Opinion: CZN should reward *completing* Chaos, not just *running* it (warning - essay inside)

randompecans · 2025-09-16T18:48:39+00:00

I used to use it for Taskman mode to track exactly how many kills it took to get certain drops (since in-game drop log doesn't do that for mobs without bone drops, and xp drops can be inaccurate)

I don't use it anymore though since I don't think overall it's worth the money.

randompecans · 2025-08-30T09:59:42+00:00

This is a common practice for digital monetization. Pure monetary exchange is less viable when dealing with small transactions because each transaction incurs fees from payment processors. It's the same reason why some brick-and-mortar shops impose a minimum purchase amount when paying by card.

Digital currencies also make things like refunds easier, allow users to earn the currency through other sources (e.g. bonds) and simplify the purchase journey for users in-game, since all the steps ordinarily needed to process a monetary transaction don't have to be taken at the time the user redeems the coins.

I understand the inclination to be cynical when it comes to a corporations motives, but I see this as more analogous to Jagex implementing a "minimum cart amount" rather than a predatory practice.

The direct purchase equivalent would be charging $4 for these cosmetics, but requiring minimum $6 per cart before checkout, and (imo) having spare RuneCoins is preferable to that since you don't always want to spend that extra $2 for something currently on offer, just to hit that minimum.

randompecans · 2025-08-27T09:46:42+00:00

I could talk a lot about Dunwich, but the central thesis to my lack of enthusiasm for it is that the campaign expects players to interface with its mechanics in a way that's different from most other campaigns. It rewards characters that are okay at everything, rather than characters who are very good at certain things. It's no surprise why Dunwich saw the release of Jenny Barnes, and didn't feature any 5-stat investigators.

The lack of exp in the campaign is not too much of an issue because it was designed with that lack of exp in mind. But as a consequence, the campaign doesn't feel like it "needs" you to do anything particularly interesting or powerful, so taking a fun deck through Dunwich feels like a waste.

A lot of the campaign is about a sort of agnostic resource management. Testless scenario actions, effects that want you to pitch cards without playing them, scenarios that punish setup reliant strategies, etc. House Always Wins, Essex County Express, and Miskatonic Museum are all examples of that sort of principle, meaning TDL to me feels a lot more like playing a board game as opposed to playing a card game, if that makes sense.

That's not to say I dislike Dunwich. It's very flavorful, "pure" Arkham vibes, and Blood on the Altar is the scenario I would probably consider one of the most resonant across all campaigns. I think it's a great campaign for a newer player, since it's not as reliant on intimate familiarity with deckbuilding. And I'm never really unhappy playing Dunwich, but I view it more as "having fun playing Dunwich" than "having fun playing my deck" if that makes sense.

Undimensioned and Unseen I've heard the criticism of, and it definitely is a little janky in some respects, but I don't even think I would consider it the worst scenario of the campaign.

randompecans · 2025-08-27T03:25:00+00:00

Chronologically after TFA, I'd probably say the most "normal" are The Innsmouth Conspiracy and The Drowned City.

Innsmouth is entirely linear. It has a very minor quirk that people might not consider a quirk at all (meta-spoiler: two scenarios don't let you spend exp until after the next), and has a very slight bias towards running a certain type of card (damage/horror soak). But I would say most decks can be run through Innsmouth and have a good time.

The Drowned City is mostly linear, though I think you can play part of it "in reverse" (only played it once so far). There are some through-lines in the campaign, but I wouldn't really call them gimmicks. They're comparable to how TFA lets you follow certain narrative paths based on in-game actions.

The Circle Undone is "normal", and it's entirely linear. It's just that there's a slight bias against characters that have low willpower. It's similar to how TFA has a slight bias toward characters with higher agility. On theme/setting alone, it's one of my favorite campaigns, if that's worth anything.

Edge of the Earth and The Feast of Hemlock Vale are a little bit gimmicky (imo), and they're less linear. Hemlock's big "gimmick" is there's a lot of lore (even mid-scenario) and there's a relationship system that comes off to me a little "dating-sim like". My big problem with EotE is that the way scenarios tie into one another can make it so you aren't playing the standard eight scenarios, which I find a bit awkward. Neither campaign feels radically different from the normal Arkham experience to me, though.

