Copycat

This is a terrible card. Despite it's name and assumed intended effect, it cannot copy any actual cat cards.

Such a weird design decision. There is definitely design space for some kind of cat-copy mechanic in arkham, surely they put something of the sort in Barkham horror.

Tsuruki23 · 2562
Boo — MrGoldbee · 1483
You left out Familiar Spirit! — Death by Chocolate · 1482
Beretta M1918

POW. Sniped!

Beretta is a GUN, with a massive hit bonus and conditional post-shot effects. The former means it's great for the many 3 characters in the game, the latter still means that without some additional help then you wont be fighting like a or anytime soon.

  • So, the big downside to Beretta, on one hand you need to beat a fight by 2 to even get a second shot, or you can have the hit deal 3 damage, or you can beat by 4 to get both effects. On Standard this means you need to aim for a big number like +9 or +10 if you want to guarantee bonus damage and/or bonus shots, and you need to push all the way to +11 or +12 to be high enough over 3 and 4 fight foes to get guaranteed benefits.

Knowing the above, a +4 to the fight test, to net most characters who like guns in the first place, a +7 base. Shooting at +7 is quite alright, if you want to land a single 2 damage hit. You can do that with a lot of security against regular ol' 2 or 3 fight enemies like Acolyte, but the fact that you have such a weapon in your hands at all -probably- means that you're hunting bigger game, it's probably your job to put down the 3 health chaff and the 4-5 health minibosses, and to chunk down the 10+ health big bads. For this job the impressive +7 fight actually becomes annoyingly flaky, bad hits that leave you with a living enemy and/or an exhausted gun, all of a suddent your only venue to killing the target is gone and the team is in trouble!

So, obviously, Beretta M1918 synergizes with statistical boosters like Well Connected, Hard Knocks, High Roller in particular is a natural combination since both cards really reward you for gross overkills, along with Lucky Cigarette Case to cash in on all the overcommits and similar effects. Perhaps less obviously, This gun synergizes with , as a means of reorienting yourself when a bad token pull would leave you stranded, someone like Winifred Habbamock or Finn Edwards is almost certainly going to get better results with a Beretta than a Tony Morgan.

If you compare Beretta M1918 to the Chicago Typewriter its's an excercise in splitting efficiency hairs, but once it's all boiled down, a Beretta far outpaces the Chicago Typewriter as a means of fighting when your starting is 3 or less and you're not using many boosts or depending on something incidental, but the flankyness of the Beretta makes the Chicago Typewriter straight up better when you have a higher starting point and/or building easy access to static boosts.

Tsuruki23 · 2562
The Sharpshooter asset combos really well with this for Finn, Wini and Skids. They can boost their Agi up to 6+ easily statically. All of those 3 should be hitting 10+ as long as Sharpshooter is in play with the Beretta and fighting against the evade value. — The Lynx · 992
It kind of reminds me of Old Hunting Rifle or Ornate Bow, because their drawbacks both reward investigators who can evade, as well. — Zinjanthropus · 229
Offer You Cannot Refuse

Hello, I just have a couple of basic questions:

Rules book: Effects [...]

  • Once initiated, players must resolve as much of each aspect of the effect as they are able, unless the effect uses the word "may."
  • When a non-targeting effect attempts to interact with a number of entities (such as "draw 3 cards" or "search the top 5 cards of your deck") that exceeds the number of entities that currently exist in the specified game area, the effect interacts with as many entities as possible.

--> Does it means here, that if you loose less than 5 ressources the "If you cannot" effect triggers ?

--> Does Deny Existence still triggers the "If you cannot" effect triggers ? (I cannot imagine that it doesn't trigger)

Cheers,

phosgene · 10
So if you have, say, 3 resources, you'll lose all three because of the second bullet you quoted above. At the same time, since you have less than 5 resources, you cannot lose 5, so the second part of the effect triggers. If you play Deny Existence with 3 resources, you won't lose them, but because you still cannot lose 5 resources, the second effect triggers. If you Deny the resource loss with 5 resources, you can lose 5 resources (even though you won't), so the second effect won't trigger. I think. — SGPrometheus · 828
Since OYCR says "if you cannot, instead...", I think if you cannot lose the full 5 resources, you do not lose any and instead resolve the "remove OYCR from your deck..." effect. — ak45 · 469
Agreed; I didn't notice the "instead" there. So Deny Existence at <5 resources is pointless since you resolve the second effect instead of losing resources, but still useful at 5 or more. — SGPrometheus · 828
I dunno if I agree with SGPrometheus on this one. Ignore isn't defined in the rules reference guide. Ignoring that aspect of the effect isn't really well defined but could easily be interpreted to mean that the card reads as "Lose *nothing*. If you cannot..." Or "If you cannot...". Personally, in the absence of a ruling by Matt, I would take the precedent that if you ignore a cost you are still considered to have paid the cost. Therefore I think Deny Existence satisfies the requirement. — NarkasisBroon · 10
Ignoring an aspect of a card's effect doesn't change or remove the card's text; you simply don't resolve that aspect. Since you cannot lose 5 resources when you have 4 or less, the second effect triggers even if you denied the resource loss. — SGPrometheus · 828
Thanks all for your answer haven't thought about the I can lose 5 resources but I deny existence and then everyhting is fine. — phosgene · 10
I'm wondering how you would apply Deny Existence. Deny Existence works against 1) an encounter card, or 2) an enemy attack. Basic weakness is none of both. — chrome · 60
Treachery and Enemy weaknesses are considered to be encounter cards when they are being resolved. It's the same reason you can use Deny Existence on cards like Sister Mary's weakness. @chrome — Jaysaber · 7
Bind Monster

In bad fantasy movies, there’s a powerful demon that gets sealed for thousands of years. Then on page 3 it gets loose. Bind monster doesn’t have that problem, if you use it right. Because there a certain reasons you keep monsters in play instead of sending them to the encounter discard pile.

In four player, you’re going to cycle the encounter deck a few times. That means monsters recur, and ones that have an obnoxious spawn or engage can bother you over and over. If you have a hunch that the encounter discard is going to be shuffled back into the deck, you might not want to kill an enemy this turn, but you don’t want to take a hit.

Relatedly, you might have scenario effects that empower the nearest enemy. In threads of fate, having a cultist with one HP in your location vs having to spawn one across the board could make a full turn a wasted effort, or create unpreventable doom chain, ending this scenario.

Third, some investigators like having an evaded enemy. Trish can get a bonus clue every turn that you keep this card active. The .25 Automatic is a fun combo, or Sneak Attack.

It has some advantages compared to handcuffs: it can target non-humanoids and doesn’t require a set up action to put it into play. But the cuffs are permanent once applied, and are level 0.

MrGoldbee · 1483
I used to think this card was trash, but you're definitely right. There are numerous occasions when it's better to lock down an enemy rather than defeat it. You can lock down a Brood of Yog-sothoth, a poisonous serpent, or basically any weakness. And the Willpower test of 3 isn't too tough when 5-6 willpower is what most Mystics are holding. — LaRoix · 1645
Fun fact, this shows a gug long before any gug enemies actually existed. — SGPrometheus · 828
This is definitely one of those cards where you're guaranteed to pull an auto-fail on the first try, though. — Zinjanthropus · 229
What about this in Horror in high gear? — Meyjoh · 1
Good call Mey! — MrGoldbee · 1483
Double or Nothing

Double or nothing is now nothing. As the first forbidden card, the creators acknowledged that all the times you might want to use this it either blows up in your face or succeed so well it wrecks the scenario. Instead of designing around it for the rest of time, they’re telling you not to use it.

Which is fine; since core has come out, rogues have many, many ways to gamble. But the day is destroying a campaign and boss with one shotgun blast may be over. You might have to, tragedy of tragedies, use both barrels and even a spell!

MrGoldbee · 1483
I'm really not sure why the developers didn't just mutate it to say: "double 1 of the effects of the successful test twice". I guess that would make it less fun than it has been but there's nothing less fun than not being able to play the card at all. — LaRoix · 1645
Because even doubling one effect requires making sure that all future printed effects that work with Donut dont break the game. I am fully in support of the Donut ban- it’s a card that is not fun to play but is so egregiously powerful that you are forced to take it at any xp cost. Mutation is also a much less clean solution, as its not written on the card. — StyxTBeuford · 13043
Couldn’t agree more. Also since Winifred Habbamock came out it actually became so easy to build a deck that just endlessly loops with Quick Thinking and All In, which absolutely breaks scenarios. Try it out once if you feel like it, but it for sure makes the game kinda boring... :D — Scarx · 53