Avi_dreader said:

I have to disagree. It could easily be taken as "place the monster on the location on the Blessed One that contains a cultist." In other words, saying that the cultist is somehow on the Blessed One card, and you place the monster on the cultist which is on the Blessed One.

Removing that ambiguity, I think, would take perhaps "Place non-Cultist monsters which are in the same area as a Cultist on the Blessed One." With that statement, you can only read it correctly or as a sentence fragment, as you'd said. But the way you had it written, the idea that the cultist itself is on the Blessed One is a possible reading. This would of course lead to the question "what if there isn't a cultist on the Blessed One" or "when do I put the cultist on the Blessed One," which would be bad.

Sdrolion said:

There is never any mechanism for a cultist to get on The Blessed One, so that reading can not be logical. I'm not really sure why you're imagining a reading based on a hypothetical situation that could never exist. Anyway, it's your creation, do what you want with it, I've spoken my piece ;') Also, "area" is a game term. An Ancient One is not an area.

Avi_dreader said:

For the same reason, I imagine, that you suggested that "Arkham neighborhood" wasn't a good wording, and debated the merits of just saying "ignore the monster limit rules": not everyone will really think things through logically, so we need to add another word or two to spell it out clearly.

All right. Here's a revised version. I've included both the statement of Avi's that I was worried about and the statement of mine that Avi was worried about!

(Not the "ignore monster limit rules" one...the "Arkham neighborhood" one.)

I agree with Avi that if you think about the way he stated things logically you'll realize there's only one correct interpretation. I believe the same applies to the "Arkham neighborhood" statement. The very fact that I said "Arkham neighborhood" as opposed to just "neighborhood" implies that the included "Arkham" does have a particular meaning, and that meaning is that this card concerns only neighborhoods on the original board.

In both cases, I may be forcing the player to think just a little bit, but including both saves a pretty good amount of space on the card. I also removed "of your choice" for the same reason: if I am not specifying a neighborhood I believe it is clear to those thinking through it logically that the choice of neighborhood is up to them.

Unless someone spots a major typo and I decide to care about it , this will be the last revision of the Blessed One until I have time to playtest it myself (hopefully this weekend, but schedules with my lab rats...er...gaming group have been unreliable lately). I mainly need to see how often the cultists actually end up killing monsters. If it is extremely rare, then I may need to play with when that happens. If it seems reasonable, then I'll leave messing around with their movement and such for a Herald.

Sdrolion said:

The problem with that assumption is that the game includes terminology that will force ambiguity into this phrase. I.e. "in Arkham" refers to all boards. So when you say Arkham neighborhood, given the way the game terminology has been designed, and how English operates, it will be a natural assumption for some people that it can refer to neighborhoods in all boards, not just Arkham proper. As far as I know, the only way to express the idea with game terms in minimal space is "non-expansion board" or "Arkham board" (since those actually are official designations for the objects). So it would be "Arkham board neighborhoods" or something. Alright, gtg. Ttyl.

Okay, quick recap, Arkham=all three boards, Arkham board=only one board. So unless you actually add the word "board," it can get really ambiguous, really fast.

Avi_dreader said:

I disagree. The very fact that I am saying "Arkham neighborhood" changes the meaning. There are no Other World neighborhoods, so the purpose of the phrase "in Arkham" (that is, to denote all non-Other World areas), does not apply in this case. I think you are drastically underestimating the capability of players to use logic to figure out the meaning of the phrase.

I believe that even if there is a question in someone's mind as to what I mean by this, they will follow a standard logical progression of thought:

1. If he meant "any neighborhood on any board," he could have just said "neighborhood."
2. The fact that he felt the need to specify "Arkham neighborhood" means that it must have a different meaning.
3. The most logical meaning is "a neighborhood on the Arkham board, as opposed to the Kingsport, Dunwich, or Innsmouth boards."

You are correct that the phrase "in Arkham" is used to mean "all non-Other World areas." (Frankly, if I were them I would have said "in town" or some such instead, but that's neither here nor there.) However, I am not saying "in Arkham." I am saying "Arkham neighborhood." There is a big difference. "In Arkham" applies to all boards largely because it does not refer to an area type that would exist only in the various towns...it does not wish to specify, and so it must have a way of distinguishing the areas from the Other World areas. (Again, really, "in Town" would have done better as an official term for that.) However, I am stating "neighborhood," which itself intrinsically removes Other Worlds from consideration since there are no Other World neighborhoods . Therefore, if I am using an adjective with "neighborhood" to specify a type, there must be a reason for this, since if I just meant neighborhoods on any board I could have just said "neighborhood."

