| Register Now | |
| My Points | |
| My Games | |
Madness and mayhem abound in this bestselling game of Lovecraftian horror
| Page 2 of 3 (44 messages) | « First page... 1 2 3 ...Last page » |
Well that all depends by what you mean by "fight him right". Which comes down to how you best enjoy the game: primarily as a stragtegic board game where you adopt the statistically most likely approach to winning, or as a desperate struggle to avoid the appearance of a GOO.
mathematical puzzle v theme
I'm not going to claim that either approach is intrinsically better, although I do have a strong preference for the latter. I personally wouldn't see the point in playing a game against Hastur in the manner that you describe, there would be no fun in it for me. But like I said above that is just personal preference & not a value judgement.
Cheers - Chris
Avi_dreader said:
Hastur is a total ass-clown. Sure, if you want to make things challenging, you can go for the sealing victory, or you can just beat him the right way. Keep the terror track down. Don't seal gates. And when he pops out with a -0 to -2 modifier bludgeon him to death. He's really a *very* easy GOO if you fight him right. Nyarlhotep is also a joke, if you go for a combat victory. I would like to think that Ithaqua is hard, but he's not if you play him right— especially if you plan to fight him from the beginning with a smaller team (with a larger team, it shouldn't matter because it's easy to get sealing victories with larger teams). Stock up on as many common weapons as you can (i.e. overstock), get as many combat allies as you can, get deputized for the gun that can't be lost, if you can, get blessings. Beat him down. Yig can be a little annoying, especially if you go for a sealing victory. Don't. Bludgeon him like you're supposed to ;') Sure, these combats are harder if you *deliberately* avoid a legitimate method of victory, buuuuut, you're doing this why exactly?
P.S. Want to make Glaaki *really* fun? Change him so that *all* undead are stalkers, and so the servants of Glaaki count as undead :'D Let me know if you have any luck with that.
Without signature
I don't get this part:
"Joe Diamond ...1 Clue token would earn him 4 more dice for the Will check. "
Why 4 clues? Not saying you're wrong. I just don't get it.
And here is my personal hobby horse tub thumping slogan:
*No investigator specials during Final Battle*
Although I have to admit that I've said this multiple times without a single eprson ever saying "Hear Hear".
So I'm probably in a small minority on this :-)
- Chris
Without signature
Avi_dreader said:
So far the largest number of players in my games have been 5. We've been theorizing about games with larger numbers of players and I think you're right that they'll get progressively easier.
Does anyone have any playtest experience? I'd be reluctant to try a solo game with 8 investigators 
Without signature
Hi Avi,
I take it you play mostly solo using multiple invetsigators (this isn't a criticism it is also how I play unless my daughter joins in).
I can't see many multiplayer groups enjoying the first tactic you mention.
I think a few folks on this list use the devouring trick, although I've mostly seen folks suggetsing it with multiple madnesses or injuries.
It is legal, but not something that appeals to me for the similar reasons to my previous post. (Again no value judgement implied)
- Chris
Avi_dreader said:
I disagree. With a large group the game is very easy to break (which is why I prefer 3-4 player games). You just concentrate your resources on making two or three of the characters extremely powerful, while the other characters try to gain more resources for them. The overpowered characters kill monsters and seal high frequency gates. Game over. Five against Shub is great... It just makes it easier to get clue tokens and allies.
Also, there's an exploit against Yog-Sothoth where you can suicide naked characters in other worlds just to respawn new investigators with full items and cash. Granted, you might not want to take advantage of this weakness :') but you *can* legitimately do it. And easily too, if you leave a gate to Rlyeh open after deliberately losing a combat.
Without signature
Avi_dreader said:
Oh... But as for fighting Yog normally... He's not *that* hard. Just stay away from gates with -2/-3 modifiers unless you have an elder sign, and don't go into other worlds if you're not nearly at full stamina/sanity. Try to avoid difficult other worlds for as long as possible. Okay, fine, I admit it, he's annoying. I can't bring myself to calling him difficult though. Other than in some of my custom scenarios (that tend to be ridiculously difficult), I can't remember losing to him.
:-) This time I'm not going to disagree with you Avi, just point out my own tactical ineptness.
I don't know how many times I've read folks suggest strategies of chosing which gates to close based on frequency etc.
I always just go for the one where I don't have to sneal past a dhole.
The line of least intelliigen.. er, I mean resistance :)
- Chris
Without signature
Hi Villain,
That is pretty much how I feel about the FB too (my daughter loves the FB & always wants to play through it even if we win).
I also handle devourings by just eliminating the invetsigator without replacement, but then I'm usually playing on my own.
I wouldn't enforce this on a multiplayer group unless it was thought as fun to then become the "mythos guy".
