I loved the idea behind corruption in Black Goat but the implementation was very lacking. Our group's main complaints was that corruption hardly ever came into play and even when it did it never really worked as a system of bonuses at a cost; the cards ranged from "meh" to flat out bad.

Looking over the summaries of Threshold it looks like they're basically admitting they screwed up corruption and have fixed it (unfortunately for another $30). Does the whole pact and power token mechanic succeed where corruption failed?

Nope. Pacts and Power can ONLY be gotten by using the herald, and corruptions can at least be gotten sometimes.

Pacts and Power are very easily accessible, but unfortunately also very powerful and exploitable. It's too soon to say, but I think Black Goat might be a less broken expansion. But Relationship cards and the new gates are very awesome.

Tibs said:

Too soon to say, but you said it anyway. We all know I disagree, but I will focus it into "broken" being a bad choice of words.

My biggest problem with the Black Goat Herald is the Surge Doom Tokens. It ends the game too fast. Those of you who are used to "Speed Arkham" are naturally more attracted to this most brutal Herald as it fits perfectly into your accelerated games. However, even with the Black Goat in play, Cult Memberships are still rare. At least the Black Goat brings in more Corruptions, because without it, Corruptions are just as rare ("sometimes" is too strong a word). In fact, without the Herald (and this has been discussed), almost the entire expansion disappears. You are left with two new monsters, generally as lost in the Cup as Nyarlathotep's Masks.

The Lurker remains a ragingly controversy, and I really don't want to add to it anymore. I'm perfectly willing to accept that I am not playing the Lurker "right", whatever that means. But I am playing it as written, and it has enhanced my games without savaging them into twelve-turn steamrolls. Keeping a fair comparison, take the Lurker Herald off the table, and you are left with a fantastic Gate Marker pile, and the Relationship deck (which admittedly works much better with more players at the table). You acknowledged that as if it were an afterthought: "The Lurker ruins the expansion, but these extra bits are awesome." I say that those Gates are a selling point!

Even if the Lurker Herald is to be stigmatized as a failure, the Lurker Expansion is MUCH better than the Black Goat Expansion. (I even prefer its Mythos cards.) Easier? Probably. Disappointing? If the hardcore response is any indication, sure. More "broken" than Black Goat? Not a chance.

Yes, I was a bit hasty there. Without using the Lurker herald, the expansion seems to be very good. However, the herald is required for much of the new "stuff" to appear. And unfortunately, the herald isn't as terrifying as it should be: in some cases it can help much more than it can hurt. And in some other cases, it can cause an auto-win in final combat. This makes the herald flawed, but the expansion is otherwise good.

Tibs and jgt:

I asked this in another thred but only a few answered. Is lurker worth getting? I have the rest. The black goat is brutal but fun at times when I need a short game. I understand everyone is still figuring lurker out, but out of 10 what do you give it? if you could rate the other as well.

I like what the lurker adds from what i've read.

Is the Lurker Expansion worth getting? Absolutely.

Let's just put the Herald aside for a moment, since that's exactly what I did with the Black Goat once I determined I wasn't fond of its quick games. What's left?

Eighteen new Gate Markers. These are fantastic, and can be used with any game. They will inject a new twinge of fear when you know a Gate is opening underneath you, or when you think you might not make your Gate Check closing roll. Most will abandon their simple old Gates for these insidious new ones, but when you think about it, with a combined forty-two Gates, you can mix'n'match however you like.

The Relationship deck. Small, perhaps limited, but very fun and by no means are any of them overpowered. They're like limited-use Skills you share with your partner. I find they enhance the social atmosphere in my multiplayer games. If you roleplay your games at all, they kinda fit with the nature of Personal Stories.

More Commons, Uniques, Spells. Where Black Goat had more Items and few Spells, Lurker has more Spells and few Items. All are interesting, but the Spells are superb, because some can be used to help other players during THEIR turn. (They're like Interrupts!) Plus, there's no STUPID "Call Ancient One" waste-of-a-card Spell here!