Quite frankly, to assume that by writing "Arkham neighborhood" I meant a neighborhood on any board, you must also assume that I am in the habit of intentionally including meaningless words on a card, since I could have just as easily said "neighborhood" and left off Arkham. So, presuming the player assumes that I in fact wrote on the card precisely what I meant to write, and did not include meaningless and unnecessary words, they'll get the right meaning. I therefore do not believe that assuming that "Arkham neighborhood" = "neighborhood" is a natural assumption: that assumption requires the additional assumption that the card writer included unnecessary language, which is not a natural assumption.

If it doesn't have that meaning right now, well...meanings have to start somewhere. So consider this the first card to use the new unofficial official "Arkham neighborhood," opening the floodgates for other cards to specify such glorious things as "Kingsport neighborhood" or "Dunwich neighborhood" or "Innsmouth neighborhood."

If it actually confuses someone, I'll write a FAQ. :-P I'm not going to take up more space on the card for something that players should be able to logic out with a minimum of difficulty. Players of Arkham Horror are playing a game which involves quite a lot very specific wordings. They quickly become used to interpreting different effects based on single-word differences. "In Arkham" is a different animal than "Arkham neighborhood" or "Arkham board" and I think they will realize that.

And anyway, if someone screws it up and plays it as any neighborhood, it's not a huge deal.

Arkham is even in bold, for crying out loud. I will be extremely surprised if there is someone out there who believes that a card writer would both include unnecessary words and mark those words in bold to emphasize how very unnecessary they are. :-P

Sdrolion said:

I agree that many people will play it correctly, but some will not. Anyway, I will not argue on behalf of the hypothetical people any longer ;') I know how to play it properly after all and I only engage in how many tentacle monsters can dance on the head of a pin argument while I'm at work. Did you find the picture useful by the way (the non-raven one)?

Nope the term Arkham absolutely refers to all non-otherworld areas. This includes expansion boards per official rulings. Adding the word board will actually clear that up.

Veet said:

The term " in Arkham" is included in official rulings. The term "Arkham," used as a modifier for something that doesn't exist in OWs, is not, that I have ever found. There is, again, a large difference. "Arkham neighborhood" specifies a type of neighborhood, and neighborhoods do not exist in the otherworld. Therefore, the "non-OWs" meaning for "Arkham" in this case is illogical: why would I say, effectively, "non-Otherworld neighborhood?" That's akin to saying "non-investigator Ancient One." If it means that, it is a pointless statement and I should just put "neighborhood." Thus, the very fact that I have used it in this manner changes the meaning.

If I add "board" it is going to shrink the text further. If players simply use a little tiny bit of logical analysis they'll understand what I mean. I'm not going to add text and make the card harder to read just because some players will simply stick with the meaning of "in Arkham" even if it doesn't make any sense in the situation. I'm sorry, and not to be rude, but if you are playing a game like Arkham Horror you need to stop sometimes and think about the rules, and recognize that if something doesn't make sense the way you're reading it, it is probably not intended to be read that way. You cannot simply say, "well, the official ruling says this about this particular term when used in a different way, so even if it makes absolutely no sense for him to have used it that way in this situation, I'm going to go with that."

Look, here's how we'll do this. If there is any card that actually uses the expression "Arkham neighborhood" and means any neighborhood including those in Kingsport, Dunwich, and Innsmouth, then tell me what that card is and I'll look and change this. But if all you're talking about is the various cards that say "in Arkham," this is different by virtue of how the word "Arkham" is being used, and I'm not going to change it.

Here's another thing. If someone gets the AO from this thread, they'll see what I mean via this discussion. If someone gets it from my Picasa account, they'll see what I mean because I've added a note. Once someone understands it, they'd have no need of the clarification on the card. So, since I have both potential areas of download covered with clarifications for those who would actually need it, there's no need to clutter up the card and shrink the text.

Avi_dreader said:

I think it will be, yeah.

*sigh*

Okay. Looking at the AO card again, it looks like there might, maybe, possibly be space for "board." I will look at it tonight. If I can add it without shrinking the card text, then I will, just to make sure that everyone will understand the card. I still feel that this is a silly thing to add and utterly disagree with both of you, but if I can do it without making the card less readable, I will do it.

I supose the term Non-expansion Neighborhood would work too, might be a little of a stretch though.

Arkham Neighborhood

Arkham Board Neighborhood

Non-expansion Neighborhood

OK that's actually one character longer.

Have you tried changing the region size in SE? I found that really useful for text packed cards.

Admiral142 said:

Change the what now?

