Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
5 Posts

Letters from Whitechapel» Forums » Rules

Subject: Investigators looking for clues... rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Brian Clymer
United States
Fort Collins
Colorado
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Since the start of my wonderful relationship with Letters from Whitechapel, we have always played that each investigator moves, then subsequently asks for clues or attempts an arrest. Then the next investigator moves, searches, arrests....etc.

After actually reading the rules, thoroughly, for investigator movement it reads that all investigators move, in turn order THEN each asks for clues or attempts an arrest. I guess my confusion comes in the logic of how the rules are written.

As per the theme (a huge proponent to this game) it makes more sense that each investigator goes first and looks for clues/arrests and the other investigators can therefore react to the actions made by the previous investigator. I feel that as the rules are written, the only reaction that can be made is whether or not to ask for a clue, or if close enough to a found clue, form an arrest...

How have others been playing, or how do others interpret the written rule? (Sorry I don't have the rule book in front of me, and it's more of a question of curiosity than necessity, for we all agree on our house rule of reactionary movements (move, investigate; move, investigate, etc.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Don D.
United States
Miami
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fendra wrote:
Since the start of my wonderful relationship with Letters from Whitechapel, we have always played that each investigator moves, then subsequently asks for clues or attempts an arrest. Then the next investigator moves, searches, arrests....etc.

After actually reading the rules, thoroughly, for investigator movement it reads that all investigators move, in turn order THEN each asks for clues or attempts an arrest. I guess my confusion comes in the logic of how the rules are written.

As per the theme (a huge proponent to this game) it makes more sense that each investigator goes first and looks for clues/arrests and the other investigators can therefore react to the actions made by the previous investigator. I feel that as the rules are written, the only reaction that can be made is whether or not to ask for a clue, or if close enough to a found clue, form an arrest...

How have others been playing, or how do others interpret the written rule? (Sorry I don't have the rule book in front of me, and it's more of a question of curiosity than necessity, for we all agree on our house rule of reactionary movements (move, investigate; move, investigate, etc.)


The rules are pretty clear on the order of everyone moves, THEN everyone acts. I also disagree that this is not thematic as each turn is supposed to be a unit of time in which all the police in the whitechapel district would be acting simultaneously and without the ability to coordinate or communicate well in that moment of time given the technological constraints of the time period.

Allowing that to be a house rule also goes too far in correcting the balance of the game. I tried that house rule for four games and found it an over correction.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Clymer
United States
Fort Collins
Colorado
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dond80 wrote:
Fendra wrote:
Since the start of my wonderful relationship with Letters from Whitechapel, we have always played that each investigator moves, then subsequently asks for clues or attempts an arrest. Then the next investigator moves, searches, arrests....etc.

After actually reading the rules, thoroughly, for investigator movement it reads that all investigators move, in turn order THEN each asks for clues or attempts an arrest. I guess my confusion comes in the logic of how the rules are written.

As per the theme (a huge proponent to this game) it makes more sense that each investigator goes first and looks for clues/arrests and the other investigators can therefore react to the actions made by the previous investigator. I feel that as the rules are written, the only reaction that can be made is whether or not to ask for a clue, or if close enough to a found clue, form an arrest...

How have others been playing, or how do others interpret the written rule? (Sorry I don't have the rule book in front of me, and it's more of a question of curiosity than necessity, for we all agree on our house rule of reactionary movements (move, investigate; move, investigate, etc.)


The rules are pretty clear on the order of everyone moves, THEN everyone acts. I also disagree that this is not thematic as each turn is supposed to be a unit of time in which all the police in the whitechapel district would be acting simultaneously and without the ability to coordinate or communicate well in that moment of time given the technological constraints of the time period.

Allowing that to be a house rule also goes too far in correcting the balance of the game. I tried that house rule for four games and found it an over correction.


That being said, though - the actions are all essentially dictated by "The Boss" for that night and there will be coordination unless the boss is laissez-faire about the night.

Furthermore, wouldn't it be a bit overpowering for Jack to then use letters on top of an inability for the police to react to clues found by previous investigators? We've yet to find a dramatic sway in advantage to either side due to the way we've been playing the investigators' movement, but we wish to play the game properly so we can have an accurate play through that doesn't skew game play in favor of either side more than the rules intend.

I'm not saying that we are against the rules, nor have we had a chance to play as per the rule book (we discovered our faux pas halfway through our last game and obviously didn't want to change rules mid-game). I can see, though, that this would add to further confusion of investigators and allow Jack the ability to back-track and lead a cold trail for investigators much more easily (something that our Jack players have found quite difficult the way we were playing).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Don D.
United States
Miami
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fendra wrote:
dond80 wrote:
Fendra wrote:
Since the start of my wonderful relationship with Letters from Whitechapel, we have always played that each investigator moves, then subsequently asks for clues or attempts an arrest. Then the next investigator moves, searches, arrests....etc.

After actually reading the rules, thoroughly, for investigator movement it reads that all investigators move, in turn order THEN each asks for clues or attempts an arrest. I guess my confusion comes in the logic of how the rules are written.

As per the theme (a huge proponent to this game) it makes more sense that each investigator goes first and looks for clues/arrests and the other investigators can therefore react to the actions made by the previous investigator. I feel that as the rules are written, the only reaction that can be made is whether or not to ask for a clue, or if close enough to a found clue, form an arrest...

