended by anything from clue to clue getting them all in the bare min number of turns.

You are literaly discribing the ONE time the investigators would win that I have allready mentioned (just in more detail).  This still, has nothing to do with the overall balance of said senerio.

I have to read the card again, but im pretty sure the fire on the flaming zombie does not do damage till the zombie is hit once and it is dropped in the room.

Also, to guy asking about keeping stats, I currently am in a book.  I mark:


Date played, Story played, players played with, questions picked, who wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, a fire token ON the flaming zombie wouldn't hurt the zombie. Fire tokens only do damage when placed in rooms, and no where in the rules/card does it say he'll take damage for holding one (only if he is standing in a flaming room at the end of the player's turn). Basically you use the zombie as a moving threat of fire, which becomes much worse if they actually attack him. I used the flaming zombie to get a sample back to my altar, for instance (although I was playing the movement card wrong, so take that with a grain of salt).

 

Also, I don't see a ton wrong with the investigators splitting up a little in this scenario. Only 1 maniac can be on the board at any given time, and they don't move horribly fast. A full grab (spawn, grab sample, move) costs a hell of a lot of threat. Maybe I'm not as analytical as the rest of you, but in my group (3 players) they decided to only send 1 person out to the garden, while the rest stayed relatively close to the foyer, as all paths lead through there for my sample grabs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I acutally just got a email from Corey Konieczka (!) about this, and he says that while they didn't see any paticular issues in play testing, the investigators for this paticular senerio just have to find the clues FAST.  He goes on to suggest that if it contunes to be a problem, place Walter in the operating room when he is summoned.

 

Next time I run this senerio with a small group I'll a hint about finding the clues as quick as possible I guess, and see where it leads. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We ran this exact setup for our first game, and this exact thing happened (2 players, 1A, 2B, didn't find clue 3 till after the 4th time card was revealed, placed Walter in that room.)

The sealed door is not an issue as it is a lock card and is discarded once the 4th time card is revealed.  The issue is that it is impossible time wise to even get to Walter in 3 turns from the garden.

I was the keeper, and the players found the first 2 clues fairly quickly, and then wasted a lot of time just killing maniacs instead of going after the last clue (which they had figured out the location of)

I think an interesting solution would be to place a ladder between the basement landing and the garden.  Then, no matter where he is placed, nor which option is selected for question 2, the players SHOULD be able to get to him with atleast one turn of attacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kanageddaamen said:

We ran this exact setup for our first game, and this exact thing happened (2 players, 1A, 2B, didn't find clue 3 till after the 4th time card was revealed, placed Walter in that room.)

The sealed door is not an issue as it is a lock card and is discarded once the 4th time card is revealed.  The issue is that it is impossible time wise to even get to Walter in 3 turns from the garden.

I was the keeper, and the players found the first 2 clues fairly quickly, and then wasted a lot of time just killing maniacs instead of going after the last clue (which they had figured out the location of)

I think an interesting solution would be to place a ladder between the basement landing and the garden.  Then, no matter where he is placed, nor which option is selected for question 2, the players SHOULD be able to get to him with atleast one turn of attacks.

 

Yes, I feel the same way. As happy as I am to get a response from Corey himself, I still feel this isn't a fair senerio.  The suggestion for the investigators to just rush thru it faster seems a little harsh.  Epesically with a 1-2 investigator group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, after 2 plays (once as investigator and once as Keeper, so admittedly a small sampling of scenarios and objectives) it seems to me like the investigators' #1 priority should always be revealing the clues as quickly as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I completely agree.  Just played one game so far, but it was this scenario.  My game group is typically three players so it was two investigators.

They followed the clues pretty well.  Only went into one closet that they didn't need to go in to, so they were making pretty good time.  However, by the time they revealed the last clue they were both in the garden and there was 5 turns left (though this was technically 4 as the second to last event ADDs a time piece marker).  It would take 4 turns of running just to get across the board to where I placed Walter, if I did nothing as the keeper.  And naturally, I would still be able to do mythos cards and Uncontrollable Urges to move them back a space and slow them down.  After counting the spaces they just gave up and didn't even attempt it because it was impossible.

Unfortunately it kind of turned them off from the game because they had done well and "gotten" all the clues thus far and followed it where they were supposed to.  Their reward?  They lose anyway.

I hope next week I can convince them to try it again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well like I said, changing the text on the Clue #1 where Walter can only spawn in Empty Rooms might change things. Only can spawn in Rooms that investigators entered, which I would only blame myself for not expecting something to happen in previous rooms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After looking at the board, this is what I see:

The investigators have 16 turns until the final event card is drawn.

