J. Chris Miller
United States
Plano
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Based on the videos I've watched from The Dice Tower, the game seems completely compatible with In the Lab. I don't have experience with the actual game myself because my copy is held up at CSI due to another game being late to print.

Anyone try it with In the Lab?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
♫ Eric Herman ♫
United States
West Richland
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
I like elephants. I like how they swing through trees.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
No. Won't work. The nature of the diseases and how they function and need to be cured or dealt with becomes very different very quickly.

Just play it as it is.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gamer D

Monroeville
Pennsylvania
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I can vouch that there seems to be a lot of things in the game by April that might be problematic if we tried to play with In The Lab. I'm not saying it can't be done and the game does self balance as you win or lose but I do think it likely works best playing it normally.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Atredis
msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
If you ignore the additional rules, and don't actually destroy vital components (mark them as lost or whatever) it is just a core game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Just adding to the chorus, no, it won't work.

Too many of the upgrades and other little changes are balanced for having to collect the 5 cards to cure.

I say this as a big ItL fan. We never play regular Pandemic without it.

If you really want you could play January with the lab, but after that, I wouldn't recommend it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Tyree
United States
Dayton
Ohio (OH)
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
eldaec wrote:
Just adding to the chorus, no, it won't work.

Too many of the upgrades and other little changes are balanced for having to collect the 5 cards to cure.

I say this as a big ItL fan. We never play regular Pandemic without it.

If you really want you could play January with the lab, but after that, I wouldn't recommend it.


Yup, and I'm in agreement on ItL, never play Pandemic w/o it myself. I wouldn't even recommend the January turn, personally. I played Pandemic without ItL a few times before starting Pandemic Legacy precisely so I would switch mental gears to the original card swapping routine. Basically, the first few months I approached like base Pandemic with some OtB bits added, then it completely dropped my jaw. ItL would've been great, maybe Season 2, but won't work for this.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gamer D

Monroeville
Pennsylvania
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
PaulAtredis wrote:
If you ignore the additional rules, and don't actually destroy vital components (mark them as lost or whatever) it is just a core game.


If you ignore the additional rules you're not playing past the first part of January.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gamer D

Monroeville
Pennsylvania
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Here's a spoiler free example of why In the Lab is problematic in Legacy. When you eradicate a disease you can make that disease easier to cure in future games. (This is in the main rule book and the stickers that you can see before the very first game.) So for instance when you eradicate Yellow twice you can make it so you can cure Yellow without taking an action, you just discard the five cards and it's cured. Likewise you don't even have to be at a research facility to do it. It not clear how that would interact with In the Lab or if it would mess up the balance. Is it just the final cure action that's free? Do you have to be at a lab to do cube pushing but not at the lab to do the final cure step? If you get a bonus that lets you cure with one less card is that just off the last cure action?

And that's just part of the base Legacy game, I'm not even getting into the changes that occur after the game starts and you begin adding new rules and components, etc. So while it might be possible to hodge podge ways around these things to shoehorn in the Lab expansion somehow it really seems like it wouldn't be worth the effort.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goodnuff
United States
Frisco
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmb
I just cannot fathom why anyone would even *want* to change the game by including an unplanned expansion before even playing it!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J. Chris Miller
United States
Plano
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
EvilNuff wrote:
I just cannot fathom why anyone would even *want* to change the game by including an unplanned expansion before even playing it!


Because most who play with In the Lab prefer that method and are used to the way it plays. Tbh, I wasn't the biggest fan of Pandemic before In the Lab. Now it's one of my favorite games. I've played enough base Pandemic to where I feel Legacy will be enjoyable, but mostly because of the theme, story and added gameplay elements.

The other issue for me is I will be playing 2 player, so the ability to trade cards isn't as easy since there is only 1 other player to trade with, and I don't want to use extra roles.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goodnuff
United States
Frisco
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmb
coyotemoon722 wrote:
EvilNuff wrote:
I just cannot fathom why anyone would even *want* to change the game by including an unplanned expansion before even playing it!


Because most who play with In the Lab prefer that method and are used to the way it plays. Tbh, I wasn't the biggest fan of Pandemic before In the Lab. Now it's one of my favorite games. I've played enough base Pandemic to where I feel Legacy will be enjoyable, but mostly because of the theme, story and added gameplay elements.

The other issue for me is I will be playing 2 player, so the ability to trade cards isn't as easy since there is only 1 other player to trade with, and I don't want to use extra roles.


But Pandemic Legacy != Pandemic. So just because you prefer the ITL variant of the base game has no relationship to Pandemic Legacy. You haven't even (when this thread was created) gotten your copy yet.

I haven't started my campaign yet so I will fall back on Risk Legacy. With Risk Legacy people who hated regular Risk loved the legacy variant, because it is a different game. People who went into Risk Legacy and made house rules and changes screwed up the dynamics of the campaign in many cases. Just play it as it is intended to be played.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J. Chris Miller
United States
Plano
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
EvilNuff wrote:
coyotemoon722 wrote:
EvilNuff wrote:
I just cannot fathom why anyone would even *want* to change the game by including an unplanned expansion before even playing it!


Because most who play with In the Lab prefer that method and are used to the way it plays. Tbh, I wasn't the biggest fan of Pandemic before In the Lab. Now it's one of my favorite games. I've played enough base Pandemic to where I feel Legacy will be enjoyable, but mostly because of the theme, story and added gameplay elements.

The other issue for me is I will be playing 2 player, so the ability to trade cards isn't as easy since there is only 1 other player to trade with, and I don't want to use extra roles.


But Pandemic Legacy != Pandemic. So just because you prefer the ITL variant of the base game has no relationship to Pandemic Legacy. You haven't even (when this thread was created) gotten your copy yet.

I haven't started my campaign yet so I will fall back on Risk Legacy. With Risk Legacy people who hated regular Risk loved the legacy variant, because it is a different game. People who went into Risk Legacy and made house rules and changes screwed up the dynamics of the campaign in many cases. Just play it as it is intended to be played.


Gosh darn it, you're right! What was I thinking?

The only thing I could see breaking when using ITL is traversing cities that have had outbreaks and are harder to maneuver through. Because ITL requires less trading, you don't have to traverse the globe as much, and thus the unstable, rioting, and fallen cities wouldn't be as much of an issue.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
EvilNuff wrote:
I just cannot fathom why anyone would even *want* to change the game by including an unplanned expansion before even playing it!


Well that's easy. Because ItL is great and you only get to play PL for the first time once. In all probability I'll only play it all once.

Despite this, as an ItL fan, I'm going to say this again. Do not use the lab, it won't work.

Here's hoping S2 has a lab.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Goodnuff
United States
Frisco
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmb
eldaec wrote:
EvilNuff wrote:
I just cannot fathom why anyone would even *want* to change the game by including an unplanned expansion before even playing it!


Well that's easy. Because ItL is great and you only get to play PL for the first time once. In all probability I'll only play it all once.

Despite this, as an ItL fan, I'm going to say this again. Do not use the lab, it won't work.

Here's hoping S2 has a lab.


That is *exactly* why you shouldn't even consider ITL for PL! You only get to play PL for the first time once, so play it as intended. Introducing other changes before even trying it as intended has such a huge chance of just torching the experience.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.