The first post stated that it is impossible for the investigators, especially if Walter is placed in the locked Ceremony Room, right? Thats what I gathered. I don't know if it has already been answered, but they have a fair chance of coming through this door, since in one of the rooms whee a random Exploration Card is put they find the axe. Most probably they will have found it till the objective Card is revealed. And with it, they can "open" any door...

Update:

The new Errata ( http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/ffg_content/mansions-of-madness/support/mom-faq-v1.pdf ) fixes this:

Clue 1A: The keeper must place Walter Lynch within 2 spaces of any investigator

"I've decided that since this is the first scenario, it should probably be easier for the investigators. I have updated the FAQ to read that Clue 1A should say

"The keeper must place Walter Lynch within 2 spaces of any investigator. "

I hope that this helps, and that it answers your question. Thanks!

-Corey Konieczka"

The email I woke up to today. And THATS why I started a thread. To bring stuff like this to the attention of the creators of the game so that if they felt the same way they could make a change.

Yep, good call.

I think the "problem" with the thread was the initial concept that the scenario was "broken". The scenario wasn't broken. It was just difficult, probably too difficult especially considering it would be likely be considered an "intro" scenario (due to being the first scenario).

The change should make things interesting.

I think now we need to Corey to see about giving the Keeper in 1C the chance for a few more zombies (or something) to show up so the Keeper has a reasonable chance of winning that set of options.

dvang said:

Its the way I post I think, the same thing kinda happened in my suitcase thread, and another thread. I am usally posting to point things out, nothing more. Its great if you have a diffrent opinion and all, and I will happily discuss things with you if you like, but usally if I'm posting something its along the lines of:

I noticed this, tested this, these are my results. I have already came up with a personal work around (if needed). I send a email in (if it warrants one) and only also post it on the forums so everyone else who cares to see and see it.

The fact of the matter is, under greater then 50% circumstances this senerio was unblanced in favor of the keeper. I understand that there are times where it will NOT be, and not every senerio can be 100% balanaced for all circumstances, but I wasn't posting it in a "RAWR THIS GAME IS AWFUL AND I HATE IT AND IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED" way, I was just posting it in a "FYI" way.

FrostyWolf said:

Then I apologize. The problem was addressed, and I'll take into consideration you post to notify more than spark discussion.

Tomoka said:

Hey, don't worry about it. I come off as brash, I know it, its just how I sound when I type really. If a discussion happens afterwards, so be it.

Yeah, sometimes it's just a matter of careful wording.

Trying to choose less "negative" words like "broken" or "impossible", and replace them with words like "unbalanced" or "unreasonably difficult", can sometimes make a world of difference, and change the whole tenor of a post. It also wasn't just you Frosty, we've all made those kind of posts or used those kind of words at times.

FrostyWolf said:

IMO, there should be only a 50% chance for the investigators if they pick the best investigators for the scenario and play without error assuming the Keeper plays without error. Any other situation should really favor the Keeper. OTOH there should be no scenario that gives the investigators no chance, even if they pick the worst investigators for the scenario and play without error.

But...how can investigators pick the best people and equipment with out know what the senerio is going to be? Also, how can they be epected to play the prefect play thru and then only still have a 50% chance of winning?

If the game was vs the board I would agree with you, but like I mentioned in another topic, no one would play this game if the keeper won the majority of the time cause it would be no fun for the other players. Everyone would just want to be the keeper not to lose.

If the investigators make a resonably balanced team and play a good game, it should be a 50% chance. If they make all the right choices and play the perfect game, it should be a much higher chance then that.

IMO, the choice of investigators is crucial in that you cannot expect to win any scenario with less than 2 capable combat characters. McGlen in his Tommy-Gun Setup is practically a must, because he is hard to reliably slow down or weaken as Keeper, since his Willpower is so high he rarely takes Horror, and his Health is so high its hard to play powerful trauma cards on him.

Paired up with someone having access to Blood Pact McGlen has become my main problem in the game. The gun is just THAT good.

On the other hand, Harvey Walters rarely seems to matter much. He takes a while to kill off due to his item, but he really isnt much of a threat unless fueled by type-writer-created skillpts, which means Gloria is around, who also is a weak supporter.

The most dangerous setup so far has been McGlen, Joe, Sister Mary and the two-gun girl whose name escapes me at the moment in my games, all of them opting for the non-discard items where possible.

Its about minimizing sources of Horror or Damage, and with that amount of firepower and high willpower, the keeper will rarely get to play a lot of trauma cards. Mythos cards, on the other hand, are not as devastating anyway.

The easiest win for me was Harvey Walters + Gloria in a 3-player game... story 1, the maniacs and zombies just slaughtered them, and I kept them at 1 life for a while till the clock was close to running out, so the respawning McGlen + Joe couldnt get to Walter in time.

In any case, beware of the two-pistol-girl + shotgun combo. So far, that has been a dealbreaker whenever they made it happen (7 plays and counting, so far we have played story 1 all three variants, story 2 and 3 )

Combat is not always a major part of a scenario. There was one scenario I ran that had only one monster appear the entire game, the players defeated it after several rounds of combat, and I still won. The fighter investigators were actually a weak link that I exploited for the win. So far, that has been my favorite session, because it captured tension for both myself and the investigators, since I had no idea if I could win, and my players had no idea what was going on.

Back to the issue at hand, while it doesn't hurt to post issues with the game here, FFG has said that any issues and concerns that need their attention should be sent to them directly, as they do not use the forums for solving game issues (usually). As a community we can come up with consensus on rulings and the like, and will post what we hear back from FFG regarding rule issues. I've posted here for those reasons myself. But when we need somethign addressed, it is always better to contact FFG directly through their link at the bottom of the page.

The fact is, Frosty, that some scenarios/objectives are more balanced in favor of the Keeper, while others are more balanced in favor of the Investigators, and a few are probably fairly evenly balanced. As mentioned, a lot also depends on the investigators chosen, as well as the options each investigator has chosen. A Joe Diamond or Jenny Barnes who doesn't their pistols, for example, poses a different threat than when they have their pistols selected. So, nothing will be absolutely balanced so that there is always a 50%+ chance of the investigators winning.

With that in mind, though, I don't think you should be suggesting that the investigators should have more than a 50% chance of winning. Despite the RPG-like aspect to the game, it is a Boardgame with two sides. The Keeper should have just as much chance of winning the game as the investigators. In an optimal world, everything will be 50% for each side. Of course, this is impractical and impossible to do, so the different scenarios/objectives will favor one or the other to some degree. Of course, I don't think this is a bad thing. All it means is that you need to try it again, IMO. I lost 1C pretty badly as the Keeper, and felt like it was *very* difficult for the Keeper to win that scenario+objective. It made me want to try it again to do better. Sometimes a challenge is a *good* thing.

FrostyWolf said:

They know the scenario. After setting up the map, then characters are chosen, aren't they? Choosing the story is the first thing done. Of course the investigators don't know the exact chronology or the exact goal at that point.

I'm assuming that they play perfectly vs a keeper playing perfectly. Neither will probably play perfectly and well, that's an advantage for one or the other.

It's Lovecraftian and mythos oriented. My assumption is different than yours is all. I don't think FFG or the game says who has the best chance or should have the best chance. I've played several games solo and the keeper usually wins, even though I know his every thought, since he's me. But I'm OK with that. Sometimes its not even close and I'm not so OK with that.

The Keeper is supposed to be the most experienced MoM player which probably gives him/her an advantage there but eventually experience will even out and everyone will have a chance to be Keeper, maybe.

If you're in 1A, even with the errata of Walter being placed within 2 spaces of an investigator, if Walter just makes a run for the Ceremony Room with the "sealed door" and gets there, it's Game Over really, no? Nothing opens the sealed door, the "all locks removed effect" at Event 4 does not apply to 1A.

If he's in the 1st space the Shotgun can shoot through the door at him but if he move to the 2nd space in the room, my interpretation of "shooting through the door" with the shotgun is you can't shoot that space.

valvorik said:

Isn't the sealed door a lock card? If it is Event 4 would remove it.

To be honest, I think chase is the climax. If Walter wins then the game tends to go with it (unless you use the Hobo's guitar or something).

Aye, the sealed door is not the "door nailed shut" blip (which isn't removable, never) but the lock card in the ceremony room which, during Event 4, is removed. Run, Walter, run.

Sorry for adding to confusion, I was caught up in fact the Event card has locks removed in 1B, overlooking it's the story objective card that removes all locks in 1A. My bad.

Rob

Maybe we are reading it wrong but when we played the Scenario - and Walter showed up (Five player game). When the keeper took his turn, Walter just "teleported" across the board to the ceremony room. When the players got close, he just used 4 threats again and "teleported" to the garden - avoiding the characters until the time ran out. It was almost like you needed to fully understand the scenario BEFORE playing it.

All new players are simply going to do Scenario one first (generally) - and I would have made this scenario the eaisiest to win against vs crazy hard.

Falantrius said:

euhm. that's impossible to do as the keeper. i'm assuming your keeper was using the maniac attack action card. the keeper has to discard the maniac attack when walter pops into the game (otherwise he could use the maniac attack card to constantly keep walter at full health).

how was he doing the teleporting thing?

K.O. said:

Maybe we missed that but we didnt see anywhere where it said to discard the Maniac Attack action.

1A: Reveal Objective: The keeper places Walter in any room. Walter is a maniac with +4 health per investigator.

Maniac Attack: Action: blah blah blah Otherwise, fully heal a maniac. If he does not have a sample, move him to any space.

Since Walter is a maniac with no sample - the Keeper could move he to "any space".

Falantrius said:

Did your game come with the replacement cards? My 1A replacement reads:

"When this objective is revealed, discard all Lock cards and the "Maniac Attack" card from play."

That top section is missing from the original 1A Objective card.

Reading your post again, I think you were just looking for the text in the wrong card. It's not on Clue 1, it's on the Keeper's Objective card.

Dam said:

I dont know what you mean "replacement cards" - are you saying there should have been a set of replacement cards in my game?

How do I tell? I think part of our problem is that even though we read the cards, we are missing "doing things" - it may be the case as we play we will be more likely to "get it" right.

There should be 7 cards marked with the letter "R" in the lower-right corner that were meant to replace 7 cards that had the wrong wording (though couldn't see much difference in some of them TBH). You should have a little white note in the box, listing few of the FAQ/Errata.

Replacements:

Keeper Action card "Command Minion"

Keeper Action card "Summoning"

Objective card "Fall of House Lynch 1A" and "1C"

Event card "Fall of House Lynch Clock Strikes 11" and "Clock Strikes 2"

Eldrich Combat card

Dam said:

Okay now all this is making sense now. The first scenario we played was Scenario 1 specifically 1A and we dont have any such not in the box or cards with the letter "R" on them. Can I order the replacements from Fantasy Flight?