Sorry for the multiple cross-post.

I worked on introducing the keeper (of Mansions of Madness) into Arkham. If you are interested, please visit there .

amikezor said:

Hmmm... The Sacrifice effect is going to be *very* problematic, especially if you use it with gate surges. You could theoretically bump up the terror level *a lot* extremely quickly. You might want to limit its use to once per turn.

Very interesting concept. I agree that sacrifice might be troublesome. Maybe if it had some negative for the keeper...like if instead of just popping it back in the cup, he had to give it to one of the investigators as a trophy? Or maybe just have it usable only once per turn like Avi said.

I'm interested to see where this goes.

Couple quick notes:

• "Lose," not "loose."
• "Dice," not "dices." (Singular of "dice" is "die.")

Not sure I entirely understand the cooperation rules. By "split any penalties between them how they want" do you mean the penalty to their rolls, or the consequences for failing a check? It sounds as though only one person is rolling for any given check, still.

For the gate opening rules: if the keeper doesn't get at least one success, does the gate still open? From how it is written it sounds as though you need at least one success to even open the gate. I think maybe you're intent was that you just need the success to get +1 doom?

Seems like you may want to make "gate burst" one of the action cards as well, but a particularly pricey one or one with some special controls on it.

All in all, this seems like it is developing into quite a nice way of doing "Versus Arkham." I like that overall you don't seem to have messed with the victory conditions or anything...you've just made the evil player-controlled.

Does the keeper get to do anything during the final battle if it comes to that?

Avi_dreader said:

good point ! I'll do that. Thank you for the feedback Avi

@Sdrolion: for the coop rules, it only means that if you play together an encounter, you split the risk and the penalties. I will rephrased it. Easier but you "lose" one turn. ;o) In a way it makes it easier but having a keeper will make it harder. So it should balanced out nicely (at least in theory :-).

No, for the gates, no success implies no gate. It is the way I make sure the keeper do not awake the AO in 6-8 turns. It is easy to open the first ones and then becomes less and less easy. I should take into account the elder signs from the board as well... hum...

Gate burst is definitely on its way to be created.

I'll playtest this first version tonight. So we will see if it works out nicely... or not

Yes I tried to keep as close as I could to original AH. It will be so easy to create dedicated stories later if it works.

amikezor said:

Heh... I've seen these sorts of infinite power loops before ;') Technically there's a chance it'll falter, but, as it is... Heh... Terror ten from zero in a turn or three is possible.

Sigh... I made an competitive version a while ago, but no one I knew ever wanted to play it (probably a good idea knowing how I would have remorselessly crushed them into investigator paste) ;'D

After a fun playtest, it worked great after updates. So I posted on BGG the modified version. I now have the Gate Burst. Still the vortex are problematic. As for sacrifice, the better is to have it only once per turn and give it to the first player as a trophy.

amikezor said:

By the way, I don't know if you noticed :') Julia played your herald in Scenario 11 ;'D

One thing she noticed is that the cultists aren't immune to handcuffs. Are you going to change that?