Remember that the Institutions are almost certainly optional. It's up to if or when you use them. Different strokes for different folks.

Candidates for Blights. Ideally these characters ought to come up in encounters. It would be good if they occasionally turned up elsewhere too (e.g. Harney jones visitting Dunwich Village for supplies)

ARKHAM

• Deputy Dingby
• Abner Weems (Town Drunk)

DUNWICH

• Ringmaster Darke (Roll two dice when trying to get rid of curses and take the worst one)
• Harney Jones (Maybe close his shack)

KINGSPORT

• Jonas Rigg
• Neil
• Principal Miles
• Gladys Pickman
• Danny Houghton

Effects would probably have something to do with Rift Token. Jonas' effect might be that no Investigator may use Food or Whiskey / prevent Sanity or Stamina damage.

INNSMOUTH

• Enoch Conger
• Brian Burnham

Probably affect the Fed Track / Deep One Uprising Track.

Potentially there could be:

• Joe Sargent (+$2 for all train fares)
• Constable Ropes (-1 to all Evade checks)

jgt7771 said:

Exactly. If the Institutions are as they read on the card, I wont use them but that doesnt mean they wont be fun for someone else. Ive met plenty of players who never come on these boards who find the brutality of some of my games to be unbearable. They will welcome the help. Mind you, these are the same people who dont know how to exploit the Lurker, because they dont think like that, or play often enough to see how it can be done.

I am in the boat that thinks the institutions are not entirely unveiled at this point, as there is no downside I could read to that card. I wouldn't be surprised if the institution has to be activated somehow. All 8 characters aren't going to be in the mob from the start, right? ... Right?

Also, notice how the Miskatonic Horror symbol is -yellow-? That seems strange. I figured that for MH they'd use "double" symbols, one for Miskatonic and one for the expansion the card actually uses. Coloring... Well, can get iffy due to color blind issues, but it does save space...

RocksLikeToast said:

That's a little unfair, I think...maybe there are people who do play like that, but there are also more legitimate reasons to want to use a guardian than "because I want to win every game." Some of my friends like to play with Hypnos, for example, to encourage having encounters in unstable locations rather than relying on newspaper/shopping gimmicks. They just make sure their Herald/AO/Investigator setup is such that the game will still be interesting.

I don't get the mentality that some people have that the only worthwhile change to the game is one that makes it harder. Especially since there are certain elements that are generally accepted to be too hard, it's nice to have something around to offset those; I would enjoy seeing how a bunch of improbably wealthy investigators hold up against, for example, Atlach-Nacha and the Black Goat (though I do agree in this particular case that just giving everyone a retainer and a couple extra ways to spend money seems like a sloppy fix).

Variety is the spice of life, y'know?

Athenor said:

The gold tome symbol is for any brand new items, like Institutions. And if you look at the cult encounter card, it has a gold Black Goat of the Woods symbol on it. So the cards will still have their respective symbols, they'll just be gold to show they are from MH. Basically what you said, but a little more streamlined.

I do not understand why people complain about the game being too easy (or sometimes too hard) while using some components. It is so easy to make it more difficult using heralds or houserules (there are tons of excellent customs ones for examples) or to make the game easier when the mechanics is too hard (using guardians e.g.). The nice point about this game is that there are many different mechanics that can be used and tweaked to improve the fun. So let's create the rules to make it as you like.

The Institutions look like an excellent opportunity to use cards we barely (if ever) use. That sounds like an excellent idea to me. This is why I really think that typically expansions can bring much more fun than their standard use (eg. there are several custom heralds and scenarios that uses the corruptions and cult encounters very nicely and make them exciting, at least more than in the standard goat though, unlike most people, I like the official Goat herald that has been classified as "too hard" ).

Anyway, I do not want to close the debate about too easy/too hard but I am trying to move it to a more positive thought :-). This games has endless possibilities and so much fun potential that lies beyond the "play it by the book". Make it as you like sounds better to me.

dj2.0 said:

I'm not really sure if it can be counted as an exploit if it takes less than a minute to figure out for a person with understanding of phase order and the value of clues ;'D

Yeah, I'm sure there will be plenty of people to have more guardians (but I sure won't be one of them since I don't use guardians now).

@ Amikezor: I don't have anything against Guardians or components useful to expand the possibilities offered by the game. I just hope that all creations (both adding difficulties to the game, or making it easier) are made after a carefull thinking about the possibilities already offered by the game. For example, I really love your two Guardians (Hermes and A shadow from the past; I don't know whether you've created other Guardians in French), even if I don't use them very often. They are good because they give you the chance to put into play cards you otherwise don't see that often, or because they allow you to explore stable locations. This is great. It doesn't break game's balance (you have to pay to obtain Hermes gifts, you can trade clues but at a certain cost and you have to pay stamina for drawing cards while in the streets) and widens the spectrum of possible strategies for the game. And they are more or less playable with any combinations of Heralds / AOs, which is a big plus. Many of the good things available in the last FFG - AH line products seem to have been done (in my vision of the game at least, I don't pretend to be right, it's just the way I see it) without thinking too much about a couple of issues. The Lurker herald is completely broken, and it'd have been sufficient adding a couple of lines to avoid some absurd situations like the ones we talked about in so many previous threads (like the Arkham Asylum exploiting thing or the gate sealing laundry. I won all the games I played using this Herald, and it's quite strange, no boost in difficulty at all). Cult Encounters are the same. No reasons to join the Cult. If the Cult Encounters had been like the one they posted on the Miskatonic Horror preview, then it'd have been different. Besides, corruption mechanic is great, but without the Herald, that deck is very rarely used (in the last 50 games without the Herald, I think I drew one green corruption and that's all). When I read the text of Organized Crime, it seems to be that they did it again. I hope there is something we didn't know yet, and in some ways it's balanced by other components. But in case it's not, it's something that can be game breaking. Ok, maybe all of us will play a couple of games being gangsters and drawing a Membership during set-up, just to play with that card (I never ever obtained one Sheldon Gang Membership in my whole Arkham life), but then? Honestly, I think that in 95% of the games, all of us will go for a retainer. And there are no detriments for this. And this Institution offers you even other benefits during the game, thus it doesn't seem to me something giving you chances to play in a different way, it gives you simply instruments to crash the game. I think it would have been more interesting if all players were forced to join the Sheldon Gang (or, in case they refuse, they should pay a certain amount of money to have their protection); and that they had bonuses from this, but maybe even some detriments, just to make it more fun and open new ways of playing (strategies to avoid being arrested; "hey, I have a Dhole corpse in my backpack and the police's coming! What should I do? I have to bring its lungs to that mad scientist for a reward, but the streets are blocked"), like in a sort of Scenario, where something's easier, something not, but everything is different.

So, basically, my point of view is simple: I'm ok with Guardians. I don't play with them that often, but nonetheless, everyone should be allowed to play according to his gamestyle and Guardians have to exist and being offered to the public. But if you try to create something different and new, you probably should try not to create again something already existing.

Julia, I fully agree with you. Thank you for your long post. My point was positive mind oriented; it is easy enough to fix the official material so that it becomes exciting and unbroken. So I'd spend more energy fixing them rather than complaining about their flaws.

I was thinking about Hypnos that can be easily fixed - either the clue only stay one turn (an easy fix), or, more fun, during the mythos phase do not add the clue of the mythos card, it would therefore force the investigators to have encounters in stable locations (which is nice :-).

warm regards

Uhm... I got your point :-) and Hypnos was just an example of a broken Guardian (Nodens is based on completely different mechanics and is a well done Guardian), your suggested fixes are good. Especially the first one - a hit and go, one chance to get the clue, otherwise it's gone; the second one could also be good, but not placing clues on unstable locations make them stay forever, and appear every round, so it makes the game a lot easier. Yeah, obviously, depends on playing styles, as usual; but I'd go with your first suggestion. Thank you!

amikezor said:

It needn't be either/or. After reading Julia's critique I think it shouldn't. And... This whole tangential discussion just gave me an idea for a new custom content challenge :'D Heralds specifically designed to go with established Guardians (so that the Guardians will feel more like heralds when you use them). I.e. something for Bast, something for Hypnos, and something for Nodens. I think the vanishing clue/stable clue along with some other thematic challenge boosting things would work well for Hypnos... I'll repost this in the fan creations thread.

SO when they say new act cards do you think they mean more "The Next Act Begins" Mythos cards to combat dilution with or new act cards which do diferent things......not sure how you would work that though.

While I don't like to be concrete about speculative things like this expansion, I think it's safe to say theyre just more of those same cards (perhaps 6 more...?)

Yay! This is an awesome expansion. I will save for when it ships!

EcnoTheNeato said:

Well, there's supposed to be an Act card every 15.5 Mythos cards. I imagine Mythos cards with two expansion symbols to indicate that you need to use both expansions to include the card. So that's approximately 1 each for CotDP, KH, BGotW, and LatT, and 2 each for DH and IH. But to be dead on they'd need to add 12 or 13. Of course, the addition of other Mythos cards would mean more Act cards, but the 8 I outlined should be satisfactory.

Dunwich gates should occur 1 out of 4 Mythos cards. That's 6 for CotDP, 9 for KiY, 7 for KH, BGotW, and LatT, and 12 for IH. 49 total would be best.

Innsmouth gates should occur 1 out of 3 Mythos cards. That's 9 for CotDP, 13 for KiY, 11 for KH, BGotW, and LatT, and 18 for DH. 74 total would be best.

Ideally, there could be a Next Act card that also opens a gate in Dunwich, for example. This would minimize the number of added Mythos cards that would boost gate/act numbers.

As for the Exhibit Item thing, there are 33 investigators that have not been covered by masks, so that would work out to 11 masks. But I don't think this is going to happen. There are investigators who would have odd or overpowered abilities (Patrice, Rex, Wendy, Finn). I expect a couple Masks, but not 10 or 11.

Akache would be a rad mask. And not TOO overpowered, because chances are you'll only be able to use it two times. Kinda like the Gloria Mask, only good for about 2 OW trips...

Agnes or Diana would be neat, too! Or another Mark Harrigan. God help us :-)

Jacqueline, Hank, Marie, and Daisy would probs be too powerful to make into masks...

EcnoTheNeato said:

I disagree... None of these effects would be game breaking if they could only last a maximum of six or seven turns. Patrice would probably be equal to ten clue tokens or so :'/ if timed right. But... Still, other than that... Nothing's *too* overpowered.

[edit: oh geeze, I posted something in the wrong window, whoops, ignore Julia's next post ;'D]

Avi_dreader said:

Nice idea. And yes, you got the point (horribly worded, though. Sorry, I'm skimming the forum while at work, I don't have that much time)

Marie's "remove a doom token" ability should not be included. That's an extremely cheap use of a mask.

Which is why I included her A third hand is fine, but a free doom toekn removal is too much! Though I suppose Hank's would be fine. Chances are, anyone who can use it for more than 5 turns or so has a terrible fight...

Tibs said:

It's cheap, but why not? If you stuck her on a mask with a couple other overpowered character abilities? Three birds with one card make it that much easier for those of us who hate those sorts of things to just take the card out of the deck ;')

Lurker at the Gate expansion is almost all positive (or neutral) from the relationships to the Lurker himself when used as instructed. The gate tokens themselves are mostly negative though, but really don't have much effect on my games, that way. The double location gates are a big positive IMO. I've gone back to using the original gates.

Hypnos with whom I've played frequently, isn't really a game winner, by a long stretch. He's a distraction. (Take a turn to get that extra clue rather than enter a gate, for example or he entices you to waste Clues in combat to save your measly life.) You still have to use a turn to pick up the Clue (and there's almost always only one in a particular location). I've seen plenty of Hypnotic clues wasted at the end of the game. But since Hypnos does give you options that you didn't have before, he's helpful. Turns might even be the most precious commodity in the game, even moreso than Clues.

As to Blights, why can't the allies go insane? That's 34 potential Blight cards right there.

I doubt that the Black Goat of the Woods herald can be saved by adding more of the same cult encounter cards. I've experimented with giving every player a membership card and they avoid the Cult Encounters like the plague (they are.). There's no there, there. If these cards are replacement cards, then maybe.

The Institutions might be a interesting if they create a theme, such as Gangsters/Professors against the Mythos! The Sheldon Gang membership is NOT very useful as it sits. I've given it to every player several times in the past as an experiment and as soon at the first investigator is arrested (1 out of six chance), it's not used again by anyone. Too dangerous. And its only useful when you happen to be out in the street anyway. Going out into the streets to use it is a waste IMO.

mageith said:

Maybe because most allies aren't in any given game?

Sadly, I think you're absolutely right about Black Goat. Maybe there will be an alternate herald. I doubt it.

avec said:

They don't have to be in the game. All we're really looking for is some names to cause some trouble if the terror increases. I've actually turned all the allies into Blight monsters (Insane citizens) through Strange eons. If an investigator happens to have the ally that goes insane, tough luck don't let the terror level go up!

mageith said:

hmmm thats actually an interesting idea...maybe you could make allies have some kinda personal story mechanic...if you get knocked unconsious with an ally you draw an injured version of them with lower stats.... and if you go insane you draw a blight version =o) be kinda neat to mess around with...