As of now, Eldritch Horror has four expansions
: two "small expansions",
Forsaken Lore and
Strange Remnants, and two "big expansions",
Mountains of Madness and
Under the Pyramids, both of which include a "side-board" with additional places for investigators to travel - Antarctica in
MoM, and locations in Egypt and along the Nile in
Under the Pyramids. If my critique here has a theme, it is this:
Eldritch Horror, which remains my favourite game, is at its base very well-designed. The basic mechanics are simple, elegant, and work well in play. But as more exceptions,
assets, spells, conditions, and so on, are added in, the older sets become overshadowed, gameplay becomes for complicated and fiddly, and simple tasks (such as finding a specific card or just plain fitting the game onto a small table) become more tedious.
It
does work very well with FFG's business model, though, which is to sell expansions, and lots of 'em. Good for FFG's bottom line; increasingly less good for gameplay, though, in my opinion.
I will add, in fairness, that the game is pretty modular. You can strip out certain parts without breaking it (I've got to the point where I'm ready to strip out
Glamour spells and all cards that reference them entirely, for example) or even entire expansions (the cards from each expansion come marked with a particular symbol).
The Expansions
Forsaken Lore was the first expansion and, frankly, I would strongly recommend that anyone who buys the Eldritch Horror base set buy
Forsaken Lore at the same time. It is a "must-buy", as far as I'm concerned; it increases the number of Mysteries for the base set Ancient Ones from four to six (hence increasing variety in gameplay, since you'll use three in each game) and adds Yig, one of the better Ancient Ones, to the initial roster of Cthulhu, Shub-Niggurath, Yog-Sothoth, and Azathoth.
I had very mixed feelings about
Mountains of Madness. I didn't initially like, but eventually warmed to, the addition of the "focus" mechanic (where investigators can spend an action to get a "focus" token, which allows them to reroll one, or sometimes two, dice)...though the fact that the game came with only
four [EDIT: eight] Focus tokens - when, in an eight-player game, you could need as many as sixteen - struck me as pretty cheap on FFG's part.) I liked most of the new Investigators, and the new Assets and Conditions weren't unmanageable. A new type of asset, the mis-named Unique Assets, showed up - which was a bit of a hassle, as (along with new Conditions including Hypothermia and Lost in Time and Space) added several new separate decks, albeit of small cards, to add to the already-fiddly setup. But many of the Unique Assets were characters from Lovecraft's work, which was pretty cool.
The two new Ancient Ones - Ithaqua and the Elder Things - weren't great, though. Each was introduced (as is the norm for FFG) to highlight a new mechanic or condition or feature in the game. (Yig brought the Poisoned condition to the fore in
Forsaken Lore, for instance.) The Elder Things require you to use the Antarctica sideboard. Ithaqua requires you to use a Focus token to avoid Hypothermia. Neither of the
MoM Ancient Ones, unlike Yig, were particularly entertaining to play.
Furthermore, the addition of optional Prelude cards (which have an impact on set-up and may hurt or help - or both - the Investigators after set-up but before play begins) felt pretty tacked-on; a solution in search of a problem, really. And the optional Antarctica sideboard was singularly uninspiring (and the use of
that required an additional three decks of cards be added to set-up).
In case you missed it: I don't like having to worry about more and more different decks. Some conditions, like Hunted, almost never come up. Hypothermia comes up more often with the Antarctica sideboard or with Ithaqua, but it's really unnecessary.
Mountains of Madness did begin to break down the need for specialized investigators; a new spell (Arcane Insight) allowed a spell-caster to simply create clues by magic, which reduced the need for a dedicated clue-seeker, and another (Storm of Spirits) allowed strong spell-casters to use their Lore skill instead of Strength, reducing the need for dedicated combatants.
It also started to break down the division between city spaces and wilderness spaces. In the base set, the Active Expedition (an encounter that, if you're successful, often does useful things like granting a powerful Artifact or holding Doom at bay) only showed up in the wilderness. In
MoM, it started to show up in some cities; later expansions now have the Active Expedition potentially showing up in any of the nine "named" cities. A small thing, and probably makes the Expedition deck more useful since you don't have to trek hither and yon to do the Expedition encounter - I will say that pre-
MoM, the Expedition saw very little play, even with the potential benefits.
Strange Remnants and Under the Pyramids
In any event, the trend towards more reduced need for specialists and more, and more cumbersome, rules, continued in the last two expansions,
Strange Remnants and
Under the Pyramids. I bought them in close succession so it's a bit difficult to compare play with one and not the other. So I'll have to kind of jumble them together, unfortunately. Suffice to say that I have a couple of real problems with these last two expansions.