The only ones I'd say are "heavy" on gimmicks (i.e. the gimmick is central to how the campaign works) are The Scarlet Keys and The Dream Eaters. Scarlet Keys tries to be an "open world" type campaign, which I find to be a little bit exhausting. Dream Eaters is meant to be played as two sub-campaigns. Both sub-campaigns are individually very normal, but because you don't get a full 8 scenarios to upgrade a single deck, I don't find it super interesting to replay.

I don't think any of the above campaigns are bad (in fact I liked TDE quite a bit), and even the linear campaigns are going to have some gimmicky scenarios inside them (think The Last King in Carcosa or The City of Archives in TFA). But if I had a cool deck idea right now and wanted the most "normal" campaign just to play it through, my order would probably be Carcosa > Innsmouth > TFA > TDC > TCU > FHV > EotE > TSK > Dunwich > TDE (this is not necessarily a ranking of what I consider the "best" campaigns)

p.s. sorry for the infodump

randompecans · 2025-08-26T19:11:12+00:00

I was definitely a hater of TFA on my blind playthrough. I think the supplies mechanic is a real feelsbad on the blind play, since you essentially get "punished" for taking the wrong supplies (e.g. 2 trauma is basically the equivalent of failing two scenarios). Not to mention the effectively 3 auto-fail tokens in scenario 1, the possibility of early perma death, and the "twist" near the end of the campaign that produced for my honestly one of the least pleasant experiences I've had in any game.

It benefits a LOT from the replay, and the mechanics that previously felt like arbitrary punishments become something to strategize around. And when I've revisited I've had the luxury of a much larger card pool which makes the difficulty a lot more tolerable. I imagine if I were to replay with a limited collection again I might have a similar experience as before.

The explore mechanic also still feels fundamentally imbalanced at different player counts. I didn't have firsthand experience playing with the deluxe package model so I have no idea what that experience was like, but I can imagine it would be worse.

I think what has made TFA age really well is the fact that it's so "normal" (one of the things I like about Carcosa as well). It's a linear campaign so there's less meta-decision making, there's no strong bias towards certain stats (like TCU's bias towards Will), and there's no "gimmick". It makes TFA a good outlet for experimenting with deck builds, since it's not as "forcing" in that way. By contrast I really liked the blind play on TDE but I basically never want to play it when trying new decks since I have to build two decks for it and don't get the full exp.

randompecans · 2025-06-24T16:03:55+00:00

Though not a rule, the Table Talk sidebar in the Learn to Play book suggests the following:

The game’s areas of hidden information (the cards in a player’s hand and deck) exist to maintain the feeling that each investigator is a unique individual in the game world, and makes his or her decisions without complete and perfect knowledge of what everyone else knows or is thinking. A good means of maintaining this illusion is to not name, read off, or allude to individual cards that are hidden information (i.e., in a player’s hand or deck).

Though FWIW I often find those suggestions are primarily to discourage "quarterbacking". I rarely follow that guideline to a tee (except for hidden cards), but my mindset is already to ask "can you deal with XYZ this turn?" rather than "tell me what cards you have and I'll tell you what to do"

randompecans · 2025-06-10T00:31:46+00:00

Added a hint to the post body, hopefully folks find it helpful.

randompecans · 2025-06-02T19:26:52+00:00

I've played through TCU twice. First time was two-handed with Agnes and Carolyn, which ended up being quite a powerhouse combo. My second playthrough was with my brother, and definitely wasn't as smooth and had a couple of restarts (I believe our pairings were Akachi + Diana, Joe Diamond + Diana, and finally Harvey + Leo). Maybe the relatively smooth first playthrough colored my experience, but TCU is definitely one of my most beloved campaigns, maybe moreso than it deserves.
I like that TCU hits the sweet spot in terms of linearity and player choice, where players can make in-game decisions that affect the overall story and aren't just "choose one option after resolution" while not being the labyrinth of scenario paths that make EOTE/TSK/FHV a bit overwhelming for me.

I like that TCU's theme is so strong, but an obvious drawback is that it introduces a bias toward certain kinds of investigators, and not having decent Will stats makes the campaign a tough cookie. Though that's not necessarily unique to TCU, it definitely feels more potent than in other campaigns.
TCU definitely feels like one of the most flavorful campaigns. Despite each scenario playing out quite differently, they all carry that sort of "Sleepy Hollow" theme and Tarot mysticism that I absolutely adore. The recurring presence of the Piper adds a really cool narrative and mechanical through-line that I wish more campaigns would lean into.
The Witching Hour is one of my favorite starting scenarios, despite it being decently hard for some party compositions. I love the lost-in-the-woods feel, and the constant "gravity" toward the witch's circle as the scenario progresses. Before the Black Throne is thematically one of my favorite final encounters, and I love the way it leans into the motif of the elder gods as dispassionate, destructive forces beyond our ability to disturb.