Assuming the farthest positions of laboratory, bedroom, and garden there are a total of 18 spaces of movement to get all 3 clues, and another 12 to get from the garden to the ceremony room, for a total of 30. If we assume the investigators are running for at least half the time (which they should be doing), they can do 18 spaces in ~7 turns, and 12 in ~6 turns. That is 13 turns, leaving 3 turns to kill Walter, which isn't too bad. A little tight, certainly.

Of course, the investigators could move faster, or leave some investigators in the foyer which is only 6 spaces away, which would give them a few more turns. If they move slower to find the clues, they might have a few fewer, so it probably balances fairly close to 3 turns. That seems fairly balanced, actually. Yes, it can be tough, especially for smaller groups.

From my limited plays, though, it certainly seems like the investigators generally want to get the clues as fast as they can, and rarely stop to try to grab extra cards. This is probably especially true for smaller number of investigators.  Minimum time for this scenario is ~11 turns, leaving 5 turns, which is pretty doable if the investigators make the effort.

Again, yes, it's a tougher selection of scenario options than some of the others. Not all will be as easy for the investigators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I am concerned this evolve like Descent scenarios :(

That is you have very small chances of winning the scenario the first time you play it. 

And this peculiar scenario is not different, especially as it would be better for the investigator to split in order to be able to reach Walter faster while the rule book specifically advice them not to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ivan Kerensky said:

 I am concerned this evolve like Descent scenarios :(

That is you have very small chances of winning the scenario the first time you play it. 

And this peculiar scenario is not different, especially as it would be better for the investigator to split in order to be able to reach Walter faster while the rule book specifically advice them not to.

Honestly, I feel this game is designed to make players lose, much like many Arkham Horror games. I play with about 2-3 others in AH, and we always get raped. There isn't even a contest half the time, and maybe it's because we are seriously that unlucky, or that we just that terrible. Don't know..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is an optional rule to prolong the game. Before you flip over the last timed event card you roll a die, on a one or two you don't flip it over (of course if you want to make it longer still set it at a higher number and then lower it by one each turn)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of you that havn't played with small groups (1-2 investigators) rushing thru the house leaves them horribly unequiped at the end of the game. 

When you play with a full party, you have investigators that get to use there action on anything they want, simply because there isn't anything else to spend it on.  With a small group, they are generally using it on flipping over the next clue or running to the next clue.

On top of this, you only have 2 investigators, meaning you don't have the big varity from have 4. 

The keeper gets one free trauma and mithos a turn if he wants to only draw cards, so even with only 1 threat, he can stock up.

With only two investigators, mithos and trauma cards can be hell.  I rarely see a game where one investigator is near 0, running around afraid of door knobs or what not, leaving only one solid investigator left.

This game is fairly balanced on most senerios.  In fact, out of our 10 plays so far, I have 5 investigator wins, 5 keeper wins.  It is not leaning towards keepers always winning, as this would not be fun.  It is diffrent when the BOARD game is sposed to beat you all the time, like in AH.  But no one wants to play a game where 1 player always win based on who calls keeper first.

@dvang  In your break down, if I read it right, are you saying that if invesitgators manage to flip a clue whenever possible and run everywhere, they only have 3 turns to kill walter?  Because there are easly enough mithos cards to make players waste 3 turns, never mind horror/evade checks on other monsters and trauma cards.  Even with 3 turns, killing walter in that amount of time with a Tommy Gun is a feat in its self considering his health, and the fact that HE CAN STILL MOVE.  Meaning he could just take off in a random direction and have other monsters block his path.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FrostyWolf said:

@dvang  In your break down, if I read it right, are you saying that if invesitgators manage to flip a clue whenever possible and run everywhere, they only have 3 turns to kill walter?  Because there are easly enough mithos cards to make players waste 3 turns, never mind horror/evade checks on other monsters and trauma cards.  Even with 3 turns, killing walter in that amount of time with a Tommy Gun is a feat in its self considering his health, and the fact that HE CAN STILL MOVE.  Meaning he could just take off in a random direction and have other monsters block his path.

Guess you just have to get cards that luckily give you stun. In fact, those stun combat cards with the spells we had (which I highly recommend a spell caster in game) stopped the Shog. from doing anything during the 2nd scenario.

Another reason the Investigators on a different run through lost the game is because I eliminated Joe (their only combat) during the final 3 turns. I luckily drew 2 Trauma cards (one that causes him to roll for horror checks in those Basement spaces, and luckily drew the instant Horror kill Trauma when they reach 0. No one could cast spells, and someone else after Joe died failed a test where their weapon was dropped in the space, meaning I had 2 unarmed attacks on Walter during the final few turns.

