On ‎7‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 10:56 PM, impulsivitea said:

That said, at the end of the day, there are still lots of circumstances (that I and others have mentioned) where the traitor insanity condition cards can end a game abruptly and/or lead to an unfulfilling game/conclusion for some players. For a decent number of people, tweaks like pklevine 's are a welcome adjustment to an otherwise stellar game. Mansions of Madness 2e is a game with a lot of merits, but I think it's fair to say that there are places where improvements could have been made (I say this not just referring to the traitor cards; things like monster bases, deficiencies in the app and issues with scaling come to mind as things that people have mentioned having room for improvement) and it's been a good discussion about potentially one of those places. People are welcome to play the game as they choose, and it's no less valid to do so, especially since we're not discussing it as a competitive/tournament game (or at least I'm not)

The bases are the worst and stupidest thing in any FFG game I've ever played and I have a lot of them. I cannot understand why they've done them that way.

Why put artwork on a card that's covered at all times, for example? Baffling.

It has been a while since I have been able to post so there is a lot to comment on...

On 7/22/2018 at 2:46 AM, totgeboren said:

Not  going for the win is something you might do when playing g  ames against kids, not when playing co-op with your mate  s  .   

I disagree. I feel that it is because this is a co-op game that one would want to try to “not win” so as not to betray their friends.

On 7/22/2018 at 2:46 AM, totgeboren said:

Winning  is suppo  sed to make you ha  ppy  .      

It is interesting that you made this comment. I actually do not play “versus” games because I do not get pleasure out of losing or winning. I only play games with friends. I am only friends with people I care about. For me to “win” means somone I care about loses, which is not fun (this reminds me of a quote from Rassilon, anybody that gets this reference and knows what it is from without looking it up gets a permanent elder sign) That is why I only play co-op games.

On 7/22/2018 at 2:46 AM, totgeboren said:

In  most games the game-play win condition is perfectly aligned with the em  otional win conditi  on  . 

That is one of the things that makes this game special. It does not start as a “betrayal” game, and if you play well, or get lucky after not playing well (draw a sanity condition that does not cause you to “betray” your friends), it continues to not be a “betrayal” game. There are however circumstances in which a player may be tempted to “betray” their friends.

On 7/22/2018 at 2:46 AM, totgeboren said:

Many  insanity cards create situations w  here it is simpl   y      not fun to win the gam   e   

That is because you are not “winning”. You went insane. The game is trying to tell you something bad has happened, that you have essentially lost. I think another big problem some of you are having is that you do not understand that losing all of your sanity is a very bad thing. There seems to be this belief that it is okay to lose all of your sanity because you actually do not die until you lose it twice. That is not the case. I think if you consider the loss of all sanity as losing (which is basically what it is) it may help with this aspect of the game.

On 7/22/2018 at 2:46 AM, totgeboren said:

That  might not be a problem for you, but it is a broken mechanic f  or many.       

I would ask that you not call a game mechanic “broken” just because you do not like it. Not liking something does not make it bad (just as liking something does not make it good). There are games that have had issues that caused the designers to quickly amend the rules. In situations such as that, I think a majority of people would agree that there were broken game mechanics. If enough people wrote to Fantasy Flight, if there were a serious uproar among the gaming community about this mechanic being broken, they would “fix” it. But I am guessing (and this is completely not based on any data) that not many truly feel this aspect of the game is even bad, let alone “broken”.

On 7/22/2018 at 2:46 AM, totgeboren said:

How   many here have said they dislike how many of the insanity  c  ards affect the game, and how many have supported you? This is why one uses a team of test-players, not just one. You might have no issues with it, but it seems like mos  t other play groups have.  

You have nothing to support this except the assumed opinions of people posting on the community board of a gaming company. As I previously stated, I think that the proof that a majority of players do not believe the game to be broken is that it has not been “fixed”. Fantasy Flight is a business. If people did not like this aspect of the game, they would change it.

On 7/22/2018 at 2:46 AM, totgeboren said:

And  I t  hink this is the issue I at least have with your objections presented in this thread. A few people have essentially said: "My group isn't having fun when using these cards", and it feels lik  e you  r response is that the cards are fun, and they are wrong.   

