Doomed

One of the absolutely worst designed weaknesses in the game by a long shot (Other honorable mention are the ones from Edge of the Earth), which is not surprising given it comes from Forgotten Age, an expansion filled with anti-player agency and some of the most anti-fun design choices I ever seen in any board game

Weaknesses are supposed to be a spanner in your wheel: they are something that will stall, cripple or potentially lead to your defeat if you are not prepared to deal with them. And even if you are prepared, they can still be a significant threat if drawn at the wrong time. And that is fine: it helps keep the tension in the game and even leads you to consider deckbuilding choices you normally wouldn't with specific investigator to counter said weakness (like using Bandages to temporaly stop Internal Injury)

That is not the case for Doomed, Doomed is literally a timed bomb attached to your back without a timer about to go off any time, and you have no way to defuse it. Take too long in camapaign and you can say good bye to your investigator and all deckbuilding progress you did.

While I do agree with many a review that do say that it fits thematically with Arkham (and that is about the only thing I appreciate about this weakness, really), and I don't blame anyone that is alright playing with it, I think design wise this weakness is beyond creatively bankrupt, given that its just a delayed instant kill. This is a game where weakness can have as various effects from simply make you discard cards and resources to more outlandish ones like draw encounter cards or have a nemesis that can block your special abilties. All of these are great! Because they make you think "How can I deal with these?", "What card can I include to counter them?" and "Can I afford to draw cards and risk getting my random basic weakness?"

Meanwhile, there is no countering for Doomed unless you can cancel the weakness' Revelation with Foresight effect or use searching to try to banish it at the bottom of the deck (usually with stuff like Scrying, Scroll of Secrets or the recent Friends in Low Places) or just try to avoid drawing as much cards as possible (which must making playing with this weakness as Mark extra fun). You are completely left at the mercy of the rng of the game whether you draw it or not in most cases, which in an already rng heavy game such as this, is not a good design choice

The effects of this weakness can be absolutely catstrophic on your campaign, not only for the effect itself, but also because of how it affect the player. Wanted to do some standalones toghether in the middle of your campaign? Forget about that, you are just gonna raise the chance to end up being killed before the end of it! It's a bit similiar to the effect of Charon's Obol in a sense: it makes you play scared, more guarded, because one mistake can be final. But while Charon's Obol's side effect can be avoided by good deckbuilding and planning, Doomed can hit you regardless of your readiness. While the Obol give you a reward for in exchange of making every defeat fatal and you can just... Not choose to pick it, Doomed, according to the rules, MUST be shuffled among your weakness if you use Forgotten Age cards and content

There is no other weakness, that I can think about, that makes you want to play less of the game: is the antithesis of fun.

But honestly, what I absolutely hate about Doomed ( and Accursed Fate) is not that they will eventually lead to The Bell Tolls. No, what I HATE with a passion about Doomed is that it is a weakass weakness on its own!

You drew this in Night of the Zealot or Dream Eaters? Congratulations, you basically got something that is arguably even less lethal than Indebted, depending on how good or bad your draw is. Even someone like Roland would look a this effect and laugh at the one horror it inflicts with his 5 sanity. It does esentially NOTHING, because the campaign will be over before this becomes a threat. That is AWFUL: a weakness should be at the very least a serious annoyance to the player, Doomed is ironically a relief in the right circumstances!

And you don't even need to draw this in a short campaign, if you luck out and avoid drawing this for half of your campaign, you are probably in the clear as well and can avoid worrying about dying from it depeding on what kind of investigator you are playing as or what scenarios are left, because most scenarios will be likely over before you could go through a deck multiple time and most investigator do not have the draw to do so anyway.

However if you are playing as someone like Harvey, Amanda or Patrice and got this card? You might as well use their superior draw to get your non-signature weakness 5 times in one scenario to spare you from the suffering of dying in 2 to 3 scenarios having already gathered and spent some exp on them

It's invevitable that some random weaknesess will be more punishing than others to some investigators (5 sanity investigators shudder seeing Chronophobia, as do 5 health ones to Internal Injury. Many a Seeker gets countered hard by Amnesia. Silas and Winifred are in for a bad time if they get The Tower • XVI, etc.), but the sheer variability of how lethal Doomed can be show just how weak its design is.

And that's what in all honesty ruins Doomed; it is too random mechanically to properly mesh with the design of Arkham. Sure sometimes it does managed to give you that sense of inevitabile demise creeping towards you, but when it fails to deliver on that, what you are left with? A good theming can only carry a card so far before that is all that it has left

And don't get me even started with the whole "campaign mode only", burn that concept with fire and impale it with prejudice! Basic wekanesses should be designed to be a threat in every scenario, because that way, no matter when they are added, they can affect your game somehow. It's signature weaknesses that can afford to have long-lasting effects (like trauma), because they are required to be added from the very start to a specific investigator deck, so they WILL affect them as long as you are playing a campaign. By the same logic, if you are playing scenario mode with specific investigators like say: Roland, Zoey and Akachi should you replace Cover Up, Smite the Wicked and Angered Spirits with other weaknesses given that trauma suffered at the end of the scenario does absolute jack in scenario mode?

Honestly what boggles my mind the most is that not only has the Return Version of Forgotten Age a better basic weakness than Doomed in Offer You Cannot Refuse, which not only has actual counter play you can engage against it, but despite being "Campaign Only" as well, it has still a nasty effect in scenario mode, given it will sap your resources regardless if you can pay your "debt" or not, meaning you can honestly still use it outside campaign mode. Even without the additional exp bonus it's WAY better designed than Doomed.

No, what leaves me speechles is that Doomed is beaten by a weakness introduced in the same box: Dark Pact is an EXCELLENTLY designed random weakness with long reaching consequences in the The Price of Failure. This is how you do basic campaign weaknesses with a nastier bonded version that will make you suffer if you cannot deal with the original weakness properly. It beats Doomed in every aspect: it's almost unreal they were designed from the same people and came from the same game.

Then again, Finn and Calvin are also from the same expansion, so I shouldn't be surprised by Forgotten Age's incredibly inconsistent design at this point

"an expansion filled with anti-player agency and some of the most anti-fun design choices I ever seen in any board game" — Lodge_Infiltrator · 1
Could you explain what you mean by that please? — Lodge_Infiltrator · 1
@Lodge_Infiltrator I think it is kind of self-explanatory what I meant, but if I have to put this potshot in the clearest terms possible: I do not think Forgotten Age is neither a fun expansion, nor a well-designed one. It is filled with contrivences and design choices that exist for no reason other than frustate players or hinder them under the pretense of being a "challenge", force the players into a specific playstyle in order to succeed, make essentially most of the Investigators worthless to use if they do not lend to that specific playstyle (by usually having high agility/favouring evasion over confrontation) and makes the branching paths basically pointless by having clealry only 1 best ending path you have to take specific choice to achieve in order to experience the full campaign. In shorts: Forgotten Age sucks, — HeroesOfTomorrow · 66
Until the End of Time

I love this card. The art? Fantastic. The name? Flavorful. The flavor text? One of my favorites. And this effect is just amazing for Calvin, allowing you to get 2&2 soak for just 1 resource. You get to live close to the edge, boosting your skill values to incredibly heights, knowing that even a treachery that deals direct damage or horror won't defeat you.

Slam dunk, 10/10 card, one of the best signatures.

Cpt_nice · 84
A Test of Will

Purchasing card with Exile keyword going into the final scenario is already a good tactic. But for this card it is even better. Penultimate / final scenario has a trend : designers love to add Ancient Evils set around here to make remaining time unpredictable, and round loss is likely with heavy consequence. Therefore A Test of Will (1) is like purchasing rounds of play with little amount of XP.

It has "lite" version of team-coverage feature compared to Ward of Protection (2) (requires same location), but that already fix more than half of the biggest problem of unupgraded Ward of Protection (0) vs. its highest reward target Ancient Evils : It must land on the Mystic otherwise there is no way for the recipient to resist.

You can go in with some strategy, like grouping up tighter a few rounds in until 1 or 2 out of 3 Ancient Evils passed by. It is relative to when you actually draw this card vs. how many evils are left at that point. But you can also try mulligan to get this then you get to defend against 3 evils for sure.

I just came back from a certain campaign with tight location layout on finale. While we won, amount of rounds left is scary low. Factored in how lucky we were that Ancient Evils often land on the party's Mystic when he has the Lv. 0 ward on hand (he only has enough XP to upgrade 1 copy to Lv. 2), if luck was not on our side we would have lose and I regret I didn't think about getting this card with my leftover XP. A team with Survivor and Mystic will be at huge advantage on keeping the evils away.

5argon · 11581
Lurker in the Dark

I rolled this weakness as Daniela Reyes and my deck was pretty much unable to handle this guy save for committing Vicious Blows with my Survival Knife or waiting for enemy phase. I think it's a mistake that the dealt damage reduction isn't reduced to a minimum of 1 - I had to versatile into some tactics into the deck to be able to deal with this guy.

Double unfortunate for me is that I have this weakness in a campaign with Mark Harrigan who also randomly rolled into this weakness as well, which has led to rather amusing moments of killing each other's Lurker in the Darks when they spawn on top of the other investigator.

Bonus points for this enemy not doing horror though - we love having sanity.

To me, this thing represents the worst that Trait-specific damage mechanics like this can give us: an enemy that is barely interesting if you do use the Trait it requires, and almost impossible to handle if you don't. Lurker is even worse than Poltergeist from Carcosa because the majority of Guardians already use Weapons, meaning that there's no real change in tactics necessary to deal with it; all it does is force you to keep doing what you're already doing. And, like in your example, if you're one of the few Guardians who doesn't use Weapons to deal damage (Carolyn Fern, Nathaniel Cho), you're in for a bad time, both in terms of difficulty (what exactly are you supposed to do against an enemy who you can barely damage?) and in terms of fun (uninteractivity is not fun). Personally, I would change Lurker almost entirely, giving it 3 health (maybe) and replacing its text box with "As an additional cost to trigger a Fight action targeting Lurker in the Dark on an asset, spend an additional action." Forces adaptation, but in a way that should be doable for most investigators (Beat Cop (2), Fight events, other direct damage would all help you bypass the extra action cost). — NightgauntTaxiService · 466
At a Crossroads

A lot of positive reviews here, but I will go one step further:

This card is S-Tier, S like Staple.

3 cards for one action and 0 cost is already that good. Another way to read it is: draw 10% of your deck in one action.
Deep Knowledge will get you 2 for this and is considered one of the best lvl 0 cards, Preposterous Sketches will require 2xp and 1 clue at your location, and Cryptic Research will ask you 3 more xp per copy to get your action back. And as you probably noticed, all these cards are in , was one of the remaining draw-starved classes (with and ), until this card arrived.

So this card already goes in every deck that has access to it to increase consistency, but where it becomes insanely good is when you do not need the draw:

  • Not only can you decide to take the other option, getting rid of one of your less useful cards in exchange of an action that will get you ahead of the game;
  • But also, you can decide to give that draw to any investigator at any location.

Most dilemmas are "it could go well in the right moment, but terribly bad in the wrong moment", like Fickle Fortune that could heal your whole party for free during the Witching Hour but also have you deciding between killing Calvin Wright or turning into an Ancient Evils.

At a Crossroads, on the other hand is literally a win-win-win.

Valentin1331 · 83201
Ironically, this card is probably the least of an actual dilemma of all dilemmas. At a crossroads? More like choosing from a menu where everything is your favorite — Nenananas · 273
Love it as Patrice, who's action starved. — MrGoldbee · 1502
The cost is 1 card, 1 action, 1 XP, which is equivalent to 2.5 actions for 3 Draw Card actions. — Senji975310 · 1
@Senji975310 The value of different actions is much more complicated than that, and you know it. Boiling everything down into their basic action cost is being willfully ignorant of the tempo of the game. — snacc · 1031