- Chris
Villain said:
To clarify my previous message, I also count "wins" in final battle as draws only, so the preferred method is always a win by sealing/closing. Thus, none of those strategies of Avi_dreader would count as truly winning strategies for me. Still, I agree some of the GOOs are very easy to beat in the final battle for a draw result (we haven't yet used the Epic Battle cards).
Avi_dreader said:
Ah, that reminds me of my main complaint in the game mechanics: getting an investigator devoured mid-game is not punished nearly enough. I'd rather use a house rule that kicks the devoured character's player out of the game, even if it means he'll have to sit out while others have fun for the rest of the game (while keeping the effective player-count at the original level for all mechanical purposes, like monster-limits, GOO hits, etc). Otherwise getting someone devoured is often less harmful than getting someone insane or unconscious.
-Villain
Without signature
jhaelen said:
Villain said:
How about this instead:
Increase the effective number of investigators for every investigator joining the game because of devoured or retired investigators.
That is perfect! Sso much so that it really should have been the official rule all along.
Of course in solo/multi-character games I'll still just not replace. But Whenever I have a rare group, I'll tell them that is the rule. They'll never know :)
- Chris
Without signature
jhaelen said:
Avi_dreader said:
Hmm, I didn't consider that. I'll try to think of something...
So far the largest number of players in my games have been 5. We've been theorizing about games with larger numbers of players and I think you're right that they'll get progressively easier.
Does anyone have any playtest experience? I'd be reluctant to try a solo game with 8 investigators
I did an 8 player solo with KH & DH once, partly for laughs & partly to try out my hidden sorcerors scenario "Sons of Yog-Sothoth" with the max number of players (I think it scaled quite well).
- Chris
Without signature
Mariana the Ex-Nun Cultist said:
I don't get this part:
"Joe Diamond ...1 Clue token would earn him 4 more dice for the Will check. "
Why 4 clues? Not saying you're wrong. I just don't get it.
Joe D regular; 1 Clue = 2 dice
Joe D with +1 Will; 1 Clue = 3 dice (he started with +1 Will skill)
Joe D with +1 Will & +1 Will; 1 Clue = 4 dice, no? (he got 2 extra skills during the game, +1 Will and +1 Fight)
A dirty mind is its own reward.
jhaelen said:
Avi_dreader said:
Hmm, I didn't consider that. I'll try to think of something...
So far the largest number of players in my games have been 5. We've been theorizing about games with larger numbers of players and I think you're right that they'll get progressively easier.
Does anyone have any playtest experience? I'd be reluctant to try a solo game with 8 investigators
Heh... I've done three games with eight investigators (solo), for the league. It reeeeeally sucks. But it did convince me how easy it is to break the game with those kinds of numbers. It takes a little adjusting because monster surges work so differently (and the gate limit is much smaller), but once you get your mind around those new threats, the game is cake.
The Arkham Horror Fan Creation League
Bloody FFG keeps stealing my avatars…
Hm... Basically the trick is get two or three of the investigators to work at clue gathering/sealing/closing gates immediately. Then send everyone else on a shopping spree, get equipment for a supercharacter or two and maybe enough elder signs/KiY for two or three more gate sealings. Then send maybe two or three of the shopping group off to fight or seal. The rest should cluster in the Newspaper for potential retainers. Once the original two or three investigators finish their initial slow-down-the-game task. They should also go shopping or to the Newspaper. Investigators with retainers should just camp on the curiosity shop with cash, and buy the place out. If you can deplete the unique item deck enough you can get easy access to a number of obscene recyling combos. Game=broken. It's not hard to do with so many people.
Granted, if you're actually playing with seven other people, they'll probably find this strategy boring ::shrug:: I should probably just let them all go wander off and die anyways.
@Marianna/Chris
While there's no rule saying that you can't treat final battle victories as inferior victories, and it might seem that way thematically for Lovecraft fans, this is a boardgame, and the implicit object of games are to win (I suppose there is another school of thought that believes that "fun" is the purpose, we don't see eye to eye). Sure, you can make whatever you want out of a game you own ;') but, um, yeah... I play for wins first, and theme secondarily (after all, if this game were true to Lovecraft's vision, we shouldn't be winning at all). I enjoy the game as a thematic random puzzle solver ::shrug:: I realize other people play it differently.
And yes, killing Hastur by keeping the terror down is very unsatisfying. So is a game that stretches on forever because it takes so damn long to seal against him (which becomes even more difficult due to gate bursts). So, um, yeah :') I usually just discard him when I draw him these days.
I'm kindof shocked that you don't seal by gate frequency (assuming you weren't making a joke). You know you're just making the game hell for yourself, right? ::Laughter:: I would go insane if I were playing in a group with you. Granted, that would be thematic.
