Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
22 Posts

Mansions of Madness: Second Edition» Forums » Rules

Subject: Insane - Not really for a co-op game? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mikael Svensson
Sweden
Helsingborg
Skåne
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
My group loves co-op's and play sush games whenever a player in out RPG group is absent. MoM 2ed looks like a co-op until someone gets insane. Some of the effects does nothing, some is just gamebreaking for a co-op.

What does it mean to "win" in this game? For me it is about beating the adventure but those little insane cards throws that out the window.

We played Escape from Innsmouth and got to the absolut endpoint of the adventure, when I go insane and just run away since my new victory condition was about making sure the game ended without the mission being complete (the actual escape that is) - thereby 'winning' by making all the others lose. Is that supposed to be fun? After three hours of great gameplay, we are rewarded by losing?

The idea is sound though, when someone goes insane something should happen. Is there anyone out there that have the same feeling and perhaps has a better alternative than making everyone lose or just one person 'win' by spoiling the experience for the other players?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donny Behne
United States
Fate
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
www.punchboardmedia.com/geaux-gaming/
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If memory serves, most of them only change the win condition of the person who receives it. In this case, it means they don't win unless they fulfill their insane requirement (like flipping all the clues). It's still very much a cooperative game but it may mean that someone doesn't win the same as the rest of the group.

If you don't like the ones that let a player spoil the outcome, then just take them out of the deck before you start the game.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
soak man
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think it is important here to also stress that if you are eliminated and have an insane condition (unless it says otherwise) you still lose.

This means that you can't tank the game by killing YOURSELF off. However, there is nothing stopping you from getting more creative and pushing an ally away from the dock or into a fire or within range of a monster.

I think it is appropriate for an insane investigator to switch sides... what I DON'T like is that there is little to no payout storywise if that player succeeds. I think there should be epilogues for betrayal victories incorporated in the app. At least then it would feel like there is resolution.

The only problem with these insanities that I see are that there is no way for the SANE investigators to combat it really. They can't eliminate said player because that player would still end the scenario on her death. I would prefer some kind of mechanic by which the insane investigator can be restored to be at least functional while maintaining the "sanity damage" to the character.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
B C Z
United States
Reston
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mixx wrote:
After three hours of great gameplay, we are rewarded by losing?


Why does losing negate three hours of great game play and an interesting story to tell?
16 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think you missed something specific to the scenario (Escape from Innsmouth)... I'll put that in spoilers, though.

Spoiler (click to reveal)
The other investigators can still win the game if you run away from the boat in Innsmouth. Sure, the captain of the boat asks you if everyone is present, but you can say yes even if somebody is missing. Those not on the boat are eliminated and thus lose the game (unless they have the one Insane Condition card that lets them win too if eliminated).

If you got to that situation, and you simply thought you could stop everyone else from winning by you not boarding the boat, then you should run through the app again to give the others their win condition as they really should have won the game.


I really do like the way the Insane Condition cards turn the game from full co-op into semi co-op. It makes you want to avoid them in most cases and gives you a really interesting set of choices to make if you do become Insane. None of them are wholly game-breaking, though, especially now that we know for sure that the full traitor card cannot win the game by eliminating themself.

I haven't played all the stories yet, but I'm fairly certain that there is no story that can easily be made impossible to win for the others if one player runs amok. Yes, it will make the game harder for the other players, but they should be able to keep it going without too much trouble. There will always be a path to victory open to them.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
MM
United States
Indianapolis
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
If you'd rather explore some more "coop friendly" insane conditions, see this thread in the Variant section.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J N
msg tools
Escape from Innsmouth
Spoiler (click to reveal)
is pretty hard. You get 1+2+3 insanity without save, which is enough to drive the 6 sanity characters insane automatically, if you can't reduce it somehow... and you'd better not mess up any sanity checks. This seems a little hard, the suspense of the scenario is okay even without the huge sanity loss.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
There are many games on the market that start of as coop, but only one player can win in the end.
MOM is a game in which insanity plays a big part of the story, and one must be prepared for anything.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Casey080 wrote:
Escape from Innsmouth
Spoiler (click to reveal)
is pretty hard. You get 1+2+3 insanity without save, which is enough to drive the 6 sanity characters insane automatically, if you can't reduce it somehow... and you'd better not mess up any sanity checks. This seems a little hard, the suspense of the scenario is okay even without the huge sanity loss.

I believe you're actually talking about Rising Tide...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
soak man
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
byronczimmer wrote:
Mixx wrote:
After three hours of great gameplay, we are rewarded by losing?


Why does losing negate three hours of great game play and an interesting story to tell?


Whereas I agree with this sentiment, it does feel rather anti-climactic when a player suddenly says "Oh wait, I win guys! Game over!" with no resolution to the scenario or story other than what is on that tiny card.
Spoiler (click to reveal)

This happens with the One of the Thousand and Pyromaniac conditions on occasion, and possibly others? I haven't seen them all yet.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
soakman wrote:
Whereas I agree with this sentiment, it does feel rather anti-climactic when a player suddenly says "Oh wait, I win guys! Game over!" with no resolution to the scenario or story other than what is on that tiny card.
Spoiler (click to reveal)

This happens with the One of the Thousand and Pyromaniac conditions on occasion, and possibly others? I haven't seen them all yet.


It's for this reason that I created a short summary sheet that lists all effects of the Insane conditions and I show it to everyone as part of the rules introduction and whenever anyone becomes Insane. That way, everybody knows what you might have and can start looking for the warning signs. The player becoming Insane also knows what things they can bluff about having too.

If you dislike surprise endings, I strongly recommend you do the same.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rick Baptist
United States
Highland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I was under the impression that if an insane person loses their objective, the entire team loses? Isn't it a co-op?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Three Headed Monkey
Australia
flag msg tools
SlikkRikk wrote:
I was under the impression that if an insane person loses their objective, the entire team loses? Isn't it a co-op?

It depends on the objective. It is possible for everyone but the insane player to win if the insane player hasn't met their objective.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rick Baptist
United States
Highland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Three Headed Monkey wrote:
SlikkRikk wrote:
I was under the impression that if an insane person loses their objective, the entire team loses? Isn't it a co-op?

It depends on the objective. It is possible for everyone but the insane player to win if the insane player hasn't met their objective.


Okay -- but looking at insanity conditions in a co-op setting, I think it would only be a true victory if everyone was happy with the outcome. If you have this investigator that went through all that hell and obviously is affected for years to come after this experience, I would want him to make sure to complete his objective.

Of course, if one of the conditions is anti-players, I understand why they could win without him. But there are many conditions (and I'm sure many more to come) that will allow him to win with the team and still fulfill his objective.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The rules are quite clear that it only affects the Insane investigator. Of course, it may be in the other investigators' best interests to help them complete their goal, as the insane one will then help complete the investigation, but they will do this at the risk of running out of time, or the investigator having an entirely alternate condition to their own, hence wanting to trick them.

If you want to play as pure co-op, then you will want to house rule the Insane mechanic heavily.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Owen Sullivan
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Going Insane and screwing over your team is basically what the Lovecraft mythos is about. I feel like neutering insanity is damaging the spirit of the game. But some people don't like backstabbing and I can understand why it turns them off to it. This game is mainly about telling a story for my group. Losing and going insane often makes the story more enjoyable than actually winning.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Pittman
msg tools
mbmbmb
Insanity is interesting from a role-playing perspective and potentially awkward from a game play perspective.

For example, becoming Obsessed (needing to clear all of the search tokens) doesn't change the fact that to win you still need the group objective to be fulfilled. If clearing all the search tokens is either impossible, or can't be done without tanking the group objective, what do you do? What would your character do?

When I became Obsessed during Escape from Innsmouth, I reasoned (to myself) that my character would still work for the good of the group, but couldn't escape unless all the searches were completed. I prioritised group goals, but searched whenever I was next to a token and doing so wouldn't sink everyone else ('I'll come back for that.' my character reasoned).

It's tricky.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Will Fuqua
United States
Hendersonville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
You can always just house rule it. For example, go through all the insane cards and remove those that really cause problems or have players not go insane but instead get some consistent impairment like they can't pick up or trade more than one item as an action. If you want it really simple, keep things like normal but they don't receive an insane card and everything is normal until they are eliminated once they have reached their Sanity number the second time. I house rule things every once and awhile and it's just worth it really when it comes to enjoying yourself. One house rule I use in Eldritch Horror is no side quest cards in the Mythos deck. It's annoying as hell.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anthony Harlan

Oregon
msg tools
mb
My group has simply house ruled all of the insanities where it makes sense to say, "and the investigation is completed."

Lighting fires has no opposition, so that aspect has no challenge. By adding completion goals, the insane investigators still have to try to overcome a challenge.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mxyzptlk wrote:
Lighting fires has no opposition, so that aspect has no challenge. By adding completion goals, the insane investigators still have to try to overcome a challenge.

There is opposition if another investigator can be putting those fires out faster than they can be lit. Also note that the specific Insane condition you refer to requires 6 rooms to be on fire (not spaces). It will take quite a while for that to be accomplished, especially if someone is putting out fires and/or stealing the firebug's Light Source so they can't make more.

It also seems like your house rule only affects 2 out of the 12 Insane Conditions, and regarding the other one:

Spoiler (click to reveal)
Narcissism, which changes your winning condition to having 6 Items at the end, doesn't really affect the group much as the Narcissist will probably help out the other investigators to win provided they can hold onto their horde.


I'm not saying it's a bad house rule, but perhaps you'd be better served by just removing the 3+ cards from the deck.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anthony Harlan

Oregon
msg tools
mb
Clipper wrote:
Mxyzptlk wrote:
Lighting fires has no opposition, so that aspect has no challenge. By adding completion goals, the insane investigators still have to try to overcome a challenge.

There is opposition if another investigator can be putting those fires out faster than they can be lit. Also note that the specific Insane condition you refer to requires 6 rooms to be on fire (not spaces). It will take quite a while for that to be accomplished, especially if someone is putting out fires and/or stealing the firebug's Light Source so they can't make more.

It also seems like your house rule only affects 2 out of the 12 Insane Conditions, and regarding the other one:

Spoiler (click to reveal)
Narcissism, which changes your winning condition to having 6 Items at the end, doesn't really affect the group much as the Narcissist will probably help out the other investigators to win provided they can hold onto their horde.


I'm not saying it's a bad house rule, but perhaps you'd be better served by just removing the 3+ cards from the deck.

Also, if you want to shank someone, you have to do it on the final turn.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mxyzptlk wrote:
Also, if you want to shank someone, you have to do it on the final turn.

I don't understand how this fits your methodology. It makes it impossible for that player to win in many scenarios. Most require the Investogators to be bunched up in a single space at the end, so the will never be a valid target.

How do you even know if it's the final turn, too? I've seen missions that end when you get the necessary number of successes on a test, but the app doesn't tell you the required number. You don't know if it's the last turn until the app tells you, and the game is immediately over after you get enough successes.

 
 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.