That is absolutely not my position. The biggest problem that I have, is that it is obvious that most if not all of the people that have an issue with these specific sanity condition cards, do not understand the rules of the game.

On 7/22/2018 at 2:46 AM, totgeboren said:

What  I want is for the game win-condition t  o be     aligned with the emot  ional win-condit  ion   .  

The first three words of this sentence is the issue as far as I can tell. You are not happy with the game as designed, and therefore call it un-fun, and then try to use that as proof that it is broken. To me, what you are doing would be similar to saying “I succeed at every skill check because failing skill checks is not fun”. I am sure you think what I have said is ridiculous, but what you and others have suggested sounds just as ridiculous to me. Taking away an aspect of the game that punishes you for failing, is basically just trying to make the game easier to win. I do not see that as being more fun. I have a feeling this all probably sounds much more harsh than I intend it to. I apologize for that.

On 7/22/2018 at 2:46 AM, totgeboren said:

p  .  s  . Thanks f  or overlooking my sometimes confused grammar in the previou  s post, English isn't my first language and I was tired when writ  i  ng   .   

I often feel as if English is not my first language, and it is my only language.

On 7/22/2018 at 10:31 AM, Taear said:

If the   cards give you the option to ign  ore them th  en

Again, no cards in the game give you the “option to ignore them”. These cards punish you for failing, and then give you a choice. You can lose, or betray your friends. You have to do one of the two, you cannot just “ignore” the card.

15 hours ago, LabanShrewsbury said:

Again, no cards in the game give you the “option to ignore them”. These cards punish you for failing, and then give you a choice. You can lose, or betray your friends. You have to do one of the two, you cannot just “ignore” the card.

But if you're "losing" - and again this is a technical lose because the actual level is completed - then you're ignoring the card.

5 hours ago, Taear said:

But if you're  "losing" - and again this is a technical lose because the actual level is completed - then you're ignoring the    card  

So if you don't want to lose, try to attain the win condition that the card prescribes, in which case it becomes a battle of wills - sane versus insane. Start fires. Try to stab people. Whatever it takes, it's up to the sane people to not let that happen.

I do find it odd that they inject roll play at such a late stage of the game, but it is what it is.

On 7/28/2018 at 7:13 PM, LabanShrewsbury said:

That is because you are not “winning”. You went insane. The game is trying to tell you something bad has happened, that you have essentially lost. I think another big problem some of you are having is that you do not understand that losing all of your sanity is a very bad thing. There seems to be this belief that it is okay to lose all of your sanity because you actually do not die until you lose it twice. That is not the case. I think if you consider the loss of all sanity as losing (which is basically what it is) it may help with this aspect of the game.

I think this is taking some liberties with the definition of what "winning" is. When you get wounded (loss of all your health the first time around), you are punished by the game, and it makes playing more difficult. You have certainly not "essentially lost", the game is still very much on but it's more difficult and thus often more exciting! If you health drops to zero a second time, you die. Only then is the game lost.

The loss of all sanity the first time around should be seen in a similar light, especially since the game is made in a way that makes sanity loss much more likely than health loss. The first time you lose all sanity your character has become a bit unhinged, but they are not beyond recovery. The loss of all sanity the second time around means the asylum for you, your mind has snapped and no amount of restful rustication is going to improve your mental condition.

I.e. the first time you lose all health or sanity, your character can recover should they survive. Therefor you can still 'win' the game. If someone loses all health or sanity the second time around, they are either dead or permanently insane, therefor they cannot lore-wise win the game anymore.

On 7/28/2018 at 7:13 PM, LabanShrewsbury said:

You have nothing to support this except the assumed opinions of people posting on the community board of a gaming company. As I previously stated, I think that the proof that a majority of players do not believe the game to be broken is that it has not been “fixed”. Fantasy Flight is a business. If people did not like this aspect of the game, they would change it.

I admit I haven't tried finding other dedicated MoM forums online, to my knowledge this place is where the action happens. Since MoM does not have a tournament scene, official rulings and such are generally not needed. The amount of feedback the company gets will also be seriously reduced due to the character of the game.

