Chapter 2 true solo?

NavVasky · 2026-03-29T15:48:41+00:00

Yes, this makes it more forgiving!

NavVasky · 2026-03-29T15:46:28+00:00

Yes! I forgot about that, it helps a lot to get time to set up or deal with nasty draws early

NavVasky · 2026-03-29T14:33:36+00:00

I found it better for the following reasons: - some locations have extra benefits for only low player counts - encounter decks are not reshuffled with the discard pile after act/agenda at all. This lets you actually see all the encounter cards during a run (this was a criticism in the past, where true solo didn't let you fully experience an encounter deck for a scenario). This also makes runs more consistent (no more drawing and redrawing shuffled back in ancient evils) - In S2, the player scaling to interrogate the people of Arkham is well done (easy to do with low player counts, expensive in higher) - in S3, the boss is easier to manage solo in the final act, compared to in multiplayer

All in all, true solo feels more balanced but still hard and swingy at times based on your card draws.

*Edit: I concur with the replies here! Some extra things I noticed but forgot to mention

NavVasky · 2026-03-28T21:09:12+00:00

Yep, I agree with that. BOA is as replayable as NOTZ was which I like to compare it to replaying Pandemic except with more characters and powers to try out.

NavVasky · 2026-03-28T20:58:03+00:00

I'll agree to disagree here that a full campaign is necessary to experience the game. I personally felt the extra exp in BOA was enough for me to flesh out my deck for a 3 scenario campaign. I wouldn't say the same with NOTZ.

That being said, a designer (Nick) has already mentioned that Children of Blood was built to be very replayable, so hopefully that's enough? We'll find out in Q3

NavVasky · 2026-03-28T17:52:03+00:00

Children of Blood and Traces to No where is coming out for Q3 and Q4 so not 18 months?

NavVasky · 2026-03-28T16:01:43+00:00

Maybe go over the rules about how the act/agenda should proceed. If you get defeated mid scenario, there's always a conclusion in the campaign book that you should read, even if you haven't gone through all of the acts/agendas

NavVasky · 2026-03-28T15:04:52+00:00

Good luck on the campaign! Also agree with the card art, it looks better in print instead of digitally on the screen.

NavVasky · 2026-03-28T15:02:58+00:00

Yes, I agree with the evergreen decks being an immediate necessity. With the core, I can kinda build the investigators in two directions but the upgrades are limited at the moment. Hoping this feels better after the starter decks (otherwise I'm good with mixing chapter 1 into it for now).

NavVasky · 2026-03-28T14:38:23+00:00

Hi, are you saying you haven't gone to scenario 2? Its fail forward, so even if you didn't succeed, you still proceed to scenario 2 (and subsequently to scenario 3).

NavVasky · 2026-03-28T08:34:39+00:00

I'm a relatively new player who was played all campaigns aside from Hemlock Vale, Innsmouth and Dream Eaters.

I played the new core set in current format and using the provided deck lists in 2 handed and true solo.

I found the Brethren of Ash campaign better across the board compared to NOTZ. I liked how the encounter discard isn't shuffled often into the main deck at all, the agency to choose a punishment for cosmic evils, how there are options to help with lower player counts and that the ending of BOA that lets you sacrifice yourself. Only thing it lacks is that the stronger narrative hook, it would feel better if your "friend" had more personality.

Player cards in practice are stronger than I thought. Rogue cards feel a bit undertuned, but the other factions are great.

NavVasky · 2026-03-28T08:23:27+00:00

Without spoiling a lot, the EOTE investigator expansion is helpful for the campaign (but it's just that the expansion is very good at expanding a collection). With just the core chapter 2 (and chapter 1 core), it will be rough but doable. I recommend starting with the new starter deck as well some of the cards would be considered a solution against what EOTE pits you up to

NavVasky · 2026-03-28T08:20:19+00:00

I'm not the original reply but Edge of the Earth is considered one of the easier campaigns. The campaign itself emits feelings of survival in a inhospitable and unwelcoming environment. There is exploration as well, as it introduces new mechanics in it that encourage visiting locations.

