Fickle Fortune

I just came from a 4 player game where we drew this when all investigators were under 3 damage/3 horror. The investigator who drew this was running Soul Sanctification and was at full health. Taking a step back, I can't imagine a 24 action swing being worth 6 charges + some incidental healing. We chose to remove the doom.

This seemed like a pretty chance situation, so I have a genuine question - is anyone taking the first option voluntarily? Depending on player count, is everyone healing 3 and 3 worth losing a turn vs. gaining a turn and taking 1 and 1?

In the ideal scenario with 4 players at full health all running Soul Sanctification still can't be worth 24 actions, right?

TheMathDoc · 16
First, healing 3/3 is sometimes more valuable spending 1 doom. If someone is defeated by damage or horror (or resigns due to its threat), they will lose future action and it might worth 24 actions. Second, first effect does not have the text:"this effect may cause the current agenda to advance". Thus, if we add Fickle Fortune in hand 1 round before advance, doom is no effective (like Arcane initiate). Last, first effect does not have "remove from game", so this card can be drawn second time. If second effect is chosen at the second drawn, this card gives 2 damage/horror healing with net 0 doom. — elkeinkrad · 499
What's with this mentality that somehow 1 doom ALWAYS equals all players total actions? Do y'all always finish the game on the very last round? From my experience, this card is insane, and the healing is a big part of that. I might write my own review but healing 3 damage AND horror from EVERY SINGLE INVESTIGATOR without costing an action is INSANE. It allows you to save so many resources and time not having to worry about cards that damage you. The fact that it can trigger on the witching hour is just icing on the cake. — Nenananas · 258
Both options are good but they depend on the circumstances. If I remember my play experience we would have coosen the doom removal most of the time since it was usually the bigger problem. — Tharzax · 1
@ Nenanas: that's hugely depends on the scenario. In "do as much as you can" scenarios, like "Midnight Masks", you often do. And there are high-stake scenarios, like "Doom of Eztly", where you rather not risk it, because timing can get tight, and the punishment for failure is severe. Also, some scenarios get harder, the more the agenda advances. Train cars get sucked into the vortex, enemies get +1 health, etc So preserving an earlier agenda as long as possible also makes the game easier. But in general, you are right. If you end the game with several turns to go, additional doom does not matter at all. — Susumu · 371
@Susumu I agree, it is very scenario dependent. But OP seemed to imply it's never a good option and I wanted to highlight the strengths. I'd even argue that in some circumstances healing 3 damage and horror is worth losing a turn for; and it's not really losing a turn because you don't draw extra encounters. On the contrary even! That amount of healing power allows all players to ignore several encounter cards and depending on the encounter deck arrangement could win you time. It's one of the few doom cards I think is actually worth placing a doom for without shenanigans. — Nenananas · 258
Scrying

From a theoretical perspective, this card is underwhelming and possibly overrated.

Counting 1 resource as 1 action, the first usage of scrying costs 3 actions, resp. a full turn. On that basis, let's evaluate what you get for that.

1) Use against encounter deck.

You get a slight chance of postponing something unfortunate, or possibly get a slightly smoother transition through the encounter deck.

Depending on the size and content of the encounter deck, there is a good to great chance that this card does nothing. If you hit a threatening encounter card, it'll just be delayed.

If you hit something that makes you feel smart (i.e. putting Obscuring Fog on top so that it lands on an empty location), there was a 33% chance that you would have drawn it in that order without playing Scrying in the first place.

All in all, there is a non-zero chance that this card does nothing.

Also consider this: you are investing at least the equivalent of 3 actions. While I can't estimate it precisely, I wager that I can handle a good chunk of the encounter deck for fewer actions than that.

2) Use against the player deck.

I believe this is simple. The first usage costs an equivalent of 3 actions. The player you use it on might as well have drawn 3 cards.

While consecutive uses get cheaper (as the upfront invest of 1 resource and 1 action to play have been paid), there is also the hidden cost of adding this card (with poor skill symbols) to the deck in the first place.

In the end, you are given a basic choice:

1) Draw the best card out of the top 3 cards for 2 actions. 2) Draw a random 1 of 3 card for 1 action.

From an action economy perspective, you are almost always favouring option 2).

In the end, action economy is the bane of Scrying. The feel good moments it creates obfuscate its inefficiency. An example: You scry top 3 and Paranoia shows up. You send it to the bottom of the 3 stack and spend your next 2 turns dumping resources, essentially countering your basic weakness. What a great effect!

Again: You spent 33% of your turn (and a measurable fraction of the entire allotted time!) doing that, for a slight chance (depending on how deep you are into your deck) of pulling this trick off. Furthermore, you must discount the odds of drawing Paranoia while being out of resources anyway.

Theoretically, this card isn't great. Practically, it's always sitting in my hand, eventually getting used for a skill check.

Edit: There is a further hidden cost of blocking a spell slot for something essential, which again, makes this card even worse.

ChrisKox · 5
Deck of Possibilities

Definitely a nod to the Deck of Many Things from D&D. Like the Tarot cards, this adds some randomness that you may or may not enjoy in your games.

Of note are The Champion and the Sword. These say from your collection, not from your hand or deck. That means you can open up your binder and grab whatever 5xp Exceptional item/ally and throw them down. It doesn't even reference deckbuilding restrictions, so you can grab anything. That's pretty bonkers and again can be pretty swingy.

Most of these options are more beneficial if they proc early in the game, with King of Hearts, King of Clubs, and definitely Ace of Spades being exceptions.

Taevus · 775
We are absolutely thrilled by The Champion and The Sword ! When it says "from your collection", does it include signature cards and story assets (specific of any other campaign) ?? — KaiserKlaus · 8
Daring Maneuver

Oh, hey look: it's a quote from Michael McGlen! Guy still hasn't shown up on in the the LCG as for 2023: crossing my fingers he, Kate, Agatha, George, Hank and Wilson will show up in the upcoming expansions!

Oh yeah, I need to review the card?

I disagree with the sentiment that Daring Maneuver is just a worse Unexpected Courage: this card is not meant to help you win, this card is meant to help you cashout with Rogue cards that care by how much you win: even at level 0, many do come in mind (Breaking and Entering, Cheap Shot, Slip Away, Lucky Cigarette Case, Switchblade. Quick Thinking, Opportunist .41 Derringer, Mauser C96, etc.). There are also many cards of other classes, level 0 or above, that also care by how much you win (All basic leveled up non-Unexpected Courage skill cards including the rogue one, both Scavenging, both Alchemical Transmutation, level 2 Deduction, etc.).

I think this makes it superior to unexpected courage in some situation if you can at least gurantee in some other ways you can succeed in the first place, because commiting unexpected courage may not be enough to win by the amount you need to get the extra effects, and you cannot know when you commit a card by how much you would succeed (not counting shenanigans with Premonition or Scrying Mirror). Daring Maneuver will never be wasted because it is played after the skill test succeeds: if you won't succeed by enough to trigger anything you can just choose not to play it!

At the end of the day, whether you will add this card to your deck or not depends on how many cards that care by how much you succeed by you have in your deck, but do keep in mind that succeeding by two is enough to benefit from basically all effects of level 0 cards that trigger on over-succeeding (with the exception of opportunist, for cards above level 0, you may want to look at its upgrade), and it costs no resources to play either!

So yes, niche card, but very good for a specific deck archetype.

Good assessment. — Cyke · 1
Good assessment. Found you can get a decent listing of all the cards it combines well with, searching ArkhamDB for the text x:"by 2 or more" gives a list. This won't list some other cards that it can combo with, though. For example, it also makes the old Core big gun, Shotgun, extremely good in a Leo Anderson deck. Not sure if there are any other Investigators with deckbuilding that can take both these cards. Unlike standard committed icons, you can hold this card in reserve until it will make a difference, and provide 2 additional damage (which is essentially more action compression). Would have the same effect with Rogues' Sawed-Off Shotgun too, I suppose, and that's a card combination available to many more Investigators. — Cyke · 1
Dark Prophecy

Just realized this car + Armageddon) is insane? Can I get a rule check on if attacking with Armageddon) then using Dark Prophecy and revealing 3 curses means that Armageddon) hits for 5 damage if I succeed? This makes me think that Dark prophecy would be absolutely bonkers with Armageddon) and favor of the moon up.

Not to mention the power of Eye of Chaos.

, · 565
Ignored tokens are not revealed tokens, refered from the QnA of Grotesque Statue. Thus, although several curse tokens were revealed via Dark Prophecy, only chosen curse token (and additional revealed curse tokens due to the effect of chosen curse token) contributes to the damage/clue of those cards. — elkeinkrad · 499