Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Mythos Pack Announced


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#41
Doma0997

Doma0997

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts

I'm glad someone said it, because I couldn't find a way to say it as politely.

 

Anywho, moving on.

 

Now that I've *almost* gotten over my crazy giddy phase about learning the theme about the first pack. (Seriously, we get to play night at the museum in Miskatonic museum!? How cool is that?!) I read the article a little closer. There was one detail I saw that I didn't remember being covered before. Someone please correct me if I'm mistaken and unobservant. 

 

Do we know exactly how experience points are earned? The article mentioned Delve too Deep being worth 1 point of experience because it was one victory point. Are victory points the primary way to get experience points? The only way? Apologies if this has been addressed somewhere I missed, couldn't find it in the threads here already.

So far I've seen Delve too Deep, completing the scenario, and with the demo video the instructor had shown that some locations with clues had victory points that you earned if you cleared out the entire area of their clue tokens. I could imagine bigger baddies may also give xp.



#42
mplain

mplain

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1440 posts

QxOuZx2bvFY.jpg


  • ShadowcatX2000, BaraBob and MitchG like this

#43
MitchG

MitchG

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts

Awesome thanks! 



#44
xchan

xchan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts

Ya know. I had this whole big post typed out contesting a lot of the weird reasoning posted in this thread. Then i realized it was at least mostly one person.

 

So instead you ended up making it personal and started insulting me? Good for you!!

 

 

What?? Who ever said that? This is a co-op game that you can play solo. Some features are co-op only, most features are available for solo play.

 

Campaign mode IS a main feature of the game though.

 

Well I had the impresion that since the game said for 1 to 2 players, this game was meant to be played solo, but I see where I was wrong. Sorry!

 

And I know the campaign mode IS the main feature, I was just pointing out that standalone was NOT. So I don't understand what your second sentence came from....

 

There is nothing wrong with designing and releasing niche cards that are very good for some players and absolutely useless for others. Because you know where that road will lead you?

 

No, there's absolutelly nothing wrong with them. I was just saying that it's something I don't like seeing in the FIRST chapter when cardpool is scarce and deckbuilding stale. If this was in like the second cycle, I would have no problem with it.

 

And sorry about your Netrunner experience. You should blame your friend not me.

 

 

Ya know. I had this whole big post typed out contesting a lot of the weird reasoning posted in this thread. Then i realized it was at least mostly one person.

 

So instead you ended up making it personal and started insulting me? Good for you!!



#45
ShadowcatX2000

ShadowcatX2000

    Advanced Member

  • Small Council
  • 1394 posts
Everyone, just chill. It is a bit premature to be calling deck building stale in a game that hasn't released and who we don't even have the full rules, scenarios, or cards yet spoiled, but I can see the point.
  • MightyToenail likes this

#46
Vlad3theImpaler

Vlad3theImpaler

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 95 posts

No, it's not subjective, it's a fact. Or how are those useful cards to you if you play solo and standalone? And btw, solo is a main feature of the game, so no reason to not make every card useful for it; and you were the one who brought up standalone play as a good alternative for those that don't want to play campain. I was just saying that it won't work as a good alternative if there are cards designed specifically for campain play. This is LotR solo play all over again, where you where "forced" to play 2 handed or you missed on half your cardpool cool synergies. They implemented a way better scaling system in this game, but if they keep designing cards that only work in multiplayer, people will end up playing 2 investigators at once, which defeats the porpouse of scaling the game for solo play.

 

It is subjective.  These cards are not "wasted" for everybody, only for people that choose not to play the game in its default mode as a campaign.  It is not a universally true.fact, no matter how much you personally dislike it.

 

So instead you ended up making it personal and started insulting me? Good for you!!

He didn't insult you.  He pointed out problems with your reasoning.


  • klaymen, Reckoner and PaxCecilia like this

#47
dboeren

dboeren

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 2834 posts

Everyone is of course entitled to their own opinion.  Personally, I'm not that much into watching sports on TV.  That's fine, when other guys might be sitting on the sofa watching the football game I can be playing a card game, or rock climbing, playing pinball, or taking out my telescope to look at the stars.  Everybody is doing what they want to do, everybody is happy.

 

But what if instead I went to the football party where everyone was watching football and spent the entire time complaining about what a stupid sport it was and how it was a waste of time and we should all be doing something more productive or watching a different show?  And I kept on doing it week after week for a few months.  People would be thinking "We get it, you don't like football.  You've made your point, you'd rather be doing something else, so why does this guy keep showing up at the football party every week?"  If I've got something I'd rather be doing, I should just go and do that instead.  I'm wasting my own time by spending it complaining instead of doing what I'd rather do, and I'm interfering with other people enjoying what they actually DO want to do.


  • WWDrakey, Toqtamish, stahlwolle and 5 others like this

#48
mplain

mplain

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1440 posts

The guy was clearly hyped about Arkham being his thing, then saw evidence to the contrary, and now he's still hoping that it might work out, even though his hope diminishes by the hour. Basically, he's sour because of a fresh breakup. I don't think the "I know that football is not my thing" analogy applies here.



#49
Toqtamish

Toqtamish

    Conquest Rules Arbitrator

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 3289 posts

Everyone is of course entitled to their own opinion.  Personally, I'm not that much into watching sports on TV.  That's fine, when other guys might be sitting on the sofa watching the football game I can be playing a card game, or rock climbing, playing pinball, or taking out my telescope to look at the stars.  Everybody is doing what they want to do, everybody is happy.

 

But what if instead I went to the football party where everyone was watching football and spent the entire time complaining about what a stupid sport it was and how it was a waste of time and we should all be doing something more productive or watching a different show?  And I kept on doing it week after week for a few months.  People would be thinking "We get it, you don't like football.  You've made your point, you'd rather be doing something else, so why does this guy keep showing up at the football party every week?"  If I've got something I'd rather be doing, I should just go and do that instead.  I'm wasting my own time by spending it complaining instead of doing what I'd rather do, and I'm interfering with other people enjoying what they actually DO want to do.

 

Well said. Now let's all let that be the end of it. 


  • Reckoner, PaxCecilia and phillosmaster like this

#50
MagnusArcanis

MagnusArcanis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Personally, I think this quest is going to be pretty cool. Granted, the whole idea of exploring/deciding what happens after Dunwhich Horror is just an awesome concept and an amazing direction to take the game.

Adaptable – On the face of it… I’m going to seek to avoid this card as much as possible. As I’m currently imaging that I’ll be better off not having to side board in cards. However, I’ll be glad it’s an option if I need it. That being said I’m more excited for the permanent keyword. Allowing players to have some effects that carry over from game to game that are more or less persistent option that we don’t have to find and re-play every time is going to be nice.

Delve Too Deep – My first inclination will probably be to include this in every deck possible. In a 4 player game, that’s up to an additional 8 xp! A more realistic outcome though is that it’ll be a card used early in the campaign, but subbed out as the quests get harder. Though, there is no garuntee quests will scale that way. In fact, it’s more likely they won’t… which could lead to me not using the card at all, except the power gamer in me demands otherwise… So all in all I think it’s a super cool card and I can’t wait to figure out how it actually plays out.
  • PaxCecilia likes this

#51
dboeren

dboeren

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 2834 posts

Agreed, the Dunwich aftermath is a great setting to tackle.  My hope is that more Whateleys show up looking to see what happened to their kinfolk but we'll see.

 

Permanent is a great idea, and there will be other Permanent cards than Adaptable.  Sometimes Adaptable is saying "oops, I messed up my deck and need to make changes".  Other times it's going to let you adapt to a changing campaign.  Maybe the first quest is all about sleuthing around and finding clues so you put in cards for that.  Then once you find the thing you're looking for you have to go kill it, which mean you want to slot in some combat cards instead.  OK, fine. But do you know BEFORE a quest what you'll need for it?  If it's your first time, you likely don't.  If it's NOT your first time, you can probably plan out your deck ahead of time without needing to change it mid-stream.  So, I'm not sure how big a niche this card actually has.  But hey, at least you're thinning your deck by a card if it starts in play, right?

 

Delve Too Deep looks thematically awesome and very strong.  Right now when the pool is small and there may not BE a ton of great upgrade cards that fit your strategy, it might not be at its best, but it's only going to get better as time goes on and there are more and more goodies you wish you could fit in.  I expect a lot of people will hold it to play at the very end of a quest hoping to stir up trouble and then dash out the exit door before it bites them too badly.



#52
Tragic

Tragic

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1661 posts

On the subject of deck building... I'm a little upset that they have decided to go in the same direction as LoTR by having Quest and Player cards sold in the same packs.

 

I would have much rather had player card packs and then maybe print on demand quest or separate packs for the quests, maybe sold as single large quest pack expansions or something. I'm sure FFG has their reasons for doing it this way, probably a marketing reason.

 

LoTR is kind of notorious for it slowly expanding card pool. In a normal LCG a deluxe gave you 155 cards or so (lets say 155) and each pack gave you 20. In LoTR you gained 11-15 + 2 Heroes cards in a deluxe and 10 player cards (1 of which was a hero) in each pack.

 

This means that in a Deluxe + 6 Packs for LoTR you got around 67 cards + 8 heroes (give or take a few). While in a normal LCG you would get around 275. This game appears to have the same distribution system. I do not know what the card counts are, but I think I am assured in saying that the packs and expansions could follow a similar kind of pattern to LoTR.

 

Then ADDED to that is the XP system making X amount of cards in those packs not able to be chosen at will or are essentially the same card but "upgraded". This could mean that the deck building has even less choices than LoTR as the card pool will expand even slower.

 

Do not get me wrong, I'm a big LoTR fan but I would have liked to see a faster player card pool expansion in this game and while I have high hopes for AH, I think that there is some validity to the opinion, or at least the worry, that the deck building will be a little shallow, at least until the card pool has expanded... if LoTR is any measure maybe 2 years in it will have the same kind of pool a normal LCG has in about 1/4 the time.