Don't know how to do that. :-P

Okee dokee, open your GOO, go into the toolbox in SE (in the top toolbar), scroll down to region editor. Open that up, and all the stuff to modify ancient ones with is under GOO, for example, goo-power. Use the location and size editors to change the area that you can fill with text (in your case, increasing it.). If you don't have the region editor, I'm sure you can download it from the SE website.

Good luck!

Admiral142 said:

Thanks. I'll take a look at it. Probably won't be able to do any work on it this week as I have lots going on with Easter coming up, but maybe I can get a revised version up next week.

Minor break from the Blessed One here since I haven't had time to even look at Strange Eons the past few nights. O_O

Got thinking about Barganon a bit again, and here's a few things I'd like to bounce off people:

Chaos Theory (revised): In addition to the effect presently on the card (anytime you would draw a specific card, you draw randomly instead), everyone's fixed possession cards at game/investigator start are instead randomized by type. That is, if you would ordinarily get 1 Common Item (Derringer) you now get 1 random common item instead. Applies only to cards...money, clue tokens, and such are still drawn normally. This would ensure that Barganon had a bigger impact on gameplay right from the get-go, since the other effect appears significantly less often than I had thought it would.

Probable final wording:

Chaos Theory:

• When setting up an investigator, ignore fixed cards and draw random cards from those decks instead.
• If any card names a specific card for a player to draw, ignore it and draw randomly from that deck instead.

Barganon Rex's worshipper effect: changed to match the effect on Avi's Herald version: +2 toughness instead of +1 toughness and -1 combat. Doesn't count for trophies.

Sinister Plots (for both Barganon and Barganon Rex):

1. Investigators Attack / AO attacks. Before Investigators: Each investigator rolls a die. On a failure, the investigator counts all items by type, discards them, and draws an equal number of items by type (basically, the investigator suffers Barganon's "start of battle" effect again).
2. Investigators Attack / AO attacks: Before investigators: Each investigator rolls a die. On a failure, the investigator sheet is replaced by a random new investigator sheet. Keep all cards and tokens and do not draw starting equipment. Adjust stamina/sanity to be within new maximums, and place skill sliders wherever desired. (Basically, the investigator suffers the "Even Identity Is Uncertain" effect from the Heralds.)
3. AO attacks/ Investigators attack: If an investigator is devoured by Barganon this turn, Barganon's combat rating improves by -1.

Sdrolion said:

The first sinister plot card effect isn't really appropriate for a sinister plot (although to be fair, there is the you win effect and the does not attack effect). Still... Generally they are actually bad, not equally random in badness or goodness. Perhaps if investigators discarded half their items rounded down, then did the effect.

For the second sinister plot effect, to make it actually risky, force everyone to redraw, and make the dieroll to determine whether they lose three stamina or three sanity (1-3 sanity 4-6 stamina).

Alright, now back to huddling in bed with fever ;')

Sorry again for delays, guys. Had a final project and final exam for my class. Done now, so hopefully tonight or tomorrow I'll get to look at playing around with area sizes in SE and get a new version up.

Hey everyone, I'm new to the FFG forums. As an avid fan of both Arkham Horror and Wizards' Magic: the Gathering, I gave a crack at producing an Ancient One card for a character coming out in New Phyrexia, the newest MtG set. I had to take a little bit of liberty with the storyline to have it make sense, but I think it's pretty good. But what do I know -- you guys can tell me better, I'm sure. Please let me know what you think!

The power behind the throne of the Father of Machines: Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite.

Here's the "designer notes" I wrote in SE for her:

In the artificial world of Argentum, the glistening oil took root. Karn, the godlike golem and creator of the plane, did not know of it until it was too late. The time of his world, with all its peoples, was over. A New Phyrexia was dawning, and like its predecessor, it would not be content with ruling just one world.

Elesh Norn, the Grand Cenobite, prevailed among the other Praetors to lead Phyrexia. Though the corrupted, mad Karn remains on the throne of the Father of Machines, it is Norn who is the power behind the throne and who has decided upon a new plane to conquer: Ours.

Now, with her descent at hand and the planar portals in place, Norn's very presence menaces Arkham. Sleeper agents -- Phyrexians in human skin -- and compleated horrors from other worlds stalk the streets, infecting those they wound with the Phyrexian contagion. The Phyrexians have underestimated modern human anatomy though; whereas on Argentum the native creatures simply withered and died, Earth, with its rich evolutionary history, is more sturdy, and if health is restored in time, the body can handle the poison on its own.

