September was another fairly solid month – 17 different games played 52 different times.
Massive Darkness got the most sessions, as it continued to surge up the charts (it’s already 2017’s 4th most-played game by hours), but there was also a fair bit of table time for Arkham LCG, which got a new deluxe box, Dominion, which continues to tick over quietly, and Runebound which got a shot in the arm from a new expansion that made it playable solo or fully cooperative.
Runewars and Descent both made it back to the table after a few months of sitting on the sidelines, and a few odds and ends rounded things off the month.
Elder Sign snuck on to the table on the final evening of the month, retaining its boast of being the only game to be played every month this year. The Dwarves also enjoyed a late flurry, bringing them up to 10 plays for the year. All told, I now have 17 games played 10 times or more this year, and an H-Index of 13, which all feels fairly healthy.
Nothing made it off of the un-played list, which still sits at 8 games for the year (it was 9, including Fate of the Elder gods, a review title which came early in the month, but only made it out of the box on 1st October). We’re going on holiday with my parents in a week or so, so I expect that we’ll take Scrabble and/or Articulate with us and see whether we can get them crossed off.
Nothing (much) New
There wasn’t all that much in September that was new. Codenames Duet was the only completely new game to get played (I also received Fate of the Elder gods, but haven’t managed to break it out yet). Apocrypha remains frustratingly absent, with constant rumours that it might be arriving, but never any sign of the actual game. and there’s still no sign of Aeon’s End either. I had planned to pick up a few exciting new bits and pieces with some of my GQ store Credit, but everything I tried to opt for was out of stock/print. Whether it’s because I break down and spend actual money to buy elsewhere, or simply because delayed stuff finally arrives, I’m hoping that October will be a bit more exciting in terms of what’s new.
What got played?
Thematically, September was dominated by Fantasy: 55% of sessions, and a whopping 67% of time. Lovecraft and Zombies also notched up a reasonable number of hours, whilst “Abstract” was big on sessions, but low on overall time (Bananagrams, Boggle and Dobble all being fairly short games).
Within Fantasy the big groups were Terrinoth (Descent, Runebound, Runewars) and Generic (mostly Dominion and Massive Darkness). Middle Earth counted for a fair amount of the sessions (4 out of 28), but got squished on time (only 2 hours of 34).
Activity wise, things remained fairly heavy on Completing the Quest together, but there was a fair amount of diversity around, with notable contributions for Making Words, Solving Mysteries, Building the Best Place.
So that was September. Steady, but not especially exciting. It’s odd now I come to write about it, just how flat everything feels – I definitely had some enjoyable gaming sessions this month, both with new add-ons (most notably for Arkham), and old favourites (we even had a few hours of Yggdrasil, which remains resolutely un-expanded). Perhaps I’m just tired.
A new month, a new question to ask myself, and a new spreadsheet (did I mention that I’m a geek?)
I’ve talked on here a fair amount about making sure that I’m getting value for money for my games (i.e. do the ££s shelled out reflect the hours of gaming being logged?) and about moving to measure things more in time (hours spent gaming) than simply sessions (of course I spent more on 5 sessions of Zombicide than on 5 sessions of Zombie Dice!)
The thing I decided to look at specifically this month was how the games I play broke down based on spending – were they old games that I kept playing in their existing form, games I was adding to on an ongoing basis, new things, Or something else entirely? Well, with a bit of time spent poking and prodding a spreadsheet into shape, I was able to find out.
The biggest category by far, was existing games that I was still adding to – as someone who follows a couple of LCGs, that probably isn’t a great shock, but it was interesting to see it quantified: 47% of 2017’s gaming time (so far) has been games that I owned prior to the start of the year, but which have had at least something spent on them.
The next biggest category was the old – games that have been around since at least last year, and haven’t had anything spent on them, 23% of overall play. This stat is potentially a little misleading, as it includes Legendary (4.26% of the year’s gaming) for which I’ve received 2 new expansions to review this year) and Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective (2.13% of 2017’s gaming) for which I also picked up a new box to review. That said, there are still a lot of games which have been played a handful of times, clocking up a few hours each, which make this category a big one.
Over 2/3rd then, of the year’s gaming was on titles already owned, which suggests a fair amount of continuity, but also a significant amount of change. Obviously it’s subjective, but I feel like this suggests a good mixture of trying new things, and not throwing the baby out with the bathwater (you should never do this, particularly once you have an actual baby to bath).
One reason that the various “new” categories are lower is the simple fact that I’ve had them for less time. Obviously, some of the new games came quite early in the year, but others only arrived in August, with a lot of catching up to do.