#53
dboeren

dboeren

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 2834 posts

I think the 2x card limit will help.  Say there are 30 new player card slots in a pack.  At 3x, that's 10 new cards.  At 2x, it becomes 15.  Whatever space is devoted to player cards is expanded by 50%.  Once we get the first pack we'll have a better idea how many cards that actually is.


  • PaxCecilia and Vlad3theImpaler like this

#54
Tragic

Tragic

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1661 posts

I think the 2x card limit will help.  Say there are 30 new player card slots in a pack.  At 3x, that's 10 new cards.  At 2x, it becomes 15.  Whatever space is devoted to player cards is expanded by 50%.

 

This is absolutely true.



#55
mplain

mplain

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1440 posts

LoTR is kind of notorious for it slowly expanding card pool. In a normal LCG a deluxe gave you 155 cards or so (lets say 155) and each pack gave you 20. In LoTR you gained 11-15 + 2 Heroes cards in a deluxe and 10 player cards (1 of which was a hero) in each pack.

 

Something is not right here. 155 seems to be the card total (including multiple copies), while 20 is different cards only.



#56
MagnusArcanis

MagnusArcanis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts
Actually, thanks to the 2x copy, arkham should progress slightly more than half the rate of a competitive lcg.

Which is greater than that of lotr, but still slow by comparison.
  • phillosmaster likes this

#57
Doma0997

Doma0997

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts

Agreed, the Dunwich aftermath is a great setting to tackle.  My hope is that more Whateleys show up looking to see what happened to their kinfolk but we'll see.

 

Permanent is a great idea, and there will be other Permanent cards than Adaptable.  Sometimes Adaptable is saying "oops, I messed up my deck and need to make changes".  Other times it's going to let you adapt to a changing campaign.  Maybe the first quest is all about sleuthing around and finding clues so you put in cards for that.  Then once you find the thing you're looking for you have to go kill it, which mean you want to slot in some combat cards instead.  OK, fine. But do you know BEFORE a quest what you'll need for it?  If it's your first time, you likely don't.  If it's NOT your first time, you can probably plan out your deck ahead of time without needing to change it mid-stream.  So, I'm not sure how big a niche this card actually has.  But hey, at least you're thinning your deck by a card if it starts in play, right?

 

Delve Too Deep looks thematically awesome and very strong.  Right now when the pool is small and there may not BE a ton of great upgrade cards that fit your strategy, it might not be at its best, but it's only going to get better as time goes on and there are more and more goodies you wish you could fit in.  I expect a lot of people will hold it to play at the very end of a quest hoping to stir up trouble and then dash out the exit door before it bites them too badly.

I just wanted to point out that you wouldn't be thinning your deck out, per the first rule of Permanent.

  • A card with the permanent keyword does not count towards your deck size.

  • Vlad3theImpaler likes this

#58
alpha5099

alpha5099

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 295 posts

Something is not right here. 155 seems to be the card total (including multiple copies), while 20 is different cards only.

 

Most deluxes are 165, so three copies of 55 cards. So the number of cards from a deluxe and a single cycle is 175, not 275.

 

If the Miskatonic Museum numbers hold across other Mythos Packs, then we're looking at 13 player cards a pack, so 78 cards in a cycle. Still less than the competitive LCGs, but better than the 6 heroes and 54 player cards a LotR cycle gives you.



#59
Tragic

Tragic

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1661 posts

yeah sorry guys, I got those numbers a little wrong... but I think the main point stands.... that this game "may" expand even slower than LoTR... though as D said, having only 2 cards per deck is a factor...

 

One of the cool things that this new system can open to us is the idea of "Pathing" you can get in a RPG. Pathing is when you build a extremely weak character, that has a slow but huge power growth curve. You see this a lot in RPGs as a way to offset characters that are designed to end up extremely powerful.

 

I would love to see deck building decisions that actively HURT your deck design and weaken your character, but after levelling it up, it becomes good. Not only will this be really fun and give yo ua sense of progression but I also think it could help immersion and even emergent storytelling. Also it will give the "teams" some texture. Instead of everyone coming to the table with a power deck, you will have some madman character full of neurosis and stuff that the team needs to support, but who ends up a wizard of ultra power!!!

 

Some clever use of the card levelling idea could really make this work, imo



#60
mnBroncos

mnBroncos

    Advanced Member

  • Small Council
  • 3801 posts

what are you talking about? the lotr packs are my favorite. I've played a little of all the lcgs and lotr packs have been the ones i always am most happy about spending money on. When you buy lets say a netrunner pack (especially now) there is usually at most 1-2 cards that you actually will play (maybe more but rarely) sometimes you get zero cards you use. However, with lotr packs you know for sure going to use at least 75% of those cards. And you will be harder to convince people to get into the game if tell them need to buy pack for your decks but then different packs to actually play the game. 


  • phillosmaster likes this