Mythos Cards. Like Black Goat, Lurker has some all-important Arkham Location Gate Bursts without requiring any other Board being in play, making it just as complementary to Innsmouth's Innsmouth-only Mythos. But beyond that, Lurker's Mythos are pound-for-pound more interesting and cool than Black Goat's Mythos. Its Rumors are perhaps a bit lighter, but more different than any other Rumors to date. And double-gate openings!

Encounters. Well, now we're at just icing. Lurker has a new chunk of cards for your neighborhoods and Other Worlds, but they're not really any better or worse than any other card expansion. But they're ones you haven't seen before, and that always makes them better until you've seen them all, right?

As for the Lurker Herald, my "lightweight" cultists are a bit on the fence, cuz they don't like Heralds (game's hard enough without them), but about half of them think it's a blast. The Pacts are meant to be helpful, but there's always a risk using them because the Reckoning Deck might bite you, perhaps swallow you whole. The Lurker's a loan shark: ever willing to help, but don't miss a payment. But there are endless debates about this all over the place, and your mileage may vary.

But by now, the Herald shouldn't matter at all as to whether or not you'll buy it. Maybe you'll like it, maybe you won't, maybe you'll spend days figuring out ways to customize it so that you will like it. Frankly, I think that would add to the Pro column in the cost-benefit analysis anyway.

It's my current favorite small box. For the itty bitty price, it's beyond worth it.

Yes, get it. Um, essentially for everything jgt said.

Thanks guys that was more helpful then Avi. I will get it once my dad gives me the money he owes me for helping him remodel his basement.

Innsmouth13 said:

Whaaaat, I didn't even say anything (and if I did, I would have told you to get it for the above reasons).

Avi, You told me just to get it and watch out for on coming traffic! You are been very helpful. I ment no offence.

Innsmouth13 said:

None taken ;') I do my best to ensure that Arkham Horror players only become squidkill and not roadkill.

Well, I'm hardly hardcore. I thought Innsmouth was ridiculously hard (with some ludicrously broken ancient ones like Quachil), and the black goat herald doom surge house ruled out, while the hardcore here thought it merely made games not a steamroll anymore.

So the only problem with the new herald is that he can sometimes help you instead of always hurt you? We'd be fine with that, as long as the whole pact thing is FUN.

GrooveChamp said:

It is. The Dark Pacts provide advantages (Power as Clues, free Allies) that can get you out of tough spots, while the counter-balancing Reckoning Deck can put you right back into them. I think the key is having a fear of the Reckoning Deck: my cultists have a healthy fear of everything AH, and don't trust the Lurker at all. It makes for a pretty fun game playing with a group like that when the game is tossing a Mythos and a Reckoning at you almost every turn.

I don't believe the hardcores have any fear of the Reckoning Deck, either because it isn't threatening enough (even at its worst, devouring can still be perceived as just a strategy) or it is circumvented by judicious maneuvering of your Pacts. Hence, all help, no hurt, which is not their kind of Herald. It's almost the exact opposite of the Cult of a Thousand, which (if you could ever do it) was a way to volunteer for pain without a great deal of benefit. It's a shame the Cult didn't work while the Lurker works too well.

I'm finding that the Lurker is doing quite nicely as a "gateway" Herald: my cultists didn't appreciate a particularly nasty incident with the King in Yellow's worst Blights, and "Herald" became a "bad word". I'm using the Lurker to cure them of their gun-shyness.

jgt7771 said:

I've probably mentioned this before, but much as I love the relationship cards for their flavor alone, I particularly appreciate how much they heighten a player's desire to not get devoured (especially since this has become a more and more casual occurrence with each new expansion)

Regarding the Cult/Pact situation, whenever I think about that, I get the feeling that there has to be some way to use the two to rebalance each other, but haven't really been satisfied with anything I've come up with... (An example off the top of my head: Rule 1–Whenever you spend power, take a corruption card; Rule 2–when a Reckoning card comes up, any player may discard their cult membership, if they have one, to counter it)

subochre said:

That's an interesting variant. I'd consider making it two corruptions for each use of power though.

