Blood Ties Objective 1C [Spoilers]

By FurinMirado, in Mansions of Madness

I didn't see this question anywhere, so maybe I'm over-thinking this, but I have to ask.

SPOILER ALERT

Objective 1C of Blood Ties says the keeper wins if the blood relative has 0 sanity and 0 health. Usually when one of the investigators dies that player gets to bring another investigator into play unless the objective has been revealed. In this scenario if that investigator was the blood relative then the new investigator that comes in is also a blood relative. So if the keeper successfully kills the blood relative before the objective is revealed does he win? Or does a new investigator just show up next turn as the new blood relative?

FurinMirado said:

I didn't see this question anywhere, so maybe I'm over-thinking this, but I have to ask.

SPOILER ALERT

Objective 1C of Blood Ties says the keeper wins if the blood relative has 0 sanity and 0 health. Usually when one of the investigators dies that player gets to bring another investigator into play unless the objective has been revealed. In this scenario if that investigator was the blood relative then the new investigator that comes in is also a blood relative. So if the keeper successfully kills the blood relative before the objective is revealed does he win? Or does a new investigator just show up next turn as the new blood relative?

The Keeper wins.

But you have to drive the blood relative insane before killing him/her, right? Otherwise the blood relative dies with a Sanity highers than zero and the game is a draw.

In the Investigator Guide it says if the blood relative is killed, a new character is provided for the player and this new character is also considered a blood relative. Presumably this gives the keeper another chance at driving them insane, and the investigators another chance of solving the mystery.

As far as if the keeper drives the blood relative insane, and then kills them, it seems like the keeper would win whether the objective is revealed or not.

I don't think the keeper needs to fret too much that, in the moments before his or her death, the blood relative was thinking sane thoughts about his impending doom rather than a sing-song chorus of "flimsy mimsy applesauce daffy duck douchebag crackers!" Keeper still wins.

I am, however, all for "partial victory" conditions. For example, if the objective for another scenario is "all investigators must escape" and I manage to kill one on their way out, I'll have the decency to let the rest attempt to scramble out. It's a win for me, but avoidance of complete loss for them.

Cassive said:

As far as if the keeper drives the blood relative insane, and then kills them, it seems like the keeper would win whether the objective is revealed or not.

But even if the objective is revealed, the keeper wouldn't win simply by killing the blood relative. The keeper only wins if the blood relative is at zero sanity and zero stamina. If the keeper reduced the blood relative down to zero stamina, and the blood relative still had some sanity left, the game would end in a draw. Or am I missing something?

@avec: I think if that happens after the objective card is revealed (the keeper kills the blood relative without them being insane) then yeah, it'd be a draw. However, before the objective is revealed, the player gets to come back as a new character, who is also a blood relative. So I feel like it's sort of a quick do-over for both parties.

Thematically I would look at it as whatever made the pact with the relative's ancestor is cursing their entire family line. Maybe for the stars to align they need to drive one of the bloodline insane, and then off them, and that'll make whatever ancient old one they worship happy, and they haven't had the chance to pull it off yet. So they screwed up on the first one, but fortunately the kid's crazy uncle showed up just shortly afterward. Time to try it all again (with less time on the clock).

Actually, going off straight rule text, according to the objective card, the keeper could eliminate the blood relative from the game (after the objective is revealed, or if there are no investigators left to pull in) and the investigators could still win. Their only objective is to solve the rune puzzle; there's no mention of keeping the blood relative alive (not including the flavor text, of course).

However, with this game, I don't see myself making a game mechanics ruling over a theme ruling. For me, this game is way more interesting as a story telling device than a game of let's see who can beat who. It's in there, clearly, and it has to be to make it engaging, but if a game mechanic that's strangely worded gets in the way of the story telling aspect, AND the people I'm playing with are cool with it of course, I'm perfectly willing to fudge it or make a house rule in order to keep the story going strong.

For me, this game is predominantly theme. Arkham is the numbers game, and if that's what I want to play that's the first place I'll go. This one's for me and my friends to sit around, relax, and see what kind of eldritch terror we can conjure up.