Even the sturdiest can fall before the might of Phyrexia, however. While other Ancient Ones may allow some investigators to go on with an array of afflictions, Phyrexia seeks to purge and correct such weakness.

The main idea is that all the monsters in the game when Elesh is the GOO are Phyrexian agents in some fashion. They don't get any stat boosts, but even a scratch from a cultist can infect an investigator, sapping health each turn until healing or knocking out. This makes combat more risky in general, which should help make up for the lack of any direct methods of intervention Elesh provides.

Concerning "All Will Be One": The hospitals have sleeper agents in them as well. When an investigator with a debilitating trauma comes in, they make sure to corrupt that person a bit; too much, too quickly would cause suspicion. After enough Phyresis sets in, they can claim "He didn't make it" while actually doing to that investigator what any devoured investigator gets: rebirth as a member of the other team, respresented by the Cultist.

I'm not so sure about Elesh's attack. I know I like her Start of Battle, but her attack may be a little too strong. Opinions?

Thanks!

Having taken a break from my Kaiju Great Old ones to meddle around with Batman and Dr. Who, I now return with a few more Big Bad Beasties for you to fight.

First up is Manda - a minor Godzilla monster who's pretty much just a Chinese Dragon.

I made this guy not out of any particular love of the monster, nor of any good game ideas, but because I wanted a very 'nooby friendly' Great Old One. He's got simple abilities that aren't terrible, a Doom Track that isn't stupid short but still has a good chance of getting to the final battle, and an easy fight mechanic. In short, he's good for teaching people how to play.

Next up is Gigan!

Now Gigan I actually only had one idea for initially, and that was the Cultist text. After that, I kinda winged it, but I came up with a few interesting mechanics that actually serve to make him more interesting than I thought he'd be.

And here's the crown jewl of this set, the Mighty King Kong!

Now Kong I had some fun with. He's got a stupidly short Doom Track, but Anne Darrow can flat-out remove tokens to keep him from waking up. But you've got to be careful, as Cultists can get rid of her and Increase the Terror Level. It occured to me that it would be possible to stave off Kong indefinitely, so I also added the Doom token adding mechanic to Cultists as well, increasing their combat rating to match. On top of that, Anne becomes a liability in the final battle, risking doubling Kong's power every time you hit him. He should be an interesting Ancient One.

What do ya'll think?

Finally had some time to work on stuff again, and got the region editor thing (many thanks), so here's a new version of The Blessed One. Sized up the worshippers and power section to make them a bit more readable, and added "board." You know where.

Still haven't had time to do my own playtest of this, as life got very busy. I have a feeling once I do I'll be doing a little further editing of it, possibly giving the Tiamaeku normal damage and a handcuff immunity instead of the devour + monster effect, but we'll see.

If anyone else does a game with this in the meantime, please let me know how it goes for you.

Also updated the Barganon and Barganon Rex AOs. Only going to show the image for Barganon Rex here (so as not to consume massive amounts of space).

Changes: Worshipper effect now gives monsters +2 toughness instead of +1 toughness and -1 combat rating. Investigator Setup effect added.

I really would like some feedback on Elesh Norn when someone gets the chance.

I don't like King Kong all that much -- I feel like you have to completely lucksack your way into getting an ally encounter or else your ass is going to get kicked. And the stuff with Anne dying too makes it just feel like there's a lot less risk management involved as opposed to dumb luck. We all know that the dice gods really control the game, but we shouldn't give them all the power.

Gigan seems way too easy. At least when I play, devourings don't happen that often if the group has any idea what they're doing, making his power fairly irrelevant. And considering he has only physical resistance, a smart team will just load up on spells and nuke his ass that way. (Also, letting investiagtors use what weapons they have left to help their defense check against him, even for a 2-success one, makes it really super-easy if they have any decent magical weapons.)

Mission accomplished with Manda. Easy, simple, clean design, not all that powerful but a good starter.

The Blessed one seems like a much more difficult yet still well-designed version of Azathoth, but I am not so sure if I like the cultists being endless. Managing to fight a cultist with their high awareness, and only getting one shot at them in combat with relatively tough stats, makes it hard enough; I see no reason that a team of resourceful investigators shouldn't be rewarded with less cultists to deal with (as well as trophies) for being able to smack a few of the bastards. If you add the handcuff immunity, the endless really should go.

Barganon Rex... wow, he sounds fun. I would love to play a game with him around just for the sheer craziness.

@Sdrolion

At the fixed item random replacement it should also say "of that type." The random card type is not currently specified on the card. Also, it needs to be plural, so it's cards. Otherwise one might assume only one of the fixed items is replaced.