Like I said, it comes down to an "if only" moment or the luck of the draw. In all, if you feel a scenario is imbalanced, then don't play it with fewer Investigators and expect to win. You can't balance every scenario to fit any amount of players (2, 3, 4, or 5). Some are just better with a group, which makes them near impossible to win solo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Frostywolf

I agree it seems difficult for 1 or 2 investigators to win this set of options. If they played things well, they could get as much as 5-6 turns. 3 seemed to be a decent average accounting for Keeper delays, desire to pick up a few things on the way, and difficulty with a lock/puzzle.  With only 1-2 investigators the choice of *which* investigator becomes critical. Honestly, there are probably only a few investigators you could take. You *have* to have someone with a weapon, whether it is an actual gun or a spell. Besides that, you kind of need a decent Intellect of about 6 or more to finish puzzles in a single turn.  Gloria (w/bind monster), Harvey(w/shrivelling), or Joe Diamond are the only investigators that come to mind that can fulfill both of those (although I might have missed someone). Pete might work, as with a good strength and dex he can either attempt to use his hands (or axe/crowbar/etc if he finds one), or with his good dex he can evade fairly well and just try to avoid most monsters until the end.

Unfortunately, it's just nearly impossible to equally balance every scenario for every investigator and variable number of investigators. Some options will be more difficult than others. As the Keeper, you have a choice of where you place the Maniac. You could choose to make the game interesting by placing the Maniac elsewhere, or knowing the options, choose the basement instead of the garden. Just like the player has a choice of which investigator they start with. If they choose McGlenn, for example, they are handicapping themselves dealing with puzzles. That was their choice, and makes the game more difficult.  Perhaps they *wanted* a more difficult game by choosing as they did.

As suggested, you could also implement the random end roll option, to add an element of uncertainty.

<shrug> I would honestly probably recommend trying to play with ~4 investigators always, even if that means a single person running 2 or 4 investigators each. There is just more for everyone to do that way, and the scenarios are a bit more balanced.  The investigators can really hamper themselves by character choice in lower count games.  I played a game with 6 people (5 investigators) and it played just fine, purely with the single additional threat for the extra investigator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dvang said:

@ Frostywolf

I agree it seems difficult for 1 or 2 investigators to win this set of options. If they played things well, they could get as much as 5-6 turns. 3 seemed to be a decent average accounting for Keeper delays, desire to pick up a few things on the way, and difficulty with a lock/puzzle.  With only 1-2 investigators the choice of *which* investigator becomes critical. Honestly, there are probably only a few investigators you could take. You *have* to have someone with a weapon, whether it is an actual gun or a spell. Besides that, you kind of need a decent Intellect of about 6 or more to finish puzzles in a single turn.  Gloria (w/bind monster), Harvey(w/shrivelling), or Joe Diamond are the only investigators that come to mind that can fulfill both of those (although I might have missed someone). Pete might work, as with a good strength and dex he can either attempt to use his hands (or axe/crowbar/etc if he finds one), or with his good dex he can evade fairly well and just try to avoid most monsters until the end.

Unfortunately, it's just nearly impossible to equally balance every scenario for every investigator and variable number of investigators. Some options will be more difficult than others. As the Keeper, you have a choice of where you place the Maniac. You could choose to make the game interesting by placing the Maniac elsewhere, or knowing the options, choose the basement instead of the garden. Just like the player has a choice of which investigator they start with. If they choose McGlenn, for example, they are handicapping themselves dealing with puzzles. That was their choice, and makes the game more difficult.  Perhaps they *wanted* a more difficult game by choosing as they did.

As suggested, you could also implement the random end roll option, to add an element of uncertainty.

<shrug> I would honestly probably recommend trying to play with ~4 investigators always, even if that means a single person running 2 or 4 investigators each. There is just more for everyone to do that way, and the scenarios are a bit more balanced.  The investigators can really hamper themselves by character choice in lower count games.  I played a game with 6 people (5 investigators) and it played just fine, purely with the single additional threat for the extra investigator.

I argee.  KNOWING all this before hand would make it more balanced, cause the invesigators can pick te right choices, but the game sets up in a way where they have no idea that what the senerio is going to be.

One of the suggestion for fixing this problem I sumbitted was that each senero comes with a Suggested Min amount of investigators listed on it.  That way, players can pick more then one investigators each to make up missing players when playing senerios like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FrostyWolf said:

 

 

I argee.  KNOWING all this before hand would make it more balanced, cause the invesigators can pick te right choices, but the game sets up in a way where they have no idea that what the senerio is going to be.

 

 

This isn't necessarily true. I payed attention to all the text that was read in the introduction when I was the Investigator on this mission (my first time playing as well), and I got the fact that Walter's wife died, and he was going insane. I concluded he was either dead from going insane, or knowing H.P Lovecraft, going insane usually meant crazy happenings. That being said, I assumed he was either someone we encountered during the run through because we were "searching" for him anyways as a business client.

Top that with the fact that the rules even say when the last event card is resolved, the game ends. Which either meant I won or the Keeper won. The rules also say there are 5 event cards in each deck, and I don't see what is stopping me from looking how many turns we get in the game before the game ends.