I will say this: The Egypt side-board is a real improvement over Antarctica. It feels much more like a genuine part of the map rather than an unpleasant side-trip. Like the Antarctica board, the Egypt board is only used with a specific Ancient One (Nephren-Ka
, the Dark Pharaoh) or with a specific Prelude card. I quite like the board when playing against Nephren-Ka; against any other Ancient One it adds very little to the game.
The other new Ancient One from
UtP, Abhoth, is actually quite a lot of fun to play. I think FFG learned its lesson from
MoM; I'm much more likely to suggest fighting Nephren-Ka or Abhoth than fighting Ithaqua or the Elder Things.
And a number of the new Conditions in
SR and
UtP are not bad (the fact that getting a
Boon condition doesn't always mean you become
Blessed, for example, or that you may become
Haunted instead of
Cursed if you get a
Bane, is a nice touch). A new effect, Impairment (where you reduce your effective trait level - where before you could not reduce it below your base score), is actually quite effective as a mechanic.
However. Again, simple and elegant gives way to rules exceptions, Investigators become more self-reliant (reducing the need for specialization and co-operation to complete tasks). Overall, the game becomes significantly easier - which is why, it seems, FFG has revised the rules to change the number of clues that spawn or gates that open for certain numbers of investigators. (For four Investigators, which is our standard, now two gates open instead of one, but fewer monsters spawn.) I don't mind the updated Reference Cards, but it does demonstrate the game's become significantly easier. Hell, these days we're playing with the updated Reference Cards, with all Easy Mythos cards removed from the deck, to find a challenge.
 |
| Like so. Tentacles! |
The Mystic Ruins deck, introduced in
SR, operates similarly to the Expedition deck from the base set (you can encounter the Mystic Ruins or the Expedition on a space matching the top card of the relevant deck), but doesn't add much to the game. As usual, the new Ancient One
(Syzygy) and a new Prelude card from
SR require that you use the new feature in that expansion. But the Mystic Ruins deck isn't particularly interesting in play (nor is Syzygy), though at least the Mystic Ruins are just another deck to add to setup and doesn't require a sideboard.
A few new Unique Asset characters have been added (like Asenathe Waite, who sadly doesn't steal your body and walk around in it).
The Assets deck has now ballooned to twice its original size, making finding a particular Asset when required a tedious task. There's now an Asset for damn near every purpose, diluting the Asset pool and increasing power and ability creep.
My main criticism, though, is the addition of Relics and Glamour spells. (Well, and the new Investigators, which I'll discuss below.) Relics are a new type of Unique Asset, and Glamour spells are spells that trigger automatically - you don't need to make a Lore test to cast them - but will often wear you down on each Reckoning. (Certain Mythos cards include a "Reckoning", which triggers some monster abilities on the board and triggers checks on things like Madnesses or Illnesses - if you're Poisoned you lose one health on each Reckoning, for instance.)
The problem with Relics (which usually have an effect triggered on a Reckoning) and Glamour spells (which always do) is that, first, they tend to continue the trend of making each Investigator more self-reliant and a number of older Investigators' abilities redundant or irrelevant; and second, that now every Reckoning includes even more checks and rolls and irritating minutiae that detracts from gameplay. (This is especially so with one character - Monterey Jack - who gains a Relic every time he completes an Expedition Encounter - and as I mentioned above, those Expeditions can now show up in Rome or Sydney, not just in the less-traveled corners of the board.)
A number of Relics make a Reckoning something to actually look forward to. Some (like the living puppet) injure monsters on a Reckoning; others allow you to improve a skill, gain health or sanity, or discard an Illness or Madness. Some players may enjoy the extra abilities and benefits of Relics, but I find that that they clutter and dilute gameplay and contribute to the general power creep.
(Note that I'm not necessarily against things that make the game easier, as such. Focus, introduced in
MoM, absolutely does so, and I'm okay with that. But it's getting a bit out of hand.)
I reserve my real irritation for Glamour spells, though. As mentioned above, Glamour spells have a Reckoning effect which usually requires your Investigator to make a Lore roll and you'll suffer a detriment (e.g. lose a point of sanity) or gain a benefit depending on how successful you are on your roll. That makes a Reckoning more tedious (more cards and effects to worry about). It also makes Glamour spells a pain to have; high Lore characters often have little to fear (though if they have too many, even they can be worn down - multiple successes don't
always prevent a sanity loss, for instance) and low-Lore characters will inevitably suffer the consequences of having a Glamour or two.
Now, okay. So you get the benefit of the spell, which is often a personal equivalent to an existing spell (e.g. one allows you to bypass monsters on your space - the same as the
Mists of Releh spell but without having to roll for it; or another that allows you to negate two points of damage - the same as
Flesh Ward); why not suffer the consequences too? And I get that. My real complaint is that the Glamour spells dilute the spell pool (just like the plethora of new Assets does in the Assets deck), making it harder to strategize learning new spells that will benefit the group. They make Reckonings more of a pain to manage. They make characters more capable. They contribute to the power creep.