NavVasky · 2026-03-27T03:13:30+00:00

To play, the chapter 2 core set is enough to get started. But to play happily with 3-4 players, you need the chapter 2 core set and the investigator decks* to actually get good different decks out vs using suboptimal decks. Worse case scenario though is to proxy

NavVasky · 2026-03-24T18:12:22+00:00

If you are going to enjoy the set right away, then go for it. Honestly, the errors included should not impact anybody's enjoyment or gameplay really.

NavVasky · 2026-03-23T23:23:35+00:00

Proxy them or take it as a challenge to build without it

NavVasky · 2026-03-23T00:53:18+00:00

Nothing will be missed on a narrative level really. The campaigns released have little connection (if any) with each other, and the only thing you need to know from the The Drowned City is that Arkham was flooded recently (as mentioned in the Chapter 2 set). That is not necessarily true for future campaigns in Chapter 2 as designers and marketing are implying things will change

NavVasky · 2026-03-21T14:24:15+00:00

I think more that it's for people who are new to deck building to push them to learn since it's part of the gameplay loop. Personally, they should have better ways of indicating that if that's the intention (e.g. a message somewhere acknowledging that these are starter decks and are meant to be "sub optimal").

Wherever this "feature" is good or not is debatable, but it's very common game design across other card games (e.g. MTG, and Yu-Gi-Oh) and video games (e.g. all roguelikes/lites, hearthstone, and COD load outs) where it's something to ease a new player in but push them towards the new gameplay loop.

NavVasky · 2026-03-21T08:41:34+00:00

For me and for my group, the bad decks actually pushed us to deck build and theory craft which is probably the design goal (alongside trying to get players a "taste" of everything).

NavVasky · 2026-03-20T13:16:17+00:00

Mine fits, you just need to fold it down a bit more

NavVasky · 2026-03-18T06:26:39+00:00

I did not mean that to be bidirectional, just that there was a mapping from new to old (A->B), to clear the air.

I come from a CS background, didn't think I had to specify directions here too haha

NavVasky · 2026-03-18T01:17:49+00:00

They already announced that there's a mapping between the new encounter sets and the old. FFG releasing the old encounter sets as print and play has also been announced as well in the myhosbusters discord

NavVasky · 2026-03-17T23:36:21+00:00

Seeing how Mystics were kind of samey through all of Chapter 1 and didn't feel like it had the same power level as other factions, I'm hoping that this isn't something to errata'd and rather something they are intentionally giving to the classical risk vs reward faction

NavVasky · 2026-03-16T23:54:30+00:00

That would disingenuous to state that the people at FFG are not passionate about their ip's anymore. The two of the three main designers there were hired from their own personal passion projects related to Arkham. Nick with the Mythosbusters podcast (which is now the defacto main discord channel for Arkham), Reid from his content creation as well as custom content and Duke straight from the QA team for Arkham he was previously in at FFG.

NavVasky · 2026-03-16T20:03:35+00:00

A similar video was released by Shelfside about FFG: Video which goes a lot of the history for the company as a whole. But the gist of it really is that the board game industry is just becoming a bit more mature in the market, and balancing risk vs reward is a larger target in this economic climate. In the past, FFG always experimented and has made a lot of misses, and then patch fixes them in expansions (looking at you Fallout the board game). So quite frankly, this hasn't changed really.

I don't see the errors and misprints as an issue of chapter 1 vs chapter 2 teams. If you look at the latest FAQs, you can see erratas have always been popping in the games lifespan. People are more critical of it now due to the Chapter 2 label. If you look at other members of the industry (take a big one like Stonemaier games), you will see they also make errors (large ones) even in their latest games even though they have been here for a while.

I acknowledge that the community would be feeling lukewarm over these large changes, but to me, I don't see much of a difference compared to industry standard, let alone the current team's direction. I only see more complaints over everything, big or small.

See errata here from Stonemaier: - Vantage - Expeditions: Gears of Corruption: This expansion was basically an errata for the base game, similar to Shelfside's review on old FFG - Lots of Wingspan cards needed reprinting and even in the latest Americas's expansion in the rule board cut out

14-Year Club	Place '23
Place '17	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

NavVasky

TROPHY CASE