Still you are correct when saying there is no way to know WHAT the actual scenario is (event cards, monster leaving the mansion), yet you can piece some things together. In other words, you should always know you are racing against the clock in every scenario, unless something hints to you that you need to survive long enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tomoka said:

FrostyWolf said:

 

 

I argee.  KNOWING all this before hand would make it more balanced, cause the invesigators can pick te right choices, but the game sets up in a way where they have no idea that what the senerio is going to be.

 

 

This isn't necessarily true. I payed attention to all the text that was read in the introduction when I was the Investigator on this mission (my first time playing as well), and I got the fact that Walter's wife died, and he was going insane. I concluded he was either dead from going insane, or knowing H.P Lovecraft, going insane usually meant crazy happenings. That being said, I assumed he was either someone we encountered during the run through because we were "searching" for him anyways as a business client.

Top that with the fact that the rules even say when the last event card is resolved, the game ends. Which either meant I won or the Keeper won. The rules also say there are 5 event cards in each deck, and I don't see what is stopping me from looking how many turns we get in the game before the game ends.

Still you are correct when saying there is no way to know WHAT the actual scenario is (event cards, monster leaving the mansion), yet you can piece some things together. In other words, you should always know you are racing against the clock in every scenario, unless something hints to you that you need to survive long enough.

 

None of this has anything to do with what is being discussed here (in the last two posts). We are discussing, once again, that in the perfect senerio where the invesitgators know excatly what they are going up against, that it is possible for them to some what balance this out. Obviously the rules state the games end in one of three ways when the event cards run out, keeper win, investigator win, everyone loses.  You still have no way of knowing whether or not its going to be a combat heavy story, or a sanity heavy story, hense with a small group you can get shafted on not picking the right investigator/equipment.

The fact of the matter is this paticular story senerio is unbalanced with a small group.  3 to even 5 turns is just not enough time to get all the way across the mansion and take out walter with a group of 1 or 2 investigators which will most likely be ill equiped for the fight and at lest one of them with near 0 sanity.  For it to be fair, there needs to be a 50/50 chance of winning.  There is not.  Granted, the game can not be completely balanced with every size group and all 204 possible combos, (not including random seeds and what ever investigators  the players pick, etc).  That is why I proposed a min amount of players for objective for certain ones.  For instance, The Shoggie has to escape the house objective of Story 1 can easily be beated by 1 investigator as it can by 4 (maybe even MORE so) so that would have a min of 1 investigators.   You don't even need to find all the clues to win.  There are plently of senerios that work great with small groups, this isn't one of them unless the players are playing with more then one investigator.  There is no need to defend it.  Its very clearly imblanced.  Every proposed "it is balanced" comment in this thread is a mix of "well, if the players pick the perfect investigators and the perfect equipment while solving all the puzzles in one turn and the keeper falls asleep, they have a decent chance at winning." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you already know the scenario is imbalanced, as you stated so in your topic post, why start a thread if you don't want anyone to try and either A. Disagree or B. Agree with you? I am merely pointing on facts that support my opinion in saying this scenario is not imbalanced as you say so. While I agree with you some of your points as I have also stated in previous comments, overall I think it comes down to the choices players make, and not the fact the scenario itself is to blame.

You are titled to your own opinion, but please don't start a topic if you don't want a friendly discussion of agreements/disagreements.

In the end, its all about having fun :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not every scenario is perfectly balanced. Some are easier than others.

for example, I ran a game last night, using Story 1, objective C.  That scenario is nearly impossible for the Keeper to win. In fact, it becomes even more difficult for the Keeper (if that's really possible) if the players DON'T find the last clue, and it becomes more difficult for the Keeper if there are more players.

(spoiler ...........

 

I mean, the Keeper has got to kill 2 investigators while only having a single zombie spawning all game (about halfway through), and possibly a single maniac (at a time) if you are lucky and the investigators let you spawn one. I spent quite a bit of time having 0 monsters on the board, as they learned, after I spawned the first maniac, to try to stay in the same room.

)

 

 

<shrug>

I don't consider the scenario+objective 1-C broken, but it is challenging for the Keeper. I'd like to try it again and see if I can do better the next time, maybe eeking out a draw instead of a loss. I've already pointed out how it is possible for the investigators to have enough time to win the scenario mentioned in the OP. It isn't impossible. Sure, it's difficult. Note that and move on to another scenario, or try it again.

The different scenarios and different objectives will always have varying difficulties, for and against both Keeper and investigators. Depending on the choices made for investigators, and the experience and gameplay of both the investigators and Keeper, scenarios will be made harder or more difficult. You'll just need to play a variety of scenarios + objectives to figure out which ones cause you and your group more challenges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...