With that caveat in mind the not-quite-a-third of time spent on “New” games broke down into 10% on things I’d spent money on this year, 10% on free new things (i.e. review games), and 8% on Kickstarters.
Of the things I’d spent money on, a lot of this is just expanding review games (Runewars Miniatures is the chief culprit here), or postage costs for trading review games for something that caught my eye (this is how I picked up Descent and Robinson Crusoe for the unlikely-looking prices of £3.90 and £7.79 respectively). Only Runebound and Rune Age involved a straightforward, old-fashioned, “give a stranger some money and they give you a game” transaction, and those were done via Facebook and EBay rather than the FLGS.
It’s still relatively rare for a review game to be a big hit, be kept long-term, and not prompt further spending – so far, Gloom of Kilforth, Dungeon Time, Battle for Greyport, and Arcadia Quest are the winners here, although Arcadia Quest doesn’t get a LOT of play, and may end up moving on eventually, whilst Gloom of Kilforth will probably one day find itself in the “had money spent” category once the inevitable expansion gets Kick-started.
I wanted to make Kickstarters their own category, simply because the time-lag between spending the money and receiving the game tends to be so big, that it skews other categories. Right now I’ve got 6 Kickstarters I’m waiting on, plus 1 received a few weeks ago – only 2 of those are even aiming to deliver in the same year they were funded. Hopefully though, lumping together the money spent on this year’s Kickstarters and the time spent playing last year’s (and 2015s, if they ever arrive…) will go some way towards providing a sense of how much value these are.
Of the games I’ve categorised as “Kickstarters,” one arguably belongs more in the “expanding reviews” category – War Eternal, the second wave of content for Aeon’s End. However, this didn’t feel quite right overall: the extra money I’ve spent on Aeon’s End is all on stuff I haven’t played (because it hasn’t arrived), which made a lot more sense under the kick-starter heading. Admittedly, all the time I’ve spent playing Aeon’s End is just using content I’d already received, but once the new stuff arrives, I can’t imagine keeping everything separate, so it will ultimately need logging together- having it all go under Kickstarter seemed the simplest, as well as the way to leave the overall numbers least skewed.
Right now it’s interesting to try to think how this new categorisation will evolve over the rest of the year. I definitely expect the Kickstarter category to grow (it’s already grown a fair bit whilst I’ve been re-drafting this article): I’m really enjoying Massive Darkness, and whilst I’m a lot less enthused about Apocrypha than I was when I backed it, I still plan on playing it a fair bit, to try to get a sense of whether what I’ve been waiting for all this time has been worth it. Assuming War Eternal and Gloomhaven show up with a decent chunk of 2017 left they should be making their mark too.
As already mentioned, some new games simply weren’t around early in the year (at the start of April, I didn’t own Runewars, Runebound, Gloom of Kilforth, Descent or Massive Darkness, but they’ve clocked up over 55 hours of table time since), so it will be interesting to see whether they form a larger part of play-time as the year goes on.
If I look only at games which have had money spent on them (i.e. ignoring altogether anything owned by someone else, or in the same state it was at the end of last year), then spending on old games is massively more efficient than on any other category- 43% of the money, 70% of the time. Spending on new things is more-or-less even – 16% of the money and 15% of the time. KS is a way down with 42% of the money and only 13% of the time [despite what my rounding might suggest, this is a zero-sum situation, so any improvement for KS will have to come at the expense of one of the others].
Kickstarter is a tricky beast to evaluate. Looking at the game that’s arrived, and the one that’s (probably) due next then, even totalling together all the money I actually spent on my pledge with and a notional amount of interest on top of it, I’ve still spent less that it would cost to pre-order the bits that are available at retail, (never mind any KS exclusives), but that won’t be the case for all projects, and it completely ignores the question of whether or not I would have bought anything beyond the base game if buying at retail (by and large the benefit seems to be fairly marginal on base games, but with expansions bundled together at a knock-down rate). As the next instalment in my intermittent Kickstarter series, I’m planning on taking a more in-depth look at Massive Darkness (probably in about a month or so), and other games will probably get similar treatment in due course, so I won’t say too much more right now on specific games.
There’s a danger with every new spreadsheet I concoct that it becomes something over formalised that takes the fun out of the gaming, but this has been an interesting exercise. I probably won’t write on this topic again at length, but may revisit it in future monthly round-ups.
July wasn’t really a month for ticking off many boxes or reaching new gaming milestones (although I did get my all-time H-Index up to 18) but I’d say it was fun nonetheless.
