I think using any number of cards lvl 0-2 from a sub class is a better deal than up to 5 lvl 0 from any other class.

Not necessarily. If you solo the game with just one investigator, you may want this or that card from another class to get some more variety vs great specialization. Or you may want to get an extra lvl 0 card for you deck because while campaigning you discover you need to boost this or that attribute and you need that card

You are playtesting this one too, aren't you?

Playtesters cannot reveal that information before products release.

Exactly, testers are not allowed to share their position as testers until the game's released

I think using any number of cards lvl 0-2 from a sub class is a better deal than up to 5 lvl 0 from any other class.

Not necessarily. If you solo the game with just one investigator, you may want this or that card from another class to get some more variety vs great specialization. Or you may want to get an extra lvl 0 card for you deck because while campaigning you discover you need to boost this or that attribute and you need that card

You are playtesting this one too, aren't you?

Playtesters cannot reveal that information before products release.

Exactly, testers are not allowed to share their position as testers until the game's released

I might be reading over it, but is The Dunwich Legacy Deluxe coming with a full playset of every card, or is this also a 'buy two if you want a complete set'?

Expansions for the LCGs come with complet playsets. It's just the core sets that don't to keep cost down and variety up.

I believe Great Devourer did not, but I may be wrong on that.

You are indeed wrong on that. There were single copies of the Tyranid Synapse creatures, but you can only include 1 in a deck anyway, so they were still full playsets.

Please.... sto... op...

-My wallet

The problem isn't your wallet. The problem is your wallet is likely leather.. Have you considered going from leather to chainmail, or even half-plate?

I'd rather go full plate! More AC vs spending

Won't be too convenient through security checks in airports though...

I'm confused by Jim Culver's ability. Treat the modifier on skull tokens you reveal as a "0." Anytime you reveal and elder sign token, you may choose to treat it as a skull token. Elder sign token effect: +1. I'm guessing Jim has some kind of Wendy Adams auto-includes that tie in with this.

,

If I am choosing to play with 3 or 4 players, I understand that I need to buy (2) core boxes so I can create up to (4) complete characters, but what about the expansions that follow? Will I always need to buy (2) if I want to build (4) investigators?

Love the theme...

I'm confused by Jim Culver's ability. Treat the modifier on skull tokens you reveal as a "0." Anytime you reveal and elder sign token, you may choose to treat it as a skull token. Elder sign token effect: +1. I'm guessing Jim has some kind of Wendy Adams auto-includes that tie in with this.

,

That's what I'm assuming as well, because without anything else that triggers off the skull results, there's no reason you would want to treat an elder sign as a skull from what we've seen.

If I am choosing to play with 3 or 4 players, I understand that I need to buy (2) core boxes so I can create up to (4) complete characters, but what about the expansions that follow? Will I always need to buy (2) if I want to build (4) investigators?

Love the theme...

Well, here's the thing. Once you have the decks, that's it, you're good. Now if you want to improve on a couple, you only need one set. The only reason you need more than one of a set is if multiple people you are providing for (or multiple characters in this case) are going to share cards in the set past the maximum. Say there is a player card in dunwich that you really want in multiple decks. You'll only get two copies, which is enough for one deck, so if you want that card in multiple decks, you either give two decks one card, or you buy more of that expansion.

One thought. What if there were cards that gave an advantage if you succeed by only a small margin. If a skull showed you could potentially lower your result and get those benefits.

One thought. What if there were cards that gave an advantage if you succeed by only a small margin. If a skull showed you could potentially lower your result and get those benefits.

We've already seen cards that give a bonus if you fail by a small margin (Look What I Found!).

I think using any number of cards lvl 0-2 from a sub class is a better deal than up to 5 lvl 0 from any other class.

Not necessarily. If you solo the game with just one investigator, you may want this or that card from another class to get some more variety vs great specialization. Or you may want to get an extra lvl 0 card for you deck because while campaigning you discover you need to boost this or that attribute and you need that card

You are playtesting this one too, aren't you?

Playtesters cannot reveal that information before products release.

That was more of a rhetorical question, she obviously does.

Hi, I'm new here. Can someone explain what the difference will be between the Elder Signs Card game and the Arkham Horror Living Card Game?

Hi, I'm new here. Can someone explain what the difference will be between the Elder Signs Card game and the Arkham Horror Living Card Game?

Do you mean the currently released game Elder Sign?

Hi, I'm new here. Can someone explain what the difference will be between the Elder Signs Card game and the Arkham Horror Living Card Game?

