Kinda newb question...can you change out weaknesses during a campaign?
By - TomPalmer1979
I'll sometimes mulligan my basic weakness, but only in certain circumstances. Usually it would just be because I keep drawing the same damn weakness over and over (for some reason Chronophobia keeps coming up) and I'm bored of playing with it. I also think it's reasonable to not use Doomed, since this is a badly designed weakness that can end your campaign prematurely with no possibility of preventing it. There's not a lot of weaknesses that I'd look to sub out though. Part of the fun of the game is coming up with a plan to deal with your weaknesses.
We also allow a mulligan for weaknesses that have come up a lot, although I try to avoid doing so if I get a weakness that just happens to be bad for the investigator I'm playing as it seems like a bit of a cop out.
I've not drawn Doomed yet, but I've been considering keeping it the first time I do. If my investigator does get killed from it, I'll probably allow myself to replace them with a new investigator with the same amount of XP, rather than going back in with a completely new deck.
Yeah same here I usually mulligan because I always get The Tower and Indebted
My first run through TCU, I was playing Yorick. I had both The Tower and Indebted. I got The Tower in my opening hand just a little under half the time. It was brutal, especially for a asset heavy investigator. But I have to say, Yorick somehow survived the campaign and kept Rex safe through it all.
From that experience, our house rule is you pull two basic weaknesses and pick one.
If you're adhering to the letter of the rules law, then nope, you're stuck with whatever basic weakness you pull. But you're right that people often discuss houserules for alternatives. (For instance, sometimes people pull a few basic weaknesses at the outset, and have to choose one of those.)
Gotcha. Yeah I definitely see how this would be houseruled, if it's not an actual rule. I mean I'm not asking for an easy tradeout, it's a pretty tall ask, so I'd expect it to cost some XP. But man I know it's a weakness, it's *meant* to be a difficult challenge, sometimes you just get that weakness that totally wrecks your day at the wrong time.
Whether a house rule for this kind of thing is appropriate depends how much you and your group are interested in getting abused by the game, I think. When you’re finally done with a significant amount of group planning and personal deckbuilding and it’s time to draw your starting basic weakness, it can be really deflating to pull the exact card that functions as the worst possible anti-synergy for your build: Paranoia for a big money deck, or Amnesia for a big hand deck, to name a couple brutal examples. You immediately know your upgrade path and overall game plan are going to have to change significantly, and you haven’t even started the first scenario!
Personally, I go back and forth. Sometimes I’m totally down for the added challenge of having a disastrous card in my deck every game, and sometimes I just don’t want to deal with it. My group has generally allowed a mulligan on the basic weakness draw if it’s immediately clear that the player is going to have significantly less fun because they drew the worst possible card. It’s a hard game, but it’s still supposed to be fun!
Personally I am in the draw 2 choose 1 camp, just so you never get stuck with Doomed. But yeah it can also be really annoying if you make like Norman Withers, and manage to draw the one which means you have to evade an enemy to get rid of it.
I tend to draw two and choose, but with the aim of getting a thematic option rather than min-maxing. That's much more important to me. A Stubborn Detective in a Skids on the run in South America deck is pretty awesome flavour (off the top of my head).
I love Stubborn Detective. It’s reliably hilarious when you’re battling an extradimensional nightmare on a plane of existence the human mind cannot even comprehend and that dude pops out *again!* :D
Stubborn Detective showing up at the Edge of the Universe is always a highlight of any Dunwich campaign.
Well he is called stubborn
Mulliganing is reasonable, I think. My wife's Ursula drew a weakness that requires her to deal excess damage. It's the end of the campaign so it's not too bad, but it could otherwise be very rough.
It's your game do what you want. It's not in the rules. Weaknesses are supposed to suck. But certain Archetypes function a lot worse with specific weaknesses (1), while other's can be a boon or roughly irrelevant(2).
(1: Big handsize vs discard all but 1 card)
(2: Dark horse vs loose all resources)
Especially with a big card pool I would suggest drawing 2 and choosing 1.
What I think is roughly within the rules you can do: After drawing a basic weakness when creating a deck saying "screw this" and create another deck with the same cards and draw another weakness.
If the weakness is beyond crippling (ie. paranoia on a rich preston's deck, happened to me recently and I noped it out), I'll allow myself to redraw.
I'd probably also force myself to redraw it if it was irrelevant, but I haven't had the case lately.
No RAW for swapping out basic weaknesses, my group gives everyone a single mulligan for it though.
The way I do weaknesses is to take all of the basic weaknesses and shuffle them face down, with permanent weaknesses like Indebted face up. Then I draw from the bottom of the deck. If I get a face up permanent then I know about it, otherwise the unknown weakness gets shuffled into my deck for me to learn about at a later date. I like to be surprised by it...
That’s what we do to. It fun not knowing what the weakness is until you draw it. Sadistic fun maybe. But fun. I didn’t think of keeping Indebted face up. Usually we would just lose two resources the first time drawing, and permanent after.
My only house rule is about weaknesses. It's simply this- I just pick one.
I do have two rules for this though.
1. It has to thematically fit the character and campaign I am playing.
I like to have an idea for my character's motivations and background for each campaign and picking a relevant weakness is a cool way to flesh this out. I want a wrakness that makes sense for how I plan to roleplay the character.
2. It has to suck to draw it. I will not pick weaknesses that are easy for a specific gator to deal with.
(Optional 3) It's also fun if it plays off of another investigator's character or weakness.
As far as changing weaknesses mid-campaign, that could also be a cool roleplaying moment. I could see thematically switching out your weakness, especially after a traumatic session!
Unban me from r/tgirls, the sub you moderate
Or ill simply circumvent with a new account.
I was banned for no reason & would like to be reinstated.