I suspect die-hard gamers are over-represented among the posters on this forum, so whatever we can learn of the the general sentiments regarding the game will be skewed.
But even taking all that into account, the only source of 'public opinion' available at the moment is this forum, and here a noticeable proportion of those responding to this thread have issues with the way some of the insane-conditions have been written.

And why would people send in feedback on their own? My main MoM group (casual gamers except me) all hated the instant-death win condition for some of the insane cards, and so I changed them to function more like the fun insane conditions. Done. I don't need FFG to approve my suggestions, no for them to publish erratas because my group was unhappy with that part of the game. And that goes for all other groups, due to this being a co-op game. You don't need an external arbitrator, so why would people contact FFG with their objections?

That is the beauty of this game- you and your group can do whatever they like, I don't believe the FFG police will be knocking on your door- they are too busy with tournament games like X-Wing. Since there is not a single winner (most of the time), there is not much completion between players.

On ‎7‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 3:41 PM, icabod said:

So if you don't want to lose, try to attain the win condition that the card prescribes, in which case it becomes a battle of wills - sane versus insane. Start fires. Try to stab people. Whatever it takes, it's up to the sane people to not let that happen.

I do find it odd that they inject roll play at such a late stage of the game, but it is what it is.

You've misunderstood there.

I'm saying that when the game ends it says you've lost when you have (for example) Pyromaniac because you've not set six fires. But really if the app is completed and the "quest" is done then you've won regardless of what the card is saying to you. And like totgeboren said this is a fake loss, it doesn't mean anything. In the same way as when you set six fires and the game is over and you've "won". Well I've not, because the game is over and the investigation isn't complete.

On 7/11/2018 at 1:58 PM, LabanShrewsbury said:

A CHARACTER THAT DRAWS AN INSANITY CONDITION SUCH AS PYROMANIA ****DOES NOT**** HAVE TO "SABOTAGE" THE GAME FOR THE REST OF THE INVESTIGATORS. IT IS THEIR CHOICE. IF THEY CHOOSE TO "SABOTAGE" THE GAME, THEY MUST WANT TO, AND THEREFORE SHOULD BE HAPPY WHEN THE GAME ENDS AND THEY "WIN".

are you kidding me dude? players want to win. so they are either forced into doing something they dont want to do to 'win' and then no one is happy or they are forced to lose when everyone else in a co-op game wins. all potentially from actions COMPLETELY out of the player's control. They were simply told by the game 'you take horror damage because the app says and now you have a card that says you lose. enjoy'

like... this is bad. what about this do you not get? Take your head out of 'lore' and whatever other muddy waters you are confusing yourself with and understand this is bad game design.

On 7/20/2018 at 12:36 PM, LabanShrewsbury said:

Tempus_37, I cannot thank you enough! That is perfect!

Okay, let’s cover the thing that I believe is causing the most confusion here...

These cards caused a pretty heated discussion in my main gaming group, a group that usually does not get too worked up. While a couple members made the same argument as you do, my take was the opposite. If you read the card, there is nothing to indicate that the investigator MUST act out the sanity condition. They say “You do not win the game as normal.” followed (not always immediately) by “if”, and then the terms that have to be met for you to win. As illogical as this sounds, I argued that there is nothing in the rules that implicitly states that I have to attempt to win the game. It is (hopefully) obviously implied that winning is the desired outcome of most (if not all) games, but nowhere does it say “each investigator’s motivation should be to win the game as an individual, regardless of the effect it may have on the investigation, or the other players”.

this seems to be the crutch of your argument but its a flawed one. Just because a specific thing isnt mentioned in the rules doesnt mean anything. The book doesnt explicitly say players can throw their minis into the wall before every turn, and its assumed they could. but its not expected. Nor does it say they cant completely re-arrange the board to whatever shape they want using the same tiles displayed. The rules say the app explains how to lay out the map. but nothing about changing it afterwards.

You can argue this however you want and come up with an infinite amount of 'unlisted' rules. I had a friend tried to argue this kind of stuff with descent 1st E. But its wrong.

A lack of evidence is not in itself, the presence of evidence.

Some common sense has to be applied.

just like its not expected a player is suddenly going to decide to purposefully lose. i mean come on this isn't how people play, and you are simply arguing to argue as devil's advocate. Literally no one agrees with you here. Including your gaming group. Maybe this should tell you something.

