I just got my 2 boxes of "Return to" products. After tinkering with them for a while, I have two ideas that I wish would have been included.

I realize that in the end it's gonna be about production costs and I surely don't want to replace actual content with those.
But I'm pitching them anyway as they would, at least for me, augment the perceived value of Return to boxes.

1. Include errata cards to replace 1st edition cards.
It would just be better if I could play without having to remember which cards have errata.
I'm guessing that some players don't even look at current errata.
Many times it won't change your gaming experience, but some erratas are quite impactful, for example:

• Dr Henry Armitage as printed allows you to discard a weakness and gain 3 resources instead!
• Lucky Dice as printed allows you to ignore an auto-fail (on first draw, or even subsequently if you have enough resources).

Both examples are massively better than their errata counterparts, so it would be nice to distribute those "fixed" cards and I think Return to products could be a good avenue for that.

2. Include copies of base encounter sets
It is nice that dividers are included for base encounter sets that are used during the campaign.
It would be even more awesome to have an extra copy of that set, so that I can have campaign boxes on my shelf that are fully self-contained and ready to be picked up and played, no matter if I play the original, return to, or random mix variation.

For sure this is purely nice-to-have and you can move the base encounter sets from one box to the other (which is probably why dividers are included).
Yet it would augment the perceived value of the box for me, and I guess to other hardcore fans that are the main target of Return to products.

I get where you are coming from!

Based on the cost model FFG seem to have I think errata cards would more likely, and possibly the choice I would find more useful!

As to the request for additional copies of base encounter sets - my solution is to use the RTTNOTZ box to hold all the tokens and other components since the campaign takes up so little space in the box, then I can just take that Return box and the relevant campaign and I know I've got everything I'll need.

I know what you mean, but at the point we are in the line, they will not change it.

Errata, most people play without looking at the them. And for the sets, I think we will have, in every return product, only those that are used twice or more in the campaign ( if I am right, in Carcosa, we will have replacement of : Ancient Evil, Striking fear, agents of Hastur, Cultist, and perhaps for the five treacheries of Midnight Mask, but don't know if scenario's cards would be replace. And probably one from Carcosa, I hope for Malign Portents because I like the feeling )

And honnestly, I don't want to have the sets from the core. Just because if they do, they will not change the form of the product, so by adding just cards from the core, they would take the place of all-new cards, and I already find there are not enough of them, so don't want these copies to take the slot of all-new cards. Or if they do, at least give new versions of them, not just the same, that would not please me ...

I still maintain that RtNotZ should've included an additional set of the player cards you only get one of in the core box...

Errata'd cards is a good shout - equally, a pack of those as the "promo pack" for a 2019 Invocation event would be a nice idea.

19 hours ago, jods4 said:

1. Include errata cards to replace 1st edition cards.

This would be so great. Though it might be difficult to realize because there would need be different cards added to different boxes of different languages

On 2/21/2019 at 4:58 AM, mwmcintyre said:

As to the request for additional copies of base encounter sets - my solution is to use the RTTNOTZ box to hold all the tokens and other components since the campaign takes up so little space in the box, then I can just take that Return box and the relevant campaign and I know I've got everything I'll need.

I'm using my RTTNOTZ box to hold all the Standalone Adventures.

On 2/21/2019 at 5:43 AM, dysartes said:

I still maintain that RtNotZ should've included an additional set of the player cards you only get one of in the core box...

Really bad idea. It would turn people off who already own 2 cores.

9 hours ago, Sindriss said:

Really bad idea. It would turn people off who already own 2 cores.

Flip side there is that people who are either considering the game, or only have 1 core (due to the amount of waste in a second core set) have additional incentive.

I mean, such a pack should just've been an addition somewhere during the first block (or even just made for a slightly bigger core), but this is FFG we're talking about...

Errata cards would be very helpful. Not sure about the extraet of player cards. FFG would use that as an excuse to jack up the price. imo

Armitage doesnt let you discard weaknesses. In the rules it says you cant discard weaknesses except by their own effect.

To be more accurate, you cannot voluntarily discard a weakness from your hand.

21 hours ago, Radix2309 said:

Armitage doesnt let you discard weaknesses. In the rules it says you cant discard weaknesses except by their own effect.

The rules say (p. 21): "A player may not optionally choose to discard a weakness card from hand, unless a card explicitly specifies otherwise."
Armitage as printed says "After drawing a card, discard that card." which explicitly targets the drawn card, no choice here.

Maybe this is not the correct interpretation, however:

1. FFG published an errata that says "After you draw a non-weakness card" so it's fixed -- or at least clarified.
2. It's not the main point of this thread. Just an example to illustrate that IMHO errata can make a big difference and is worth having new cards with fixed text.

1 hour ago, jods4 said:

Armitage as printed says "After drawing a card, discard that card." which explicitly targets the drawn card, no choice here.

But you do have a choice, because it's part of a cost. If Armitage had said "After drawing a card: Discard that card...", then he'd have been able to hit weaknesses. Paying a cost is always voluntary, so you can't use a cost to discard a weakness or discard a weakness as part of a cost. The errata makes his ability clearer, but it doesn't actually change how it works.

3 hours ago, jods4 said:

The rules say (p. 21): "A player may not optionally choose to discard a weakness card from hand, unless a card explicitly specifies otherwise."
Armitage as printed says "After drawing a card, discard that card." which explicitly targets the drawn card, no choice here.

Maybe this is not the correct interpretation, however:

1. FFG published an errata that says "After you draw a non-weakness card" so it's fixed -- or at least clarified.
2. It's not the main point of this thread. Just an example to illustrate that IMHO errata can make a big difference and is worth having new cards with fixed text.

Armitage doesn't specify that he can discard a weakness.

I absolutely agree with both of these ideas. I'd happily buy a set of errata cards, but including them with the Return To sets would be a phenomenal gesture of goodwill.

And likewise, being able to buy just a new set of the core set encounter cards without having to shell out for a whole new core set would make me so happy. I've got three cores presently, so I'm covered through at least "Return to The Path of Carcosa" (assuming we get one), but I don't want to buy two more cores just to get another set of Ancient Evils for "Return to the Forgotten Age" and "Return to the Circle Undone."

First world problems, I know. But still a problem.