The Investigators
All told, Eldritch Horror currently has twenty-eight Investigators to choose from. As you would expect, some Investigators are better than others, and many of the original set's Investigators are seriously overshadowed by those in later expansions. The latest two expansions are particularly bad in this respect. Looking at things purely in terms of mechanical heft, why anyone would want to play the Soldier, the Martial Artist, or the Spy from the base set any more is beyond me, as there are much more mechanically effective Investigators in later sets that can fulfil the same role, better. Furthermore, to continue the theme of my critique here, the simple and elegant abilities of earlier Investigators are overtaken by more complicated and less intutive abilities in later Investigators (because, after all, you have to differentiate them mechanically from their earlier colleagues). It's part of the overall power creep and rules bloat that now afflicts the game.
Now, we tend to play with random investigators (more specifically "draw three, play two") and we do play some of the older Investigators simply because we like them. It's easy enough to choose not to play the new Investigators. I still hate the power creep.
 |
| AND WHY DOES THIS IDJIT HAVE 3 WILL?! |
Final Point: I See White People
This complaint doesn't have anything to do with mechanics. It has to do with just how monochromatic and monocultural the Investigator roster is. This would be more acceptable, I think, in Arkham Horror where you're restricted to cities and towns in New England, more or less. Less so in a globe-spanning game of pulp adventure.
Of the twenty-eight current Investigators, all of five are people of colour, and four of those are basically stereotypes. The African character is a shaman (because they're all tribal, you know), the Chinese character is a martial artist (they all know kung fu!), and the two African-American characters are a jazz musician and a nightclub singer. The one who doesn't fall into all-too-standard roles is the Vietnamese character, who is...a secretary. Apparently people of colour aren't politicians, ambassadors, ex-cultists, farmhands, professors, teachers, gangsters, bootleggers, sailors, researchers, nurses, nuns...and so on.
Now, of course it's meant to be the 1920's. So, yes, the roles of people of colour in the United States (and in the pulps where the Cthulhu Mythos appeared) would have been very limited. But this is a world-wide game, spanning every continent on the globe...I'm not asking for wholesale revision. Just a nod to greater diversity. Would it have killed FFG or the fan base to have the lawyer, who starts in Mumbai for God's sake, have the surname of Bannerjee or Bansali instead of Barnaby? It's not like there weren't Indian lawyers at the time.
 |
| Yes, that Gandhi. Okay, he lived in South Africa. Still. |
Or a First Nations or Inuit character? I guess the "shaman" role was taken by the sole African character, and what other possible role could an indigenous character have? Sigh.
More broadly, even putting aside the paucity of people of colour, there's a notable lack of names that aren't British or Brit-American. No Eastern European names, for instance; no Turkish character in Istanbul; no Scandavians or Germans; no French (the jazz singer has a French name but she's from New Orleans) or Italians; no Portugese or Spanish (whether from Europe or South America). There's a character with a Greek surname (Samaras), at least.
This is, of course, a side-point, and not one that relates
to gameplay. And yes, of course the characters in the Mythos stories were
white and stiflingly Anglo-American, and there was a strong racist undercurrent (and sometimes overcurrent)
in Lovecraft's writing. But FFG, to its credit, has gender parity among the Investigators; half are women, and while the female Investigators are disproportionately given spell-caster or support roles (as they often are in fantasy fiction generally), it's still a significant departure from the source fiction that was a full-on sausage party. Surely FFG can see its way to adding a few more Investigators with a true non-Anglo-American background?
 |
| In fairness, women appear in the "armed delusional religious fanatic" role, too. |
Edit: I'll add in a
link to a recent column (which I hadn't read prior to writing this post) on the classism and lack of people of colour in
Arkham Horror, since I downplayed those problems in
Arkham Horror and figured it's worth noting that
Arkham, too, has been criticized for similar exclusion.
Further Edit: As an aside,
Signs of Carcosa continues the trend; the two
previewed Investigators are (shocker!) Anglo-American: Mike McGlen and Wendy Adams. It's like FFG has the White People Name Dictionary and are just picking randomly. I'm actually more annoyed now than when I originally wrote this post.
Anyway.
That's my critique/review/rant about Eldritch Horror. All told, on balance I am glad I bought
Under the Pyramids, at least. I am much less sold on
Strange Remnants. I admit I may well buy
Signs of Carcosa because c'mon, Hastur, right? Hence justifying FFG's business model. But on the other hand given where the game is now, I'm not sure that I need or want to add anything
other than a new Ancient One (such as Hastur) - indeed I'm in the process of deciding what I can strip out - so I'll see how long I can resist. Now if I can just avoid mentioning Hastur one m....