First, as I have mentioned before, it is basic etiquette to note the edits you have made to your post (aside from simple spelling errors), especially when making large edits such as you have done.

1 hour ago, PinkTaco said:

this seems to be the crutch of your argument but its a flawed one. Just because a specific thing isnt mentioned in the rules doesnt mean anything. The book doesnt explicitly say players can throw their minis into the wall before every turn, and its assumed they could.  

No, my argument, if I had one, would not need a crutch, it would be able to walk on its own. I also do not have a CRUX to my argument, being that I do not actually have an argument. What I am trying to do is help clarify the rules regarding a specific game mechanic that seems to be confusing to many people.

Let us go back to your first post.

On 5/8/2018 at 5:41 AM, PinkTaco said:

Has anyone else thrown away these god awful ridiculous things?

Yeah, i get what they were trying to do here and its funny the first maybe second time. But after finally managing to get 3-4 people together for an epic 4-5 hour mansion game just to have someone go insane 3 hours in because the app just forces horror during eldritch phase with 'oh you see something move that didnt take 1 horror' and pull one of these cards is just balls. In no way is it a good mechanic to magically end a 3 hour game randomly because some person pulled a traitor card and ends their movement on a space with someone on their turn.

 They seriously dropped the ball with those insane conditions.

First let me say you clearly do not “get what they were trying to do here” especially when you think it was to add humor to the game. Let me reiterate a point that has been made by many people here already, the sanity condition cards are meant to punish you for losing your sanity. It is pretty easy to figure out the game designers have decided that one of the most important aspects of the game is sanity being that you pay such a heavy price for its loss. I do not think they were trying to be funny.

Second, being upset “because the app just forces” something in the game to happen does not make sense. Everything the app tells a player, or the players, to do is it “forcing” them to do it. That is the whole idea of the app. If you are tired of being bullied by the app, do not play the game. If what you are trying to say is that usually at least once per game there comes a time when the app randomly makes one or all of the players lose a sanity without the ability to negate the affect, and that is unfortunate, I would agree with you. Do I think that makes the game broken? No. I would also point out that it is not a common occurance, and that it usually happens closer to the end of the game (or what should be the end), and I believe it is intended as a way to let the investigators know that the “clock is ticking”, and that they need to wrap things up.

Third, the game does not “magically” end. It ends because there are rules in place that state if certain conditions are met, the game is over. That is not “magic”, it is the rules of the game. It also does not “instantly” end as others have stated. There are no cards that “instantly” end the game.

And finally, the cards you are referring to come into play at the beginning of an investigator’s turn, not at the end. That is a very important distinction.

1 hour ago, PinkTaco said:

The    book doesnt explicitly say players can throw  their minis into th  e wall be  f  ore  every turn, and its assumed they could

What you seem to be missing here is that I am (and I can only assume our friend was) responding to a point. For someone to randomly say that anything not covered in the rulebook should and could be done, makes no sense. Based on a lack of understanding of the rules, people here are assuming that a player has no choice but to act out the conditions on sanity condition cards such as Pyromania. There is nothing specific on the card or in the rules that states this as a fact. The card says something along the lines of “you no longer win that game as normal, you now only win if you do ‘X’” The only way you would have to do “X” is if there was a rule stating that you must at all times try to win the game. Assuming that everybody wants, and or is trying to win the game is just that, an assumption. In this instance arguing that there is no rule stating that you have to act out the condition on the sanity condition Card was not only valid, it was correct.

2 hours ago, PinkTaco said:

just  l  ike its not expected a player is suddenly going to decide to purposefully  lose.     

I think you are completely wrong here, though I absolutely have no proof other than anecdotal evidence to support my belief. In the games I have played, anytime a player’s character has been inflicted with one of these so called “traitor” conditions, they have chosen to lose individually and continue to try to help the investigation. Assuming that every person that plays this (or any other) game has the same desire to win as you and your group of friends does not make sense.

2 hours ago, PinkTaco said:

L  iterally  no one agrees with you her  e  .  

I think you may need to either look up the definition of “literally”, or re-read the posts on this thread.

2 hours ago, PinkTaco said:

Including  your gamin  g  grou  p.

My gaming group did not understand this game mechanic at the time. Now that the rules have been clarified, not only do they agree with me, but they think it is a great and important aspect of the game.

3 hours ago, PinkTaco said:

are     you kidding me dude? players want to win  .    

I covered this in my last post, but I will add to it here. What makes this game interesting is that it basically asks you “how badly do you want to win?” In my opinion, that adds to the enjoyment of the game.

3 hours ago, PinkTaco said:

all   pot  entially from actions COMPLETELY out of the player's control.      T   hey we  re simply  told by the game 'you take horror da   ma   g  e    be  c     a  u  se   t  he   a  p   p s  a  y  s 

This is such a bizarre statement. Anything the app, or a card instructs you to do is out of your control. There are times when you are able to attempt a skill check to avoid taking horror or damage, other times you are not. Would it be more satisfying or “fun” for you if you were allowed a skill test and then failed, and this is what caused your character to go insane?

3 hours ago, PinkTaco said:

'you  take horror da   ma   g  e    be  c     a  u  se   t  he   a  p   p s  a  y  s   and now you have a  card that s   ays y  ou los  e   .    

Either this is hyperbole, or there is a card missing from the games I have played. Statements like this are ridiculous.

3 hours ago, PinkTaco said:

like   ... this is bad. what abo  ut this do you n  ot ge  t? 

Here are a few things I do “get”.

You posted on this forum a poorly thought out and worded rant, based on either not having read, or not understanding the rules. In my opinion this is not only lazy but insulting to the game designers. As I have stated before, if you have an issue with a game, if there is something you seriously believe needs to be addressed, take the time to write a post based on facts, using in-game examples, quoting cards and rules. Otherwise it sounds like you are saying “I don’t like when I lose”, which is a reflection of you, not the game.

let us be clear on a few points.

1. You do not have to act on the “traitor” sanity conditions, as verified by Fantasy Flight.

2. The win condition for the “traitor” sanity conditions come into play at the beginning of the “inflicted” investigator’s turn. This is an important distinction.

3. The other investigators have actions they can preform to try to stop an “insane” investigator from “winning” the game.

4. There are no cards that “magically” or “instantly” end the game.

5. Taking “random” mental or physical trauma where you do not get the opportunity to avoid it by skill check is part of the game.

6. Keeping track of, and not losing sanity, is one of the most important aspects of the game.

With this information, feel free to create an argument for why you think the “traitor” sanity condition cards should be removed from the game. Saying that they “make an otherwise enjoyable game, not fun” is an opinion and should be stated as such. And as an opinion there is no argument that can be given to counter it because it is simply an opinion. But when you start to talk about removing an aspect of the game, and imply it is “broken”, you should have something to back that up with besides your opinion.

From the top of this page:

On ‎7‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 6:25 AM, Taear said:

The bases are the worst and stupidest thing in any FFG game I've ever played and I have a lot of them. I cannot understand why they've done them that way.

Why put artwork on a card that's covered at all times, for example? Baffling.

When MoM1 was released, the only other Arkham board game (there was an old Call of Cthulhu CCG that they acquired and turned into the first LCG) was Arkham Horror. The bases were made to use the same sized tokens as AH2 used. This allowed you to slide either token into your minis, depending on which game you were playing. (Unless you were my boss, in which case you glued the MoM1 tokens into the bases. Seriously.)

The bases served for that, but I'm with you that I'd prefer most other options for their basing. Now, having Descent2, Imperial Assault and the upcoming AH3, I'd much rather have the pertinent information for the enemies on cards. They'd be easier to sort, store, and use.

Anyway, that's the history lesson. I think that was the deciding factor for Eldritch Horror to use the same token style for its monsters. I'm super glad they didn't make it into either Elder Sign or the LCG.

On 8/7/2018 at 10:15 AM, PinkTaco said:

They were simply told by the game 'you take horror damage because the app says and now you have a card that says you lose. enjoy'

Again though... this doesn’t really happen unless the investigators are actively ignoring the potential insanity effects prior to someone going insane and they continue to ignore the implicatiotions if someone going insane during the Mythos Phase. They shouldn’t do that.

”Rick has a bladed weapon, has one brain left before he goes insane, and is in a room with one other investigator.” The investigators should make sure people split up or the weapon is traded ASAP. Same with fires, they shouldn’t be ignored while everyone is sane, light sources should be traded when someone is drifting towards insanity.

The insanity cards in discussion here really aren’t instant lose conditions at all.

5 hours ago, KalEl814 said:

Again though... this doesn’t really happen unless the investigators are actively ignoring the potential insanity effects prior to someone going insane and they continue to ignore the implicatiotions if someone going insane during the Mythos Phase. They shouldn’t do that.

”Rick has a bladed weapon, has one brain left before he goes insane, and is in a room with one other investigator.” The investigators should make sure people split up or the weapon is traded ASAP. Same with fires, they shouldn’t be ignored while everyone is sane, light sources should be traded when someone is drifting towards insanity.

The insanity cards in discussion here really aren’t instant lose conditions at all.

Except they are instant lose conditions.

Because lets say the investigators DID prepare, and give away the knife, grouped up etc.

Well now the investigator that pulls the insanity card, he instantly loses. Because the other investigators prepared for that situation and now the insane player is stuck with a loss and no way to win. Not fun.

There is literally no outcome from these cards that allows for someone to not feel like the win didn't get straight stripped away from them due to RNG or some factor out of their control.

Going insane happens and it can be a drag or entertaining, I have enjoyed games where we were on the verge of winning until someone sparks one more fire and grins..it is Lovecraft world people go insane all the time

Obvious line no one is forced to play with the traitor cards.

Ways to maybe avoid them; save clues for those checks that can cause sanity loss, play with investigators who have a high sanity stat to begin with.

I have played the game many times and you rarely go insane by luck (bad dice rolls) it is usually because you are taking too long and the game stops being nice and moves in for the kill. A retrospective on why I have lost in the past is often... i should not have talked to ALL of those people or picked up ALL of those items. Going insane while holding arms full of items might be the cause.

45 minutes ago, PinkTaco said:

Except they are instant lose conditions.

Because lets say the investigators DID prepare, and give away the knife, grouped up etc.

Well now the investigator that pulls the insanity card, he instantly loses. Because the other investigators prepared for that situation and now the insane player is stuck with a loss and no way to win. Not fun.

There is literally no outcome from these cards that allows for someone to not feel like the win didn't get straight stripped away from them due to RNG or some factor out of their control.

The traitor cards do not function like you say they do.

The text on Pyromaniac reads:

Quote

You do not win the game as normal. At the start of your turn , if 6 or more rooms contain Fire, you immediately win the game and the game ends. If the game ends for any other reason, you lose the game.

The emphasis is mine. I’m pretty confident all of the cards in question (Pyromanic, One Of The Thousand, and Pact With Yog-Sothoth) have equivalent text. I don’t have access to them right now... apologies in advance if I am incorrect about that.

If an investigator goes insane during the Mythos Phase and there’s a bunch of fire on the map, none of the sane investigators should allow the insane investigator to go first to ensure someone can put out some of the fires. If an investigator goes insane during their turn and draws Pyromaniac, that player does not win during their turn, as the start of their turn has already passed. Neither of those are instant lose conditions. I cannot think of a situation in which someone draws a traitor card and instantly wins.

Again, investigators who know the game mechanics well should be hedging their behavior against the possibility of someone going insane and becoming a traitor once the brain cards start flying. That is the purpose of those traitor cards, not to create an “instant lose” scenario... investigators should start to treat other players as potentially suspicious if someone is flirting with insanity.

Whether or not that creates a game state that someone is looking for when they play MoM, or whether or not it feels good to lose to an insane investigator... those are different discussions. But none of the traitor cards are ACTUALLY instant losses, and they are most dangerous when their implications are ignored while everyone is sane.

*sigh*

You consistently make large edits to your posts, and it seems as if you do it immediately. That is very confusing.

19 minutes ago, PinkTaco said:

Except   they ar  e instant lose conditions. 

You are incorrect. For this to be true, the card would have to tell you that you have lost the game and there is nothing you can do to prevent it. That is not what the “traitor” sanity condition cards do.

31 minutes ago, PinkTaco said:

Well  n  ow the investigator that pulls the insanity card, he instantly los  es.   

I think you need to add “instant” to the list of words whose definition you should look up.

41 minutes ago, PinkTaco said:

There  is literally no outcome from these cards that allows for someone to not fe  el like the win didn't get straight stripped away from them d  u  e to RNG or some factor out of their control.  

So it seems that this whole thread is based on people having their feelings hurt. I am not sure which is more sad, the fact that people feel as if “the win” was “stripped” away from them, or that it apparently causes so much distress. If winning is so important I do not understand why you are altering this aspect of the game, why not ensure you never go insane instead of altering what happens if you do. An easy way to do that would be to double each investigator’s health and sanity. You are sure to win every game if you do that, which seems to be what you and your friends are most concerned with.

50 minutes ago, spoonman2084 said:

no  one is forced to play with the traitor cards.  

I agree, but for the life of me I cannot imagine why anybody would want to remove them. When used correctly they add so much to the game. Having to make the choice between myself, or the people I care about (the one, or the many) brings another dimension to the game.

54 minutes ago, spoonman2084 said:

I have played   the game many times and you rarely go insane by luck (bad dice rolls) it is usually because you are taking too long and the game stops being nice and moves in for the kill. A retrospective on why I have lost in the past is o  ften... i should not have talked to ALL of those people or  picked up ALL of those items. Going insane while      holding arms full of items might be the cause. 

I could not agree more with this comment! Time management is an extremely important part of this game. You usually do not have the ability to investigate everything on the board. There are many things that are meant to distract you, and make you waste time. You really need to be smart about what you do and do not investigate, and you need to know when to stop checking every single item that can be investigated. I think this is something that may be missed by casual players.

On ‎8‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 8:29 PM, spoonman2084 said:

Going insane happens and it can be a drag or entertaining, I have enjoyed games where we were on the verge of winning until someone sparks one more fire and grins..it is Lovecraft world people go insane all the time

The thing is why would that person grin?

Again, for a lot of us if you "win" because you've set a load of fires and it ends the investigation in a co-op game that doesn't feel like a real win. The game is over and the investigation isn't done, that's absolutely a loss.

On ‎8‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 9:17 PM, LabanShrewsbury said:

*sigh*

You consistently make large edits to your posts, and it seems as if you do it immediately. That is very confusing.

I've never been on a forum where it even allows you to give a reason for editing and I feel like that's etiquette that you're pushing onto everyone else. Especially since this thread gets maybe two posts a week, it's not like we're in a chatroom replying at a mile a minute.

1 hour ago, Taear said:

Again, for a lot of us if you "win" because you've set a load of fires    and it ends the investigation in a co-op game that doesn't     fe  el like a  real  win   .  

Circles and circles and circles. Then do not set a load of fires.

1 hour ago, Taear said:

d  oesn't       fe  el li  ke a  rea  l   win      .     

I really think you may be too obsessed with winning. It really seems as if that is the issue here, you do not like to lose.

6 hours ago, Taear said:

I've never been on a forum where it even allows you to give a reason for editing and I feel like that's etiquette that you're pushing onto everyone else.

No, I am pushing it on you because you make substantial edits to your posts almost immediately after posting them it would seam. I receive an email every time there is a new post in this thread, and the email shows me what you have written. From the time you post a response and I receive an email, and am actually able to read the email and then come to the forum, you have deleted part of, added to, or otherwise altered your post. It makes it very difficult to respond to you when you make such large changes to your posts.

13 hours ago, LabanShrewsbury said:

Circles and circles and circles. Then do not set a load of fires.

I really think you may be too obsessed with winning. It really seems as if that is the issue here, you do not like to lose.

Then why have the card? If you are going to ignore it, why have the card?

Why have a card that creates new win conditions for part of the party and makes them a traitor in an otherwise co-op game? That, again, is the whole point of the thread.

Oh, my god. Because It is great! I have played recently with a couple of friends who never played board games. They enjoyed the game, and when they went insane, they said that It was very funny because they had an option to "win" at the end of the game. One of them tried to burn six rooms, and his girlfriend needed 6 objects. But they do not "won" instantly. They "losed", but they thought It was a great game and they want to repeat.

Insane cards are not broken. You don't like the cards, only that. If you want to "win", try to not go insane!