A big-ish clearout saw me back in to positive figures for the year money-wise, as I got rid of a selection of games that hadn’t been played much in years, along with Star Wars Destiny, and some Dice Masters cards Rare enough to have a cash value. As I said back when I reviewed Destiny for Games Quest, I really like the mechanics and concepts in the game, but the price-point is just too high, and with the ongoing arrival of new sets (FFG are already starting to release spoilers for the 3rd wave, when I only got to about half of the cards in the 1st set), it basically becomes pay-to-win: I decided to get out ahead whilst I still could.
For Dice Masters, I’m basically restricted to a monthly event at the FLGS, and have missed the last 2 of those. I’ve decided to hold on to the bulk of my collection for when my son is old enough to play, but that’s probably 5+ years away and I wanted to get the balance sheet to a place where I didn’t have columns of red glaring back at me every time I looked at it in the meantime.
July was also a good month for spreadsheets – I’ve been moving gradually away from just counting sessions of games to trying to count hours (a tricky task when you’re trying to use a formula rather than timing every session with a stop-watch [which would be an even trickier task when a single game can be interrupted multiple times by a single baby]), and a long spell of dead time in front the computer meant that I managed to get a new sheet sorted to monitor this for me – no huge surprises with what it threw up, but some pleasing graphs and charts nonetheless.
In terms of what got played, July saw fresh life being breathed into old favourites as I made it to Lord of the Rings night at the FLGS for the first time in a while, completed the Dunwich Legacy cycle for Arkham, and we continued our slow trek across the sands of Egypt Osirian in Pathfinder Mummy’s Mask. In more recent acquisitions, Aeon’s End got dusted off after a couple of months hiatus, Mansions of Madness saw some play now that the Investigators have all returned from the painting table, and we managed a few more hours of Runebound, which were enjoyable enough, but definitely whet our appetites for the upcoming fully-cooperative expansions.
However, it wasn’t just the old – I finally managed to get my teeth into a small pile of review games that had been sitting around for a while, with several run-outs for Arcadia Quest, Battle for Greyport, and Gloom of Kilforth. All of these were deemed worthy enough to keep around for a while (the PvP combat may eventually see Arcadia Quest moved on, but as killing-each-other games go, it’s a really good fun one). Battle for Greyport is remarkably enjoyable once you’ve managed to get your head around it, and Gloom of Kilforth is probably the best-looking game I own, even if the rulebook is awful. Speaking of awful rulebooks, I also picked up Robinson Crusoe in trade, which was a game I’d had on my radar for a fair while, simply on account of it being so highly ranked and supporting solo/co-op play. I’ve not had it long enough to form a considered opinion yet (played once, thought I was doing ok, then winter came and I died), but I’m certainly not regretting the trade.
In terms of new, new stuff, July was the arrival time for a whole heap of stuff for the world (or at least the UK) at large: Near and Far (the follow-up to last year’s Above and Below) an X-Men big box, which got me more excited about Legendary than I had been for a while, a new expansion for Eldritch Horror, and Lovecraft Letter (Love Letter becoming the latest game to get the inevitable Cthulhu treatment) all arrived on my doorstep. In light of that fairly epic haul, missing out on Sword and Sorcery really wasn’t too bad.
That new expansion to make Runebound fully Cooperative, and the long awaited Massive Darkness have both been sighted in the wild, but I’ve not managed to catch a glimpse myself (Runebound conspicuous by its absence on this side of the pond, Massive Darkness I now have a tracking number…) – in fact, none of my outstanding Kickstarters have landed yet (I have potentially have anywhere up to 6 due to drop between August and October), but the delay may well be for the best, as I try to clear some space (mental and physical) for them.
Although July still fell short of the 60s and 70s of the early months of the year, there was a definite pick up from the low, low numbers of June, and I think 50 counts as a good number for the near future. Obviously there’s a bit of an issue with an ever-growing number of titles competing for a shrinking number of hours, but I’m hoping that we’re not too far away from getting the boy a proper bed-time, which should free up some evenings once again (you can laugh at me in a few months’ time when he still refuses to go to sleep.)
I also started looking at how this year’s gaming compares with that of previous years. The top 10 most-played games this year only account for 56% of my time, compared with 66% last year, and 88% the year before (in fact, in 2015 it was 70% of time just on the top 3).
Overall, 2017 is definitely the broadest year so far: looking at the number of games played, played 2+ times, 5+ times, 10+ times and 20+ times, I’m ahead of 2015 in every category, and although I’m still behind 2016, with 5 whole months to go, I expect to catch-up in a lot of those categories.
Looking at hours and percentages rather than sessions gives an interesting perspective, confirming that nothing is dominating like the last few years, although Zombicide is still going strong.
Playing what exactly?