The Arkham Horror Fan Creation League
Bloody FFG keeps stealing my avatars…
Avi_dreader said:
As for the suggestion that devoured characters shouldn't respawn... I'm not sure about that, that seems a little *too* brutal... Perhaps the way to get around the exploit (if you really feel a need to write it into the system) is just to house rule that the replacement character can not start with more cash, clue tokens, or items than the devoured character (sure you could still exploit this, buuuut). Otherwise you unbalance the game, and boot players who might not want to be booted ;') I don't know, how often do you actually see people exploit devouring? I've done it two or three times in games that were going pretty badly, but never more than once in the same game— it's unusual, but I can't help myself if my team is losing, we'll never lose while I have will to spare, my fight slider might be down, but my will slider is ever at its farthest!
I wouldn't use the "no respawn" rule, just because it reduces the fun factor for whoever happens to get devoured. If I want to brutalize people I'll go to work. When I play a game, everyone is supposed to have fun.
I do agree, however, that there should be more penalty to being devoured in the midst of the game. We hadn't had anyone devoured in a while, then it happend lasts week when a Moon Beast ate Michael McGlen. When I reread the rules section, I ind of went "thats it?!" We decided to add an extra doom token to the track. I also like the idea of increasing the relative number of investigators. I'll add that to the penalty next time it happens. That will be particularly challenging because we almost always have four investigators, and the bump to 5 (with only four actually playing) with its attendant extra monsters being placed will be a real penalty.
Bydand! Animo non astutia. An Gordonach! An Gordonach!
Nghtflame7 said:
Avi_dreader said:
As for the suggestion that devoured characters shouldn't respawn... I'm not sure about that, that seems a little *too* brutal... Perhaps the way to get around the exploit (if you really feel a need to write it into the system) is just to house rule that the replacement character can not start with more cash, clue tokens, or items than the devoured character (sure you could still exploit this, buuuut). Otherwise you unbalance the game, and boot players who might not want to be booted ;') I don't know, how often do you actually see people exploit devouring? I've done it two or three times in games that were going pretty badly, but never more than once in the same game— it's unusual, but I can't help myself if my team is losing, we'll never lose while I have will to spare, my fight slider might be down, but my will slider is ever at its farthest!
I wouldn't use the "no respawn" rule, just because it reduces the fun factor for whoever happens to get devoured. If I want to brutalize people I'll go to work. When I play a game, everyone is supposed to have fun.
I do agree, however, that there should be more penalty to being devoured in the midst of the game. We hadn't had anyone devoured in a while, then it happend lasts week when a Moon Beast ate Michael McGlen. When I reread the rules section, I ind of went "thats it?!" We decided to add an extra doom token to the track. I also like the idea of increasing the relative number of investigators. I'll add that to the penalty next time it happens. That will be particularly challenging because we almost always have four investigators, and the bump to 5 (with only four actually playing) with its attendant extra monsters being placed will be a real penalty.
Hmmm... Added doom token for devouring. I think I'll just use that as a penalty, it seems like enough to discourage the behavior (and make it seem more disturbing when it happens accidentally). Maybe I'll also have it raise the terror track by one (even against Glaaki? Maybe).
The Arkham Horror Fan Creation League
Bloody FFG keeps stealing my avatars…
I have nothing against gearing up for the final battle - it just means forfeiting a real victory (= seal/close victory) and settling for a draw (= victory in final battle) instead. Perhaps if the Epic Battle cards were used, both "wins" could count the same, but thematically I see the Ancient One destroying half of Arkham and killing thousands of people even if he is defeated in the final battle - hardly a victory in my eyes.
Looking at the mentioned strategies from such an angle reveals that Dam's are superior to those of Avi_dreader: the former help you win the game, while the latter help you not losing completely. I'm firmly in Dam's camp in this. If you give 2 points for a (close/seal) win, 1point for a (final battle) draw and 0 points for a loss and play, say, ten games, the difference in score should become obvious.
Of course, this is just my personal look into this, and if I saw the game as just a mechanical puzzle, I'd probably be on Avi_dreader's camp. Luckily, I see it as a Lovecraft-themed story, where the Ancient One awakening means the shit has hit the fan already.
-Villain
Without signature
Got you. I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that Joe got +4 dice for spending a clue after failing the initail roll.
I see what you mean now - Chris
Dam said:
Mariana the Ex-Nun Cultist said:
I don't get this part:
"Joe Diamond ...1 Clue token would earn him 4 more dice for the Will check. "
Why 4 clues? Not saying you're wrong. I just don't get it.
Joe D regular; 1 Clue = 2 dice
Joe D with +1 Will; 1 Clue = 3 dice (he started with +1 Will skill)
Joe D with +1 Will & +1 Will; 1 Clue = 4 dice, no? (he got 2 extra skills during the game, +1 Will and +1 Fight)
Without signature
| Page 2 of 3 (44 messages) | « First page... 1 2 3 ...Last page » |
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS