"I'm outta here!"

Initially this card seems kind of useless. Honestly I can't really comment on its applicability to your typical investigator but I do know of two investigators who can benefit a lot from it.

Zoey and Jenny can both get really screwed by their weaknesses if they drop in the last few rounds of the game. Zoey can get caught traveling all the way across the map in order to kill some jerk monsters and Jenny searching for Izzie in far off lands. This can be especially problematic in large maps or ones flush with monsters. If you only have a couple turns left in the campaign before the final Agenda procs you may not have that many actions to spare, and especially for these weaknesses they are on-par with being defeated anyway (which is significantly worse than any other investigators weakness penalty). In this method you can almost halve the number of actions required to fulfill these without screwing over your win condition.

It's not a perfect fix, but I'd consider a 1-of for these investigators to help them out alongside action-investments like Police badge or action-compression items like Cat Burgler.

Difrakt · 1325
I don't follow how this card helps wit the problem. Resigning is the same as being defeated for the purpose of those weaknesses, isn't it? So you don't avoid the penalty by resigning. — nierensieb · 1
Yes, this was clarified in a recent errata. This card does not save you from your weakness. It's main use in the current set is being able to resign without being in the VIP area of The House Always Wins. — FBones · 19472
If this card was "fast", it would save 1 action in many scenarios, but i'm not sure if that's enough to make it worthwile. — Django · 5162
He said that it halves the number of actions necessary to fix those weaknesses, not gets rid of them completely. IE you only have to go halfway across the map to deal with the weakness, you don't have to come BACK to resign. — Ebrey · 238
I'm currently replacing manual dexterity with these, trading the card draw with the occasional utility. — bigstupidgrin · 84
You don't avoid the penalty by resigning, but this card can help you resign *before* you draw one of those weaknesses. — Signum · 14
Rise to the Occasion

Three is fantastic. I love the restriction, it feels thematic and inline with other cards like Lucky!, Oops! and "Look what I found!". When it works it is incredibly helpful however I have found it a bit of a dead card often sacrificed to Wendy Adams ability. It's probably better including Unexpected Courage and other skill cards with more versatility rather than risk having a dead card in your deck.

Pilgrim · 321
FWIW, I've found the same. The condition about 2 or higher does make it tricky to get into play, and do you want to be trying something that you start at -2 for? — AndyB · 955
I think this card is brilliant for Pete. His base fight and intellect values are two but they are essentially 4 when taking these actions with Duke. — RedV · 1
On second thought, I am not sure anymore whether Duke would circumvent that requirement. Duke says with a base skill value of 4 while this card says than 'your' base skill value. — RedV · 1
I always include all neutral skill cards in my decks, except unexpected courage. They're fantastic, as they cost nothing and you draw a new cards, if you suceed. I don't think this card works with duke, as he replaces petes base values. However it should be pretty good to balance both survivor's low attributes, like wendys fight or ashcans fight/investigate, when duke's not ready. — Django · 5162
correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the base skill the printed value and skill value after cards like Magnifying Glass or Beat Cop? If Pete has 2 intellect but also a Magnifying Glass and Dr. Milan Christopher does the Shroud value have to be 4, 5 or 6 before being able to commit Rise to the Occasion? — Paphoved · 1
The base value is before bonuses. If Pete investigates himself, base value 2, regardless of magnifying glass, Dr. Milan, or any other bonuses. If using Duke, base of 4. — Faranim · 417
Taunt

What is action compression, what is action investment? Why is this card so damn good?

For 1 resource (something you almost always start your turn with one of) you get at least one engage action with this card. This is the lowest value you get for this card and honestly even at that level it is deceptively good.

Here's the thing: not all actions are made the same. Say you have an enemy engaged with your fragile Daisy flower one stop over from you, if the enemy has 2 health and you have a .45 then it takes you three actions to move, engage and kill that enemy no problem. However if the enemy has 3-4 health you're now in trouble. If there are two enemies at 1-2 health you are similarly guaranteed someone has to take damage (unless your daisy has a plan)

With Taunt you now have that action you need to cut through the chaff and save everyone. Wonderful! For 1 banked resource you saved someone 1 damage and 1 horror probably.

Where Taunt breaks the game is if you're a certain nutty chef. As Zoey you can:

  • run into the room
  • wave your cross at a horde of rats
  • cap one 2 health enemy with your .45
  • hack another 2 health enemy with your machete

And make 2 damn resources for your slaughter.

Does it usually get that efficient? No, but since it's minimal efficiency is trading one resource into an action (which is a good trade) it's never a bad card. As soon as there's two enemies in a location fire away and reap the rewards of action economy!

Difrakt · 1325
You remember you can fight an enemy that is not engaged with you? This screws up your Daisy example unless I misunderstood you. — nierensieb · 1
@nierensieb While that is true, you typically should at least consider that a missed shot with the .45 could put a bullet hole in the very fragile Daisy Walker's body. She can't take much punishment. A missed shot could certainly mean Daisy is suffering from the monster attack now along with the bullet you put in her side. Chance away by all means, but I believe that the point for Daisy is still a valid one. — Bronze · 187
Fair enough. I was just wondering if Difrakt missed the fact he can attack an unengaged enemy. — nierensieb · 1
can confirm. Taunt in a Zoey deck is auto include. It gets even crazier with upgraded taunt. — stetson · 3
This card doesn' deserve to be in my Zoey deck in a two player game. There are rarely enough enemies for this card to prove its worth. Most of the time im following my clue finder around protecting him, and half of the time I will draw the enemy from the encounter deck anyway. There are so much better cards in core+dunwich that this simply clogs the deck. In 2p game I'll pass. — Andronikus · 1
When you play Taunt, you don't just trade action(s) for resource. You trade action(s) for resource AND A CARD, which is significant difference. If you only need just 1 engage, you are better off not playing Taunt. — Deo · 1
Another thing to consider is that for Zoey, the icons will usallly come close to a single Wild icon. — Blackhaven · 9
Rex Murphy

DO NOT PICK HIM! Use the Librarian instead because here comes the hate.

Hand's down Rex Murphy is the WORST investigator in the game (through Blood on the Altar). First of all, Rex's Curse is absolutely brutal. I cannot overstate how crippling his unique weakness is. You will doubt every decision you make while it's out, and it never really goes away. This transforms your turn into a painful and tedious experience, rather than a challenging risk/reward analysis. If you do manage to get rid of it (strategically failing?), then the likelihood of you drawing it again only increases as your deck gets thinner and thinner. Not being able to add fortune cards is just a slap in the face. Secondly,hHis investigator's ability is rarely triggered and is only useful at locations with multiple clues. Thirdly, "Oh hooray! I drew the Investigator Token! +2 or autofail to draw three cards?" Sheesh.

But what about his special card, Search for the Truth? Sure, it has three skill icons, but look at that ability. It only works when you stockpile clues - the exact opposite thing you want to do in this game. And you only get one use out of it! It's almost as if Rex was an inside joke at Fantasy Flight. Rex "Resign or Die" Murphy.

I thought I'd be getting into an exciting challenge by playing as Rex in standard solo mode, but I can't even get past Midnight Masks with him. I dare you to play him solo in The Midnight Masks scenario. If you can complete that scenario with more than half of the available victory points, then please please please post your deck. I've given up on him.