How have others been playing, or how do others interpret the written rule? (Sorry I don't have the rule book in front of me, and it's more of a question of curiosity than necessity, for we all agree on our house rule of reactionary movements (move, investigate; move, investigate, etc.)


The rules are pretty clear on the order of everyone moves, THEN everyone acts. I also disagree that this is not thematic as each turn is supposed to be a unit of time in which all the police in the whitechapel district would be acting simultaneously and without the ability to coordinate or communicate well in that moment of time given the technological constraints of the time period.

Allowing that to be a house rule also goes too far in correcting the balance of the game. I tried that house rule for four games and found it an over correction.


That being said, though - the actions are all essentially dictated by "The Boss" for that night and there will be coordination unless the boss is laissez-faire about the night.

Furthermore, wouldn't it be a bit overpowering for Jack to then use letters on top of an inability for the police to react to clues found by previous investigators? We've yet to find a dramatic sway in advantage to either side due to the way we've been playing the investigators' movement, but we wish to play the game properly so we can have an accurate play through that doesn't skew game play in favor of either side more than the rules intend.

I'm not saying that we are against the rules, nor have we had a chance to play as per the rule book (we discovered our faux pas halfway through our last game and obviously didn't want to change rules mid-game). I can see, though, that this would add to further confusion of investigators and allow Jack the ability to back-track and lead a cold trail for investigators much more easily (something that our Jack players have found quite difficult the way we were playing).


Well, two things important to note about your post. 1) Ignore the boss rule. Its really silly, the investigator players should all be an equal team cooperating. 2) Ignore every variant listed in the rule book. I mean this in as least disrespectful a manner as possible, but the designers of this game did not know their own game when it was published. Certain elements of the rules and especially the variants they included are evidence enough to convince me of this fact.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Clymer
United States
Fort Collins
Colorado
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dond80 wrote:
Fendra wrote:
dond80 wrote:
Fendra wrote:
Since the start of my wonderful relationship with Letters from Whitechapel, we have always played that each investigator moves, then subsequently asks for clues or attempts an arrest. Then the next investigator moves, searches, arrests....etc.

After actually reading the rules, thoroughly, for investigator movement it reads that all investigators move, in turn order THEN each asks for clues or attempts an arrest. I guess my confusion comes in the logic of how the rules are written.

As per the theme (a huge proponent to this game) it makes more sense that each investigator goes first and looks for clues/arrests and the other investigators can therefore react to the actions made by the previous investigator. I feel that as the rules are written, the only reaction that can be made is whether or not to ask for a clue, or if close enough to a found clue, form an arrest...

How have others been playing, or how do others interpret the written rule? (Sorry I don't have the rule book in front of me, and it's more of a question of curiosity than necessity, for we all agree on our house rule of reactionary movements (move, investigate; move, investigate, etc.)


The rules are pretty clear on the order of everyone moves, THEN everyone acts. I also disagree that this is not thematic as each turn is supposed to be a unit of time in which all the police in the whitechapel district would be acting simultaneously and without the ability to coordinate or communicate well in that moment of time given the technological constraints of the time period.

Allowing that to be a house rule also goes too far in correcting the balance of the game. I tried that house rule for four games and found it an over correction.


That being said, though - the actions are all essentially dictated by "The Boss" for that night and there will be coordination unless the boss is laissez-faire about the night.

Furthermore, wouldn't it be a bit overpowering for Jack to then use letters on top of an inability for the police to react to clues found by previous investigators? We've yet to find a dramatic sway in advantage to either side due to the way we've been playing the investigators' movement, but we wish to play the game properly so we can have an accurate play through that doesn't skew game play in favor of either side more than the rules intend.

I'm not saying that we are against the rules, nor have we had a chance to play as per the rule book (we discovered our faux pas halfway through our last game and obviously didn't want to change rules mid-game). I can see, though, that this would add to further confusion of investigators and allow Jack the ability to back-track and lead a cold trail for investigators much more easily (something that our Jack players have found quite difficult the way we were playing).


Well, two things important to note about your post. 1) Ignore the boss rule. Its really silly, the investigator players should all be an equal team cooperating. 2) Ignore every variant listed in the rule book. I mean this in as least disrespectful a manner as possible, but the designers of this game did not know their own game when it was published. Certain elements of the rules and especially the variants they included are evidence enough to convince me of this fact.


We have only played the Letters From Jack variant once and I found them entirely too powerful in favor of Jack (I was playing as the investigators). We want to try each variant at least once just to see how they work, or don't work, and most of them are just FAR too swayed one way or another.

The both of us certainly noticed our fault in assuming that investigator movements were to be reactionary upon one another, the last investigator of the rotation being able to act upon information from all the other 4 investigators, was a big flawed assumption to make. When we play again, we foresee the game-play swaying in Jack's favor due to our original plays (with the incorrect ruling) swaying in favor of the investigators.

That being said, I must certainly agree that a lot of the variant rulings seems like an after-thought...no matter the intent of the variations. The only one that I see to be some (and I use "some" loosely) use is the False Clue tokens. We always play with them for they are so seldom used anyway that they don't alter the game much, if at all.
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.