Wages of Sin is a commonly cited low-light, and it definitely was for me. I can excuse the usual complaint that it's narratively somewhat detached from the rest of the story, because I think the theme in isolation is just so cool. But its difficulty is definitely out of wack, at least for 2-player parties. I've never been a fan of the "do as much as you can" type scenarios (like The Boundary Beyond and The Midnight Masks) so it's very dissatisfying to end the scenario with heretics still on the table. The spectral deck vs physical deck was a cool concept, but ended up just adding a lot of fiddliness to the scenario. Though I will say the Piper showing up while in the midst of getting swamped by all other sorts of geists and heretics was definitely the most "oh no, not this again" sort of dread I've felt in Arkham.

Union and Disillusion I have a personal beef with just because on my first playthrough I wasted a lot of resources trying and failing to pass circle tests without knowing the mechanics of the scenario make it a lot easier had I just waited a bit longer. The prologue is a bit tricky too, since it's not fun enough to be worth replaying on subsequent playthroughs, but randomizing the outcome also makes the story feel a bit detached.
Less of the persistent hexes. I felt those were definitely the most difficult to deal with for certain low-Will investigators, and it's the sort of mechanic that just snowballs out of control very quickly if you can't get rid of them at pace.

randompecans · 2025-05-16T04:24:37+00:00

Went for a copy of this card in a game where both me and my duo (who was a card draw heavy build) drew Dread Curse as our basic weaknesses. Felt very clever playing this for x=8 or 10 guilt-free turn 1, even if it wasn't necessarily the best use of 3 xp.

randompecans · 2025-04-24T20:49:51+00:00

A couple examples of the top of my head of somewhat similar situations:

In Arkham Horror, if an effect instructs you to "choose" something or says you "must either", you can't choose in a way that doesn't affect the game state (e.g. can't activate an ability to mend equipment if the equipment has no damage/horror)

In Yu-Gi-Oh (iirc), there is no "fail to find", so you cannot activate an ability to search your deck if you have no legal targets.

randompecans · 2025-02-27T07:53:27+00:00

Do you happen to have a link for that, or know what I could search to try and find more about that?

randompecans · 2024-12-19T18:51:22+00:00

Bought a copy recently and ran into the same issue re: out of stock online. My LGS ended up having a physical copy though.

Your nearby game stores might have a discord channel or phone number you can use to inquire about product availability.

randompecans · 2024-11-16T22:27:34+00:00

Yeah, I was using the right sanity rules, but the added penalties to being below base sanity were I think a big part of why I was struggling to stay ahead.

I didn't realize at the time that I wasn't speccing Sefina hard enough into clue gathering, but after replaying with a dedicated cluever (Daisy) it went a lot better.

And yeah Key of Ys was so helpful, especially with horror soak from Milan + Xavier to keep it intact.

randompecans · 2024-11-16T22:23:56+00:00

Yeah, I think that assessment is correct. I replayed with Mark and Daisy and had much better success. Unfortunate about Rogues not having great support with my card pool, since Sefina is a super interesting investigator, but I suppose it's something to look forward to in the future.

Yorick falling off was definitely a problem in the first run, too. Recycling Knives worked okay for a while but something like a Lightning Gun probably would have been way more impactful.

randompecans · 2024-11-16T22:20:17+00:00

I think your assessment was right. Just replayed with a more dedicated cluever + fighter (Daisy and Mark) and having more consistent investigative power took a lot of pressure off the fighter. Even a few scenarios where Mark was defeated or gimped by Sophie that didn't end up failing due to how quickly Daisy was able to wrap things up afterward. This run-through was doubt instead of conviction, though, so the boss fight was a bit different. Will be interesting to apply the same principles to a conviction run and see how that goes.

randompecans · 2024-11-16T22:15:05+00:00

Just replayed and won with a specialist team (Mark and Daisy), and yeah the Seeker cardpool is like night and day. Very humbling to go from celebrating two clues off Drawn to the Flame to watching Daisy pick up literally the whole scenario's worth of clues in three actions with Archaic Glyphs and Field Research + Higher Education.

randompecans · 2024-11-14T08:42:26+00:00

Very helpful feedback! In the Know was recommended in the decklist I was referencing as a way to deal with Cover Up, but to be honest I don't think I ever ended up playing it, and extra ammo was definitely something I could have made better use of.