ADHiDef · 7801
Rex is a highly specialized character; he has an unsurpassed ability to pick up clues. If you can keep monsters off of him, he investigates with a ridiculous economy of actions. Yes, Rex may struggle a bit in a solo game, but he shines in multiplayer where other characters can shore up his weaknesses and locations often contain large stacks of clues that Rex can dutifully pursue. If you think he is a awful investigator, it is because you aren't using him properly. — NatesPromNight · 902
@NatesPromNight, He doesn't just struggle in solo mode; he dies or resigns (except for Core set Prologue where I'll admit he dominates). I'm not blind to the fact that he is supposed to be your clue-getter, but his weaknesses overwhelming trump his supposed strengths. In multiplayer, what you mean to say is Rex really shines in the early game. His curse hasn't shown up yet, there aren't any pesky enemies in the way, and the locations are still fresh with clues. My point is that as the game progresses, he becomes exponentially worse and worse in a way that no other investigator does (up through Blood on the Altar). Clues diminish. Enemies spawn and prevent him from investigating. Burglary requires him to be alone, but he always needs someone by his side to fight the enemies he inevitably encounters. And his curse is more and more likely to appear. And you seem to be forgetting that his ability only works if he passes the investigation test by 2 or more, which encourages you to overcommit resources. Think about it; even a shroud of 2 means that anything worse than 0 won't trigger his ability without help and you can't use Fortune cards to get around that after the fact. You've got to commit upfront. He's just not reliable. Daisy is light years better than Rex at clue-getting over the course of a campaign. 2x Deduction and Daisy is ready to kick some clue butt. If you can beat The Midnight Masks in solo mode on standard while earning half the available XP, then post your deck and I'll start taking you seriously. — ADHiDef · 7801
If you don't find him reliable, that's on you. In my group Rex routinely gathers up 5-6 clues a turn in the late game, something no other character can match. Higher education works exception well for him, and if you get Dr. Christopher out you can easily afford to burn at least one resources on every roll. Which means, against your hypothetical shroud of 2, he gets two clues per investigate on all but two draws. Yes, he struggles in solo, but in multiplayer (we have been playing three and four player games), we have been able to keep things off of him without much trouble. I like daisy, but if you are getting more clues with Daisy than with Rex in a multiplayer game, it is because you are playing Rex poorly. — NatesPromNight · 902
Post your deck — ADHiDef · 7801
You make good points. Admittedly I have only played him in 2-player and solo campaign. When you mentioned piles of clues, I was like "Huh?" But now I'm picking up what you're laying down. I'm ready to concede that his ability might even be INVALUABLE in a 4-player campaign, where clue-based advancement requirements are so high and there's a large even number of clues on every location. Maybe thats why Rex's Curse is so brutal and why he can't use fortune cards; FFG recognized how beastly he is at gathering clues in a 4-player campaign. There would also be enough investigators to keep enemies off of him. If there's already a Mystic in then party, then I'm ready to also concede that Rex would probably be a better choice than Daisy. But in a 3-player campaign, I'm still not convinced that he is the better Seeker than Daisy. That's why I'd like to see your Rex deck. Maybe you could post what other investigators you would suggest to compliment him? As the number of players increases, the game appears to be better at accommodating hyper-specialization, and Rex is probably the most hyper-specialized investigator in the game (up through Blood on the Altar). From this discussion and from my experience, I'm convinced that hyper-specialization becomes more and more of a liability as the player count goes down and as the campaign progresses into a more diverse set of challenges. In my 2-player campaign, there just weren't enough ways to keep enemies off of him (friend was playing Roland), and we were often faced with a resign or die situation. When I switched to Daisy, Night of the Zealot became much more fun and much more manageable. Daisy can fend for herself in ways that Rex simply cannot. Book of Lore keeps her weaknesses in check too. We decided to progress into The Dunwich Legacy with Daisy instead of Rex. After that experience I wanted to know what the deal was with Rex. What could I do to make him work? I started experimenting in solo mode with him. The fact that you keep saying he "struggles" in solo mode tells me you have not played him in solo mode. He doesn't just struggle. Struggle would imply that he merely has a hard time winning. Again, play the core set through Midnight Masks on solo standard and tell me afterwards if you honestly think The Devourer Below is winnable. I just don't see how it's possible. If you can do it, please post your deck and teach me the ways of Rex. If I can replicate it, then I'll completely rewrite my original review. I admire you're commitment to championing this investigator. Even with all the concessions I'm willing to make in light of your arguments, at the end of the day, an investigator who's strength is dependent on the number of players, their ability to keep enemies off of him/her, the chance he/she doesn't draw his/her unique weakness, and the resolution requirements of the scenario (clue-based) - just isn't that good. — ADHiDef · 7801
I haven't played rex one or two player, so you are the expert on that front. I published the rex deck we use in our four play game, and will put up my Zoey deck as well. — NatesPromNight · 902
Rex is a fantastic character if played correctly. Zoey & Rex crush scenarios like mad. — FBones · 19472
scavenging and disc of itzamna makes rex wandering alone less frightening . And dont even tell me that with milan and burglary you dont have the economy for it . I utterly agree with previous posters , you play rex poorly . — Susu · 36
I've played Rex in 2, 3 and 4 players, and he's been amazing in each campaign. He pretty much managed BotA solo in our blind 3 player campaign. He can gather clues so well we think his ability is borderline broken and are considering nerfing it to once/turn, and I would probably not pick him up again in a future campaign (certainly not on standard). He also finds it easy to acquire a ton of cash to fuel both Higher Education and Hyperawareness, meaning he can reliably pass any test and boost past the negative side effect of having the curse out. — unitled · 2309
At first i also thought rex's curse destroyes him and his ability happens too rarely/ is too expensive. However i played him in a 4 man game and he ruled clue gathering. Even with his curse out, i often succeeded on checks when i didn't expect to. Rabbit's foot helps a lot to compensate the curse and with the seekers decks draw speed, you can easily have a full hand of cards, helping with any kind of situation. — Django · 5162
I personally love playing Rex. My friend and I have been playing a 2 person Dunwich campaign and we have been crushing. Essex County Express was a joke to us. I walked into the car grabbed the clues in a single turn and he opened the next car. Rinse, Repeat. — ironmule · 1
Reading this long after Rex was taboo'd and everyone talking about how broken Seeker is feels hillarious. — PowLee · 15
Indeed. I've been listening to old podcast episodes and a lot of card reviews are funny as hell. Many cards that were considered weak have since been nerfed. Stuff like this happens in a lot of card games. — Blackhaven · 9
@Blackhaven @PowLee Yeah! It really highlights how much easier it is to learn to play properly today. As a newcomer nowadays, just reading through card reviews here, maybe watching a couple of Youtube videos, will get you a rundown of concepts like "action economy", "draw consistency", and "maintaining tempo". In contrast, we can see that seven years ago when the game (and the player community) was still new, an insanely overpowered brokenly strong Investigator Ability can get a bad review.. because because back then there wasn't even the vaguest inkling of concepts that are now considered basics ("action compression" in this case). — Cyke · 1
Rex's curse is the weakest weakness ever. All it costs him in the end is one single lost action, that's it, nothing else. And you can't get rid of it strategically, just play as you were until you waste a single action. The only reason he curse was so brutal is because you tried to get rid of it "strategically". — Senji975310 · 1
Peter Sylvestre

A very strong card but one which I feel is commonly misunderstood.

Basically Pete is a highly defensive card.

Looking first at the stats he offers, Pete gives a boost to and once upgraded . When not used for specific class trait abilities such as spells () or rogue/survivor style /evade based events, these tests typically come up in REACTIVE encounter deck tests. That is to say you cant easily plan when you are going to use them. Encounter deck tests are typically associated with horror hits and is typically associated with physical damage, though both are associated with other penalties such as action loss/movement restriction or asset loss. Note that is more common than in the encounter deck so far making unupgraded pete considerably less useful for encounter protection than upgraded pete.

The stats Pete doesn’t cover, and , are more PROCATIVE. You have more control about when you choose to use them and as a result you tend to get more mileage out of them (specific / specs aside). is typically the most progressive given that clue hunting is the primary source of act progression in the game. And while obviously plays a defensive role against the damage from enemies, it can be seen as progressive in the sense that it is common for a scenario to offer you compulsory/boss type enemies which are either plot relevant or at least offer victory points. It is much rarer for the game to offer or tests for progression, though it is not unheard of.

The difference between these two sets of stats is likely the reason for Pete being the only card in the current card pool to offer a boost to two stats simultaneously, and has a lower cost than other stat boost allys, such as Beat Cop or Dr. Milan Christopher. Essentially unless you have spec`d into them for spell casting/evading based builds, they are less innately progressive. They don’t help you win so much as stop you from losing. Part of the lower cost however may also be representing both the unique pip and the survivor trait of coping well with encounter decks.

Looking at Petes second ability, the recurring sanity soak has obvious defensive capabilities. It can be argued that in mystic where you expect to take additional horror from spell side effects it would facilitate a more aggressive play style letting you use spells more liberally. With current investigators, this is mainly Agnes Baker since Jim Culver gets a lot of passive horror healing from Jim's Trumpet but you could argue a similar role if you have used out of faction slots on other characters to be a hybrid spell caster. Outside of these effects, it is simply defensive.

So, what are good uses of Pete?

  • Any time you want Pete just for theme. Honestly this is a game. just enjoy it. Despite what i'm writing here there is no wrong way to have fun!
  • Any build that expects to take horror more commonly than other builds. Or where sanity loss is particularly cumbersome, such as Mystics or characters with low and/or sanity.
  • Any build that is centric. Which means your either packing cards that test evasion (Backstab, Sneak Attack, Close Call or similar) or you’re planning on evading enemies rather than fighting them (usually low combat characters relying on natural evasion).
  • Any build where the upgraded Pete’s bonus is important to you, so mystics again (if you can take him – currently just agnes), or a spell hybrid Survivor investigator, or someone where you need that passive encounter deck protection.

Prime examples from current card pool are Agnes Baker (bonus for casting and option to dump horror hits that you don’t want to/cant use for the damage tick safely), or Wendy Adams ( focus). Note also that both of these have a signature weakness which gives 2 horror.

What are bad uses of Pete?

Basically anywhere that using pete comes at the expense of using something better or where using pete prevents another investigator in your party form using him who would get more.

  • Characters who`s primary actions will involve and/or and have little to gain from passive encounter protections, such as high will to protect against horror hits,
  • Characters where the ally slot is at a premium, such as seekers who really want Dr. Milan Christopher, or guardians who might want Beat Cop/Brother Xavier.
  • Anyone who is in a party with someone who could use pete better.

Specific Implications for "Ashcan" Pete:

This interaction was really my inspiration for this review. Short of a hybrid caster spec, the other Pete doesn’t really get much from young Mr Sylvester, yet many players seem to treat him as an auto include. Ashcan's actions are primarily taken through Duke, who benefits more from or boosts. He usually fights enemies rather than evading. He has high (4), beaten only by Agnes, and high effective sanity due to the option to put up to 2 on Duke without losing him - basically giving Ashcan 8 sanity before death – among the highest in the game. Though realistically that’s equivalent to a quite reasonable 7-sanity investigator before you become heavily encumbered by the loss of Duke. Peter Sylvestre is a massive over compensation for problems "Ashcan" Pete deals with perfectly well anyway. You're likely to be better off with an ally that aids progression such as Beat Cop, or Dr. Milan Christopher (if hes not needed for a seeker). Both also give you a one point sanity soak without dying, or 2 if you dont mind sacrificing them. Perhaps if you cant afford the out of faction slot for these, you might take Peter Sylvestre as an in faction ally which is a "generically strong card". Its probably better than Stray Cat, but thats possibly the only reason for considering him. Remember you dont have to take an ally of course. 3 resources and an action to play is not a small cost for something that has limited synergy with your deck. Definitely dont deny him to the team when someone else has more use for him.

Upgrading Peter Sylvestre gives you the boost, which does very little for a non spell hybrid Ashcan. Its like putting Dr. Milan Christopher in Zoey Samaras. Its boosting even more things you don’t really plan to do. It also costs you a whopping 4 xp to upgrade both cards. Something that could be spent on something substantially better.

StartWithTheName · 71981
I've found that the upgraded Pete with Agnes is almost more useful for the agility than willpower bonus. Agnes' willpower is so high, +1 almost doesn't make as much of a difference - but a bump to 4 agility can actually make a big difference. And yes, he's a lovely sink for horror that you can't commit damage with :) — AndyB · 955
yeah i agree. If you are aiming in most cases (standard difficulty) to have 2 skill higher than the test strength, going from 5 to 6 base skill only really ADDITIONALLY covers you for tests at strength 4. Anything lower was already covered. Its simple diminished returns i guess. I am yet to actually try Agnes on Hard, but i would imagine you might get more ultility from upgraded Pete there though. If your aiming 3 above, then going to 6 covers you for 3s which is are fairly common. Similar principal with 4 agility over 3. evasion 1 enemies are fairly rare but 2s and and to a lesser degree 3s are common. — StartWithTheName · 71981