Hm, yeah, probably. My main concern is that a bigger per-use penalty would just make it even less likely that players will use their power for anything other than seals. One alternative is to give them, for example, one corruption for every two power they spend at a time (ignoring fractions). It's a little less simple, but it'd encourage people to spend it on an extra roll or on small-scale damage absorption, which seems like a good thing.

subochre said:

Well, bear in mind, I'm already considering implementing a variant that allows for a max expenditure of 3 power per turn, and only the turn after it's aquired. Personally, I'd be willing to trade 2 corruptions for 3 clues. Or six for 9. Being able to seal 2 gates is worth the danger (I think). Especially if you spread out the aquisition of the clues and try to get gates that will remove corruptions. Anyways :') the point is to make it more dangerous, not less (plus I love corruptions and hate how rarely they're seen).

What's that you say? I now have to murder all my children to gain corruptions? Okie dokie!

I love the idea of tying corruption to spending power time to make more use of them.

Spinning off in a slightly different direction, am I alone in noticing that the threat from the Reckonings goes down as the game continues? What with seals blocking a gate opening and mythos cards causing surges, there seems to be fewer cards getting drawn. This of course seems counter intuitive - as time goes by the threat should be getting worse. Using the Deep Ones Rising track as an inspiration I was thinking of trying the following rule:

Anytime a gate opening is blocked (either by a elder sign or Kate), draw two reckoning cards and resolve both of them.

ricedwlit said:

Oh, that'd work. I just house ruled so that blocked gate openings are treated as normal (i.e. draw a reckoning card).

Ha ha okay yeah, we just had our first game with the threshold herald and pacts do appear to be broken.

Unless we're reading it wrong, you can just get both a blood + sould pact. From that point on you trade all your stamina and sanity for power tokens, which can then be used interchangeably as sanity, stamina, AND clue tokens? So someone can just park in the hospital/asylum, trade 7 sanity/stamina for 7 power, then recover and do it again next turn? $2 for 7 clue token? o_O

GrooveChamp said:

If you have a Bound Ally Pact, you don't even need the $2.

GrooveChamp said:

Geeze... I just went through the reckonings list... And it's even more overpowered than I thought earlier (and I already thought it was horribly overpowered). If you're willing to play the risks a little, you can do what groovechamp said. Of course, you can just discard your power from soul pact and blood pact if you draw several of these cards...

http://www.arkhamhorrorwiki.com/Power_Corrodes

http://www.arkhamhorrorwiki.com/Power_Corrupts

http://www.arkhamhorrorwiki.com/Power_Decays

These two might kill you, but so what? You'll get a new investigator with new items who can take new pacts.

http://www.arkhamhorrorwiki.com/Humanity_Lost

http://www.arkhamhorrorwiki.com/Prisoner%27s_Dilemma

This is really the only reckoning that's a minor threat for having too much power:

http://www.arkhamhorrorwiki.com/Debt_Comes_Due

As long as you're even mildly careful, and only have 5 power at most at a time, the worst case scenario is that you'll gain a doom token 1/27 draws (I'd say 28, but one's a reshuffle) for an event that'll probably only even happen half the turns in your game. It's absurd that anyone would think this is anything but a guardian :'/ If you play it hard, it gives you *amazing* advantages for getting a sealing victory. I don't see how you can't call this a guardian considering that it gives more game benefits than all the other guardians combined :'/

Well, there are various other slightly bad things that can happen (Give the Devil His Due, Devil's Bargain, Unsettling Aura), plus, if you're devoured, you'll at least lose all that power and your relationships. Even so, my group does have yet another house rule: Pacts can't prevent reckoning damage. Which seems plausible enough, and makes one at least a little uneasy about bleeding oneself dry.

subochre said:

A)you're house ruling again ;') nice house rule by the way

B)slightly bad things don't counterbalance incredibly good things

--

I mean, the truth is, I enjoy using these components very much even though I have to house rule them, but it does kind of annoy me that FFG attempted to pass this off as a herald ::shrug::

It was fun though! We still ended up losing to Rhan since he drew 4 cultists and with 5 bound ally pacts we weren't even going to bother fighting him.

Our group sees it as a fun thing to throw in play to balance out the totally ridiculous ancient ones like Quachil, Rhan, and Zhar.