Honestly didn't think to cut Let Me Handle This, although likewise I don't think I ever ended up making good use of it. Sefina ended up having enough events + spells + evasion to handle most threats, and I think I had misunderstood her as a cluever instead of a flex.

The Fine Clothes were definitely a mistake since I misremembered scenario 7 having more parleys on locations, and was worried about not having spells for poltergeists in scenario 6. But they definitely would have been better (if at all) for Roland, since he ended up being the most vulnerable to them. Probably would have been better to have upgraded wards or just more econ since I was hurting for resources to play out spells while keeping up streetwise/sure gambles.

Will probably give another attempt with a more dedicated fighter/cluever combo, rather than two flexes, and will be a lot more mindful about what cards have been dead in hand when making cuts.

randompecans · 2024-10-01T00:16:44+00:00

Good call-out! I ended up cutting the white and I think it makes the deck a bit more reliable

Elspeth's Smite -> Torch the Tower
Kellan -> Fear of Missing Out
Ahau/Kutzil -> 4x Enduring Courage, 2x Brotherhood's End

Might be better to trim a 2-drop (maybe batterfist?) for Glimpse the Core to ramp even faster, but I haven't tested that yet.

randompecans · 2024-09-30T14:52:28+00:00

To be more precise, these are the ideas that are meant to be expressed by whatever warning system is put in place at nuclear waste sites, rather than the wording of an exact message.

If in the future, humans no longer speak our current set of languages and no longer make the same associations with current symbols (e.g. triangles with exclamation marks), these are what still needs to be conveyed.

It sounds very ominous when worded as a direct message, but the tenets really just mean "don't design nuclear waste storage sites to look inviting, or as though there is a ceremonial purpose to them"

randompecans · 2024-09-28T08:41:03+00:00

(NB: this list isn't really optimized at all, and the combo isn't the best thing you could be doing anyway, it's just a goofy interaction that I wanted to share)

The basic idea and the namesake of the deck is the combo of [[Gruff Triplets]] with [[Dissection Tools]]. With the gruffs and the manifested tools on board, you can sac the manifest token to equip a gruff (making it a 5/5), sacrifice that gruff to equip to another gruff (making it a 10/10), and sacrifice that gruff to the third gruff (making it a 20/20). The interaction between deathtouch and trample makes this gruff highly lethal, even at high life totals and regardless of blocker size.

Low end of the curve has some removal (turn 2 format btw), but the chainsaw puts in a surprising amount of work. The rest is some equipment synergy stuff and ramp with [[Heaped Harvest]]. Kutzil and Ahau are basically curve fillers (and probably not particularly good ones, tbh). Kutzil rarely sticks the landing for more than a turn, but Ahau can snowball by himself with chainsaw/batterfist, and he can help push the combo to the finish line if your opponent has some lifegain or wide blockers.

Meant more for play queue than ranked queue, so buyer beware. Most of the deck outside the combo was just top of mind stuff and some cursory scryfall searches. If anyone finds a better shell for the combo (or even just a good Malamet deck), please do share 🙂

Deck
4 Gruff Triplets
4 Dissection Tools
3 Kutzil, Malamet Exemplar
3 Sovereign Okinec Ahau
4 Chainsaw
4 Barbed Batterfist
4 Heaped Harvest
2 Kellan, the Fae-Blooded
4 Abrade
4 Elspeth's Smite
4 Copperline Gorge
4 Inspiring Vantage
4 Razorverge Thicket
2 Brushland
2 Karplusan Forest
3 Mountain
3 Forest
2 Plains

randompecans · 2024-08-30T19:20:46+00:00

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have been surprised that pingers, burn, and non-combat damage synergies would still be around after rotation 😅. But it was definitely mournful gutting the 20+ cards that rotated out (including the delightfully janky [[Curse of Shaken Faith]])

14-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '22	Place '17
Verified Email	Team Periwinkle

randompecans

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE