Vengeful Hound

As far as investigator-specific weaknesses go, Vengeful Hound is relatively mild. I would say it is most like the basic weakness Stubborn Detective in that it effectively blocks out Norman's special ability.

The differences between Vengeful Hound and Stubborn Detective:

Generally speaking, character-specific weaknesses are supposed to be worse than basic weaknesses, so if you get a character-specific weakness that's on par with a basic weakness, that's pretty good. If you compare Vengeful Hound to other character-specific enemy weaknesses like Sacrificial Beast and Graveyard Ghouls, I think it's much milder. In fact, I think even Stubborn Detective is a tougher weakness since it has a harder fight and you really don't want to be evading these types of smaller hunter enemies anyways.

I think this weakness was made weaker because Norman Withers has such low and , but he has plenty of combat options to help him deal with this weakness. Mind over Matter, "I've got a plan!", and Shrivelling can all potentially take down this monster with tests that are base +2 or base +3. That's really not bad. Of course, if it's multiplayer and Norman doesn't have any combat options in his deck for some reason, another investigator can easily dispatch this enemy for him.

I'm not sure what the non-replacement cards for Norman Withers will look like. I think that the other replacement card, Split the Angle, is situational at best. However, I think it is possible people may come back to use these replacement cards even after the main cards are released so that they can continue to use this relatively mild weakness.

Another difference - Vengeful Hound isn't a hunter, so evading it once is enough if you're at a location you don't need to return to. — TheNameWasTaken · 3
Do you think that might have been a misprint? Of all the cards not to be a hunter, you wouldn't expect it to be one with "hound" in the title. — sfarmstrong · 271
I hadn't thought about that, but it would make sense! As far as I can tell, the Hound and Jenny's replacement Sacrificial Beast are the only weakness enemies that aren't hunters (not counting campaign-specific things), and the Beast specifically spawns as far away from Jenny as possible and wants to remain far away, so the lack of hunter makes sense there. Might be worth dropping a line to FFG about that. — TheNameWasTaken · 3
I did get around to writing to FFG about this some time ago and just got a reply - the lack of Hunter on the hounds is intentional. — TheNameWasTaken · 3
Naturally, 'draw or reveal cards via player card effects' is significantly wider than the 'printed text box were blank' effect of Stubbon Detective, which does not affect any card effect other than the investigator cards themselves. — Cluny · 52
I notice the scanned card has "Prey - Norman Withers" while the Arkhamdb text has "Norman Withers only". Is the scan correct? Or has there been an official errata? — Vittek · 1
Double or Nothing

There's an obscure theorem that I feel I should bring to your attention:

Finn's Law

For any card in Arkham Horror CG, if the card's combo potential with Double or Nothing is part of what makes it exciting, then that card is actually very boring.

Double or Nothing depends on being played with just the right card in just the right circumstances in order to accomplish anything. The effects of this card can certainly be spectacular, but spectacular does not win scenarios - utility, efficiency, and reliability do.

sfarmstrong · 271
I can sympathize with the attitude towards spectacular vs steady, but Double or Nothing is NEVER just a ? because it always increases the difficulty. Unless the difficulty was 0, in which case you traded a card for an action, which isn’t terrible. — Death by Chocolate · 1489
Right, I apparently have trouble even thinking of this as a skill card. Making the correction. — sfarmstrong · 271
Ever collected 20 clues with guiding stones? That’s spectacular and wins the game. Seeker can help you search for missing combo pieces. — Django · 5154
Oof this review couldn’t be further from the truth... there are many, many situations where you can commit DoN to make significant gains with minimal risk. Shooting some spheres or avian thrawls for an extra 2 damage, testing against low-shroud locations or having your high-int investigator use her stacked up into cards to pass a parley twice. These opportunities pop up many times throughout a scenario. It’s just a matter of recognizing that seductive power-turn plays aren’t the only way to use this card. — Difrakt · 1319
I can respect that, even if I'm not convinced. I can't say I've come across many situations myself where I really wish I'd drawn Double or Nothing instead of, say, Quick Thinking, Narrow Escape, "Watch This!", or an innate skill. Of the situations you've listed, picking up multiple clues in a low-shroud location is the only one that you can be sure will come up at some point (and that's a pretty weak benefit unless you combine it with e.g. Guiding Stones or Deduction), and apart from that I would dispute your "many times" assessment. I think you'd average maybe one situation per scenario where Double or Nothing is unambiguously BETTER than its alternatives, and I just don't think that's good enough to justify running it. — sfarmstrong · 271
Considering Rogue’s biggest weakness is not being able to do one thing quickly enough (esp gathering clues and conserving limited ammo) you’re missing opportunities. There’s times where you need to clear two clues off a 3 shroud location right *now* and this at its very weakest enables that. A card which it’s biggest condemnation is ‘at worst it’s a free action’ is a very, very good card. — Difrakt · 1319
Maybe I'm not understanding your argument. Wouldn't Doubling a 3-shroud location effectively bump it up to a 5-shroud location, once you factor in the ? symbol? At best, that seems like a lateral move. Plus, it seems like virtually all the situations you're describing would be more efficiently addressed by playing Sleight of Hand on a firearm or Flashlight. What am I missing? — sfarmstrong · 271
I don't know, Double or Nothing and Sure Gamble or Stroke of Luck can be awesome. A DoN, Vicious Blow & Stroke of Luck attack by Duke does 6 damage. That is pretty spectacular, and it helped with the scenario. (Yes, it did take a bit of setting up) — AndyB · 955
@AndyB, I guess it's just that I'm suspicious of anecdotes as an argument for analyzing a card that's the poster child for "occasionally spectacular." Anecdotes, or idealized examples, put a bit too much emphasis on "spectacular" and not enough on "occasionally." I wonder if I'm allowed to post a second review for the same card, because I'm honestly seeing a lot more pushback than I expected to, and I think I'd have a strong case for Double or Nothing being the most overrated card to date if I could delve into this more seriously. — sfarmstrong · 271
@sfarmstrong I can agree partly with you. When the situation does not come up or your deck isn’t built around it, this can be a dead draw for a long time. But once your seeker had archaic glyphs and Milan out... or guardian a big weapon, you get plenty moments to double up. — Django · 5154
I think this card is a bit better than you're giving it credit for. Remember that you can commit this to an investigate test of a 1-shroud location (or a 1-2 shroud location with Flashlight) and it basically becomes Deduction. That's fine right there and requires minimal support. Add in that there is also serious combo potential in the late campaign, and I like the card quite a bit. In the late campaign you can take cards that basically give you an autosuccess (Seal of the Elder Sign, Stroke of Luck, etc.), plus cards that give outrageously good effects on success plus large boosts to the tests (Lightning Gun, Shrivelling V, Rite of Seeking IV.) These cards are all excellent with Double or Nothing, and the best part, from my point of view, is that you wanted these cards anyway. They are all great on their own, and just so happen to go great with Double or Nothing. So, I like the card. — CaiusDrewart · 3183
That said, I do think this card is a bit overrated, especially within the Rogue faction. A lot of people seem to be under the impression that this card can be the centerpiece of a good Rogue deck. I don't really agree. This is a one-time effect (I don't believe there is any way to recur this card at the moment) and difficult to set up. I think the upside means the card is worth including, but I wouldn't base my whole deck around it. Second, you'll notice that none of the cards I listed as going great with Double or Nothing are Rogue cards. That's not a coincidence. Despite the great Rogue theme, I think DoN is much stronger with cards from other factions. — CaiusDrewart · 3183
Well argued, but I've been thinking through the range of interactions with Lightning Gun, Rite of Seeking IV, Shrivelling V, and... I'm actually more convinced than ever that DoN isn't just overrated - it just outright sucks. NONE of the examples any of you have listed seem to amount to a compelling case for Double or Nothing, as they all hit some combination of "too awkward," "too expensive," "too risky," or, most often of all, "too little payoff," compared to its alternatives, and those are in situations where it's even PLAYABLE. It looks like I'll have to write up that lengthier review at some point, after all. If I can't post a second one, I'll have to amend this review instead. — sfarmstrong · 271
Hmm. The combo with those cards has been pretty good with Double or Nothing in my experience, and not that hard to set up. After all, you were going to play a Lightning Gun or Shrivelling V or Rite of Seeking IV anyway. It's not like you're purchasing and playing these cards just because of the nice interaction with DoN--they were going to be the centerpieces of your deck anyway, and you were going to put them into play and use them as much as you could anyway. Within that framework, DoN only costs one card, and getting 6 clues or 6 damage in one action is really sweet and not all that hard. That's been my experience. I've especially found the 6-clue interaction with Rite of Seeking IV to be really good. (The 6 damage is quite a bit finickier due to a lack of good targets.) But I'm willing to listen to your arguments otherwise! — CaiusDrewart · 3183
Deduction II would be another nice target that's fairly easy to set up (assuming we're talking about a game with a high player count) and that would also fall into the category of a card you already wanted to be running that combines nicely with DoN. — CaiusDrewart · 3183
Tbh, I run DoN but also "combo" parts like Watch This. Most of the time, when I have DoN without other pieces I don't even wait for them. I always have to commit Don by itself pretty fast ^.^ Of course, Streetwise helps. — Palefang · 72
Seems like 2 years later "just the right cards in just the right circumstances" causes this cardqqqq to be the first banned in — Skeith · 2444
Arkham History. I thoroughly enjoy the irony. Also dont post from cells. It leads to double posts... — Skeith · 2444
Deciphered Reality

I've built a fair number of high-XP Seeker decks and I've never been that tempted to include Deciphered Reality. Oh, sure, the peak performance of this card is bonkers. In some scenarios you could arrange events so that you pick up nine clues in a single action. The rewards for a successful investigation are so high that combining it with Double or Nothing is actually worth actively pursuing (whereas most reviews' mentions of Double or Nothing are more like a fun thought experiment than a practical deck-building consideration).

But I'm not sold on it, and I think there's an important philosophical point we ought to unpack, there.

Arkham Horror CG decks should be built defensively. The consequences of succeeding a scenario are huge compared with failure - it could mean getting powerful allies, avoiding trauma and extra weaknesses, or even tipping the balance of success or failure for the entire campaign. By comparison, the difference between succeeding at a scenario and succeeding at it very well is typically an XP or two.

Therefore, cards that help you not fail are more important than cards that help you win harder. Deciphered Reality is a card of the latter type. You can only really bring out its full potential when you're in total control of your situation, where you can afford to have you and your other investigators spread out and exposing as many locations as possible to maximize the yield. If that's the position you're in, then you were probably going to win anyway.

Sure, in theory picking up a lot of clues at once can tip the balance between a win and a loss, but honestly? This is more clues than you need. Bear in mind that averaging one clue per investigator per round is extremely fast, and most scenarios will let you get away with half that pace, e.g. six rounds to pick up three clues per investigator. Massive clue-vacuuming plays are less important for a Seeker than just making sure that they, or someone else nearby, can keep enemies at bay so they can zip around the map and investigate at a steady pace.

If you don't specifically plan to use Deciphered Reality to make a huge play, then it may not even be worth using. It's not cheap at four resources, and there are relatively affordable cards to help you rapidly collect clues, like Archaic Glyphs: Guiding Stones and both variants of Deduction. Moreover, Pathfinder or a well placed upgraded Shortcut are great ways to cut down on the number of actions in a scenario, which is similar in practice to the payoff from Deciphered Reality, but they're cheaper and they're easy to use well.

On top of that, this card is just begging to be autofailed. If that happens, then you're practically guaranteed not to have time to pick up clues at all the VP locations that you deliberately didn't finish up, and could be at risk of failing the scenario itself. This game is meant to randomly generate huge setbacks. For the love of Yig, do not put all your eggs in one basket, like Deciphered Reality is baiting you to do!

sfarmstrong · 271
I would be very tempted to use it in solo play, as it might provide huge action compression. Unfortunately I do not like the seeker class that much. — XehutL · 47
How would solo play improve its action compression? — sfarmstrong · 271
I basically agree. But a few points. First, in one prominent scenario, which happens to be one of the hardest scenarios ever printed, all locations start revealed. Second, by the time you get this (which would be very, very late campaign), you can have significant protection from the autofail on your team, with the likes of Time Warp, Seal of the Elder Sign, that sort of thing. — CaiusDrewart · 3183
That aside, in most circumstances, I think this card is not worth it. You'd basically have to know in advance that the upcoming scenario is going to be conducive to it. — CaiusDrewart · 3183
Basically, yeah. Even with Seal of the Elder Sign, this combo would be a complete bastard to set up, but has some potential upsides if you know scenario details ahead of time. I haven't replayed enough scenarios to have a feel for how that kind of foreknowledge affects deck-building. — sfarmstrong · 271
I meant not improved by solo play but fact that with several scenarios it might provide huge acceleration with the right setup/play. It still can be ruined by tentacles, of course. — XehutL · 47
We tried this card in several scenarios in 4 Player but is was never worth it. Alone the time it took to reveal all locations... guiding stones and in the know is much easier to use. — Django · 5154
This card is crazy in Dim Carcosa though. — Razoupaf · 1
Might work well in a Minh Barricade deck. — Zinjanthropus · 229
Except with https://arkhamdb.com/card/04307 it can't fail. And if your Rogue friend has a Double or Nothing, you can complete some scenarios quite fast. — GrandMasterJ · 2
I agree with this assessment. I've used this card once and once only, in The City of Archives, and yes--it was awesome to pick up six or seven clues in one action. But it took a fair amount of setup to get my Seeker in the position to make the play, and the stars never aligned like that again. This card, although sexy as hell, is just pie in the sky. — Pinchers · 132
Expose Weakness

It feels like the 3XP cost of upgraded Expose Weakness has more to do with making sure that Roland Banks can't buy it than it does with the actual value of the card itself.

This card basically lets a Seeker fight an enemy with their Intellect. If that were all it did, then it would just be a weaker version of Mind over Matter.

The card's only two saving graces are the card-draw (which is fine, I guess), and that it lets another investigator take the shot. The clearest combo is Shotgun, for which Expose Weakness hugely boosts the odds of scoring the maximum 5 damage. If you throw Double or Nothing in the mix, you could be looking at 10.

That combo is all well and good if you can pull it off, but it comprises three cards across separate classes and, realistically, at least two separate investigators in the right place, and a total of 7XP. That's assuming your scenario even has an enemy with enough health to make it worthwhile.

If that represents the best case for Expose Weakness, then it's in trouble. For the same 7XP, you'd be far better off getting Acidic Ichor and 3XP Emergency Cache to refill it, and dealing with the enemies yourself. As a Seeker, you're also in a much better position to make sure you actually draw those cards, using e.g. Cryptic Research or No Stone Unturned.

Also compare with "I've got a plan!" - the other major card built around weaponizing your intellect. It's more costly than Expose Weakness and doesn't work if you don't have the clues (although for a Seeker that shouldn't be a problem very often), but it deals solid damage and you don't need anybody else's help to deal it. It's genuinely unclear whether Expose Weakness even represents an improvement, which has got to be a pretty embarrassing comparison for the card that costs 3XP.

I give this card a rating of "unpurchasable."

sfarmstrong · 271
This does seem like an extremely weak use of 3 XP. — CaiusDrewart · 3183
The biggest saving grace of this card is that it sets the fight to 0, which nearly guarantees success. Put this in a rex deck and combo it with double or nothing, and you stand to enable your guardian to make one very effective attack. Rex is efficient enough that he might even have time for this. — SGPrometheus · 841
Also combos with Monster Killer really well, but that's still an 8xp investment (divided between two people, but still). — SGPrometheus · 841
@SGPrometheus, I feel like I addressed those points in the review itself. The plays you're describing certainly work, but they're inefficient compared to the abovementioned alternatives. You could absolutely justify playing Expose Weakness if you drew it, but I don't see how you would justify including it in your deck to begin with. That's also how I feel about Double or Nothing - the mere fact that useful applications for the card EXIST isn't enough to overcome its dismal average value. — sfarmstrong · 271
Speaking of combos, Monster Slayer is also an ideal target for this card, since a lot of tough enemies are not actually elite. — Azriel · 1
This feels like it's only passable on expert, where higher education boosted book tests and testless damage are about the only things you can rely on — Mataza · 19
"It feels like the 3XP cost of upgraded Expose Weakness has more to do with making sure that Roland Banks can't buy it than it does with the actual value of the card itself."It's funny you say that, because Roland now CAN buy this with his Parallel Lines back deckbuilding options — HeroesOfTomorrow · 59
Art Student

This card is very similar to Working a Hunch - they both do the same thing for the same cost with a few differences:

So, Art Student effectively costs one more action than Working a Hunch, provides some soak, but takes up a slot that could be prohibitive to playing other useful cards. In-class, I don't know if Seeker investigators will take either, since I think they'd rather put their resources towards playing assets that will let them gain clues over and over again rather than getting a one-time clue. Sure, Working a Hunch will help you get one clue from a high-shroud location... but how are you going to get the rest of them?

I think most Seeker investigators are not going to be interested in Art Student as an Ally option. Dr. Milan Christopher is generally the preferred choice for clue gathering as a flat +1 with resource generation is overall a more useful set of effects than gaining a single clue.

However, I think Art Student is a good ally for Roland Banks. Roland's is lower than most main-class Seeker investigators, so he likes having the testless clue option to crack high-shroud locations. He also has low sanity, so the 2 points of horror soak are welcome, especially in an ally that can be discarded without too much consequence. Roland's other main ally, Beat Cop, definitely adds a valuable +1, but it's twice the cost of Art Student and Roland is usually spread pretty thin on resources.

I think there's a good way to build a Roland Banks deck without Beat Cop, and I think in those builds Art Student is one of his better choices. There is some minor synergy with Calling in Favors and Laboratory Assistant where you can use the allies for their "entering play" effect, have them soak one horror, then return them to your hand so that you can use their "enter play" effect again. Roland Banks likes these smaller, cheaper Seeker allies for horror soak.

So, while Art Student isn't necessarily the best card, it definitely has its uses. In decks that count on the occasional testless clue and want cheap Seeker allies for horror soak, I think it's a reasonable choice.

Art student is a cheap soak and great target for calling in favors( together with laboratory assistant. — Django · 5154
For Roland, I think I'd go with Scene of the Crime and "Let Me Handle This" to pick up clues at a high-shroud location. I'd say Dr. William T. Maleson is also a stronger purchase for 1 resource - better damage-soak, and the ability to drop a clue is helpful for dealing with Cover Up. — sfarmstrong · 271
@Django - I agree, Laboratory Assistant and Calling In Favors let you get more out of Art Student. It really helps with the card draw, horror soak, and clue-gathering. — ArkhamInvestigator · 305
@sfarmstrong - I see what you're saying with Dr. William T. Maleson. For 1 resource, you get very good horror and damage soak, and his ability does help a lot with Cover Up. However, with Maleson's ability being so important for Cover Up, I think he's less expendable than Art Student (and so Roland might be hesitant to use him for his full soak value). I also think that Roland's best version is probably "Dirge of Reason" Roland (if you have the books) and I think that benefits a little more from Art Student than Maleson (since Mysteries Remain is itself another testless clue gathering card and has the potential to drop a clue on Roland's location to be picked up, and Cover Up isn't looming throughout the scenarios). Scene Of The Crime and "Let me handle this!" are definitely both good Roland cards, too (and to be honest, a testless-clue Roland build might take all 3 cards). — ArkhamInvestigator · 305