I wasn't sure what to expect from this or that but was excited to see you start with Quick Learner, the other Arkham channel I subscribe to and watch regularly. I figured that even if I didn't like the new format, I would enjoy the conversation between the two of you. I was right about that but also found the new format very interesting. Looking forward to more entries with other content creators.
I think it'd be a fun idea to let parallel Lola have different bonuses and/or penalties depending on what role she is in instead of limiting her to just one color depending on the role. So something similar to Lily's Disciplines or parallel Roland's Directives, where she gets a bonus effect while in a certain role but is still able to play and use cards of her other colors. She could then maybe get something like a cost increase to the colors she is currently not using as her main role or something of a similar effect, like dealing damage or horror to herself if she acts out of character etc., you get the point. Would be nice to just open her up a lot more and really have her deckbuilding and playstyle create a lot of different and unique combos and synergies.
I haven't fleshed this out or figured out how to properly reign in the backside. But, it would be cool with Lola's role changing if it wasn't so much about restricting which cards you can play, so much as about shifting her stats. Maybe 5 in one stat and all else 2s (combat for Guardian, willpower for Mystic, intellect for Seeker, and agility for Rogue); all 3s instead for Survivor.
Definitely more return to; I’d also happily lose the extra player cards, we can add higher exp versions of cards in other expansions. But the return to scenarios add so much variation (and sometime even fixes!) to the existing campaigns
This. They don't even have to reprint the boxes/dividers and whatever other extras. Give us the "return to" scenario cards in a blister pack, like the investigator starters and we'd be good to go.
I think the problem with the parallel jenny is that 2 versions already exists: they are called Preston and Skids. For a parallel Lola, susi does a pretty good impression.
@@PlayingBoardGames yeah that is fair. But for lola/susi i meant that they do have a fairly similar backside. Susi has a different drawback to make the all class deckbuilding work. And because lola is defined by her deckbuilding, i consider susi having to have the same ability, but with a different mechanic. Even if they are thematically very different. So i still will consider it a pretty good impression of a parallel lola, even if certainly not a perfect one. Clearly lola dove a bit too deep into acting to be a monster.
I wish they'd take the player cards from the return to boxes and release them somewhere else. I don't understand the point in discontinuing the return to boxes and not having a way for players to use the player cards.
I watched this get recorded live (How time flies!). It's a really fun format imo. Lightweight discussion and fun to hear some different perspectives if you involve other guests in the future! A topic suggestion (probably not a very good one!) could be Rotting remains vs A Tear in Time. Clumping up the consequences of the failed test or making a choice of the consequences of the failed test.
My idea for parallel Lola would be she can pretend to be another investigator from the scenario she's in. She would be able to play cards from any investigators discard pile so long she is at the same location. She can even commit skills from the discard piles, but this would have some kind of limiting condition so it doesn't get abused too much. Maybe only from the investigator she is pretending to be/imitate and only once per test per round? Her deckbuilding requirements gain the ability to upgrade into the class which she last had most control of. So if she finished a scenario with something like Decorated Skull (3) and no other assets from another class, she could purchase up to Rogue level 3 cards. Or maybe even that specific card as a bonus.
Loved this video and the podcast-esque chatting! I'd really like to see a difficulty-enhancing product which is essentially a "fuck me up" encounter set expansion for different campaigns, similar to the return to range. Following the difficulty of The Longest Night, I realised how fun struggling really hard even with strong decks is - and it would be cool to swap out encounter sets with really difficult enemies and treacheries.
My take on the Ancient Evils vs Frozen in Fear is that Frozen in Fear is more impactful, but Ancient Evils ranks higher for me on the “bummer” scale. Most of the time it’s not that bad, and if you know it’s in the deck you have to play differently, but it’s always going to be a feel bad when it pops up and ends the game. I feel like drawing Ancient Evils to end the game is similar to a sports team losing the last game of the season to miss the playoffs. If the team had won a game that felt meaningless at the beginning of the season they wouldn’t be in that position, but it still feels crushing. So perception of the worst case scenarios I think pushes Ancient Evils up the “most hated” list. My beef with Ancient Evils is scenarios that consistently reshuffle them back into the deck, that’s where it can feel like my play experience is randomly being taken away from me. Recently on my play through Innsmouth in a three player campaign the first agenda was lost on turn 3 because all 3 copies of Ancient Evils were in the top 9 cards, and then shuffled back in. It’s those moments where you really hate the card.
Parallel Lola i would try something along the lines of at the start of the round choose two different stats to be +1 for the round. The not chosen get -1 for the round. She is a 3333 who is never actually 3 in all stats. Always acting the part she needs to play.
We don’t need more return to content. That’s my opinion, but I understand people got into the habit of playing scenarios over and over to master them and then complain that some of them are almost solved.