To begin, Elder Sign is not a card game but a dice-based board game.

Hi, I'm new here. Can someone explain what the difference will be between the Elder Signs Card game and the Arkham Horror Living Card Game?

Pretty much everything beyond "they are games from Fantasy Flight based on the Cthulhu Mythos." They are completely different games. I recommend looking at the product pages for each to see what the gameplay is like.

Hi, I'm new here. Can someone explain what the difference will be between the Elder Signs Card game and the Arkham Horror Living Card Game?

Do you mean the currently released game Elder Sign?

Yes. What's the main difference? I understand the concept of Living Card Games now but I'm still not entirely clear on the difference between Elder Sign and the Arkham Horror LCG.

Elder Sign is a dice rolling game, and the lightest game the Arkham Horror line has to offer. The LCG will be a card game driven by a light narrative.

That's the easiest way I can put it.

Control and planning based on building your deck rather than rolling the dice?

The LCG, though the campaign mode, seems to have more of an ongoing story focus?

At some point, it's kind of like trying to describe the difference between Yahtzee and Gin Rummy.

They are SO different that it's difficult to compare them at all. It's like comparing Baseball and Pac-man. They both have... um... round things in them and there's some running and chasing involved? Both feature a protagonist against a team of defenders, sort of?

Best thing to compare is to watch the Arkham Horror LCG Gencon2016 vids on youtube, then on youtube watch the tabletop (with Wil Wheaton and the lovely Felicia Day) playthrough of Elder Sign.

You will see how components and gameplay both completely differ

I think using any number of cards lvl 0-2 from a sub class is a better deal than up to 5 lvl 0 from any other class.

Not necessarily. If you solo the game with just one investigator, you may want this or that card from another class to get some more variety vs great specialization. Or you may want to get an extra lvl 0 card for you deck because while campaigning you discover you need to boost this or that attribute and you need that card

You are playtesting this one too, aren't you?

Playtesters cannot reveal that information before products release.

That was more of a rhetorical question, she obviously does.

Just because she tests a lot of their games doesn't mean she tests them all. I've tested for three of their LCGs so far. And for IA. Plus my answer is for others who may not know that playtesters cannot reveal their status as per the NDA we all sign with FFG.

Just because she tests a lot of their games doesn't mean she tests them all. I've tested for three of their LCGs so far. And for IA. Plus my answer is for others who may not know that playtesters cannot reveal their status as per the NDA we all sign with FFG.

Same here, I've playtested for three LCGs but I'm certainly not on everything.

Just because she tests a lot of their games doesn't mean she tests them all. I've tested for three of their LCGs so far. And for IA. Plus my answer is for others who may not know that playtesters cannot reveal their status as per the NDA we all sign with FFG.

I did not knew she tests a lot, I only knew she tested MoM2.0. And my assumption is not based on how much games she tested for FFG in the past, but rather on how much insight into that unreleased game she has. By the way, if a person is not a tester, there is no NDA that forbids him from replying "no" to the question "r u a tester?", so "I can't answer that because NDA" is basically a "yes".

Just because she tests a lot of their games doesn't mean she tests them all. I've tested for three of their LCGs so far. And for IA. Plus my answer is for others who may not know that playtesters cannot reveal their status as per the NDA we all sign with FFG.

I did not knew she tests a lot, I only knew she tested MoM2.0. And my assumption is not based on how much games she tested for FFG in the past, but rather on how much insight into that unreleased game she has. By the way, if a person is not a tester, there is no NDA that forbids him from replying "no" to the question "r u a tester?", so "I can't answer that because NDA" is basically a "yes".

This is not correct, I always say "I cannot answer to this" because it's the most politically correct answer to me. My NDA requires me not to share any information of sort; saying "I wasn't a tester for this" is giving information in the same way as saying "I was a tester for this" and they are both wrong. So, for all games, even those I clearly don't test, my answer will always be "testers cannot disclose their eventual position as testers before release". Period.

In any case, I hardly think I have insight on this particular product, considering that I asked about frequency of cards and stuff. Had I been a tester, I'd have known, and not asked. What I post are thoughts and impressions, derived from articles and from general knowledge of games.

Now please can we move on? This has nothing to do with the Dunwich Legacy, it's barely of interest for anyone, and it's frankly getting annoying for me. The only result you'll all achieve here is that I kill my profile and stop commenting on games. I'm here because I believe in helping the community grow, in the same way the community helped me back in 2007 when I started playing Arkham Horror.

Back on topic, please

Back on topic, please

This