For instance, in the new campaign we have quite a ways to go ahead of us. Its easier to keep one character around in the core from beginning to end, but I can imagine I will want 2 sets of characters leveling throughout a campaign. It makes it especially safer for when you lose a pair and there are not infinite upgrades anyways so you might as well have two parties kicking around.

So, is it supposed to be in a way that you can read the intro and try to understand whether your investigative pair should have been assigned to this adventure or your monster hunting team(just an example) and then decide who is participating? I understand the openness here on coop play but was wondering if this was spelled out somewhere?

Scenarios usually require both investigation and fighting, so you'll be better off with a single generalist team than multiple specialized ones.

3 hours ago, Khudzlin said:

Scenarios usually require both investigation and fighting, so you'll be better off with a single generalist team than multiple specialized ones.

Thats not the question, and I have already pointed thats just an example of two teams. Its when you can decide on what investigators to use. Such as after reading the scenario description, etc. Or selections needed beforehand.

Well, it's up to you how you play, but I think this question doesn't come up for most people. Generally, you choose your starting investigators, and stick with them throughout the campaign. The only time the standard rules allow you to swap out an investigator is when one becomes so debilitated by trauma that you retire them, or someone dies outright.

What you seem to be talking about is comparable to having a roster from which you pick your team for each mission. Have I got that right? If so, not many people will be able to answer your question other than 'at the beginning of the campaign, and never again!'

Perhaps this is a misconception that I have had in planning for the upcoming campaign. Perhaps I read the 'when a new player' joins in select a new character, and the 'when people aren't around' keep their characters as a means to swap characters in and out for certain adventures. In several instances it seems logical that there are multiple groups of people working simultaneously even towards the same goal in stopping a forthcoming evil from enveloping the world. I had thought somewhere else it mention you can swap characters at your own leisure. This would be misfortunate perhaps then when you are forced to do a scenario with someone who has 4 mental trauma out of 5 and certainly are doomed in that scenario (especially if playing solo).

This is also somewhat unfortunate that at some point, sometimes even two scenarios into a campaign, there are not many cards you would consider swapping in and experience is just going to waste instead of going to another character who could be made part of the campaign helping out somewhere advancing themselves to aide the end of the campaign's conclusion.

So, perhaps I have made a poor assumption here; which is saddening.

You are free to retire a character at any point, as you say this might be due to trauma, or lack of build options, or you might just get bored of them, but if you retire a character you can't go back to them. Then, you pick a new character and start with a brand new, level 0 deck and go from there. What the normal rules *don't* allow for is swapping back and forth as different scenarios come up.

As I said, you're free to play the game how you like, but the challenge as the rules are intended, is to come up with a character deck (or decks for multi player) which can adapt or respond to whatever problems get thrown at them.

Your comment about players who miss a scenario, their character would normally sit out with them. So if you and three mate see usually play, but one of them can't make a game, the other three can carry on without them and their character, then they are okay to join in again the game afterward with no hassle.

Have I explained that okay? Cheers!

Officially, as per the Campaign Setups of all published campaigns, you choose your investigator, make their deck, pick the difficulty level, assemble the Chaos Bag, and then begin setting up the scenario you intend to play.

Players are free to miss a scenario and rejoin a campaign later, as well as join a campaign after the first scenario with a fresh deck. So you're free to swap investigators in and out.

Just remember that you can only have one deck for each investigator going at a time, and once an investigator is killed or driven insane, they cannot be chosen again.

17 hours ago, General Zodd said:

You are free to retire a character at any point, as you say this might be due to trauma, or lack of build options, or you might just get bored of them, but if you retire a character you can't go back to them. Then, you pick a new character and start with a brand new, level 0 deck and go from there. What the normal rules *don't* allow for is swapping back and forth as different scenarios come up.

...

Have I explained that okay? Cheers!

Yeah, that is the part that I thought was unfortunate.

Given that it has rules for accommodating new characters I'd say you can if you really want to, but remember that only the characters participating in a given mission should get XP for that mission. The intention is to create a RPG style experience though, so it's going against the original intent a bit.

5 hours ago, Bronze said:

Yeah, that is the part that I thought was unfortunate.

Having an investigator sit out a scenario isn't retiring them. If your buddy misses scenario 3 of an 8 scenario campaign, they can return for scenario 4 with the same deck.

It does sound as though the investigator sitting out rule is meant to accommodate people who can't make every game. Not for those who want to switch between characters however.

2 hours ago, Bronze said:

It does sound as though the investigator sitting out rule is meant to accommodate people who can't make every game. Not for those who want to switch between characters however.

Sure, but the point is the game can support it mechanically. It shouldn't function differently based on who is playing a deck.

I mean, people play 2-handed all the time, and that's explicitly against the rules, and breaks other game functions (Peril, in particular).

I wouldn't do either, personally. But swapping out gators makes more sense in the framework of the rules as written.

Think of it like this. You can sit down and finish a game for your buddy. Strictly speaking, the rules don't allow this, but there's no real mechanical issue that would break the game. I might be a better or worse player, but the game still works the same.

Similar idea here. Does the game function differently if it's Buddy #1 or Buddy #2 playing that Daisy deck I want to sub in for Roland? Not at all.

I guess you could make an argument that at least one character has to bridge the scenarios to keep the campaign log fresh, but even there, the log isn't particularly attached to one character, but the campaign, which has a pool of available investigators.