Thematically this was a very strong month for Fantasy, although Arkham Horror did a good job of holding up the Lovecraft banner, almost single-handedly for much of the month before the rest of the franchise piled in in the last week or so to make up the numbers. Mechanically, the good-old cooperative adventuring (survive the monsters, complete the quest, save the world) was the primary order of the day, with only very slight variations in theme.
July was also the month where I decided to stop and properly look at the categories I’d created for dividing up the aim of the games I play. Ever since I first started trying to do this, I’ve been aware of a certain unhelpful vagueness with solve the mystery/complete the quest/save the world/survive the monsters more-or-less bleeding into each other to the point where the distinctions aren’t that helpful.
Revisiting it, I decided to pull out the key element: most Mythos games are about solving a mystery: there probably are monsters to be fought, but that’s not why they’re there – Eldritch Horror was the only one I put under “save the world” in recognition of its epic scale, along with all the Pandemic titles, and other reality-as-we-know-it-is-at-stake sort of games.
“Survive the Monsters” became simply “Survive” which allows it to include Robinson Crusoe, but generally this category is for things where the peril has come to you, whether that’s a horde of Zombies, or an enemy army.
I also took all the table-top RPGs and a few similar-feel games out of “Complete the Quest” and put them into “Explore” in an attempt to reflect the open-world, lack of long-term objective nature of things. Complete the Quest remains a bit of a catch-all, but hopefully it’s a bit more coherent now, with the idea of a group having their own mission, something they set out to accomplish beyond simply surviving, but which might not (at least immediately) lead to the end of the world if they fail. This covers things like Pathfinder, but also things like Descent. It’s also where I’ve put all things Lord of the Rings, because it’s very rare that an LotR scenario will be a direct confrontation with Sauron to destroy the One Ring, generally, things are much more low-key and small-scale
In the final analysis, the only place I’ve left games in 2 categories are the ones with hidden traitor mechanics, where “find the traitor” still exists on my spreadsheet as a secondary mechanic (and the traitor’s victory condition is ignored). Ultimately, categorisation is still subjective, but it certainly feels a lot neater now.
Whilst it’s pleasing to have things measured and labelled more neatly, the bottom line is that a fair amount of gaming happened in July, and most it was enjoyable and felt worthwhile. Aside from keeping an eye on what I’m spending, that always has to be the ultimate measure for gaming and, as things stand, I think I can be fairly content.
As regular readers of Fistful of Meeples will probably know, I like plenty of theme in my games, and I don’t really do things by half-measures.
Last autumn/winter, was a big Arkham kick for us, starting with Elder Sign, running through Pandemic Cthulhu and picking up Mansions of Madness 2nd edition, Eldritch Horror and the new Arkham LCG in November. I also picked up the beautiful Lore book that FFG put out, providing various backstories for the investigators.
Those remain popular games: even though Mansions took a bit of a back seat whilst I attempted to get the latest batch of monsters painted up, the Cthulhu Mythos is still the setting for the 2nd 4th, 5th and 6th most-played games this year (by hours. By sessions would be 2nd, 4th, 11th, 13th, as it’s just easier to squeeze in 15 minutes of Dungeon Time than find 3 hours of Eldritch Horror…), and the Arkham Horror Files make up more than 25% of gaming time overall. That said, I’ve probably calmed down slightly from the peak of obsession of last year.
Looking round for something new, I was starting to wander in one direction when a new game caught my eye.
You don’t have to have spent much time on Fantasy Flight’s Website in the last couple of months to have noticed the Runewars Miniatures game. The core box was launched to great fanfare, and barely a day went by without a new expansion being announced or previewed.
It looked like a good game: taking a few mechanics from X-Wing and creating a rank-and-file Fantasy Wargame. I was lucky enough to pick up a review copy (see here for the full review, which summarises my general thoughts) which removed the initial obstacle of the heavy buy-in cost.
New Tales and Old
The thing which really interested me about Runewars Miniatures was the fact that it came with not just 2 books – FFG’s standard “Learn to Play” and “Rules Reference” – but 3: this time out there was a new feature, a Lore book.
Terrinoth is Fantasy Flight’s own little Fantasy world, a place that they have been using as the setting for board games for a number of years, but which hasn’t historically received that much development.
Terrinoth tends to attract a certain amount of derision for being very generic, but it feels like it’s still a significant place, simply on account of being the home of some fairly important games, including Descent, Runebound, and Battlelore Second Edition.
As I already mentioned, Terrinoth hasn’t been the most developed setting up to now – I’d been meaning to have a go at Descent since we realised how much we liked Mansions of Madness last year, but had absolutely no notion of where it was set.
I’d also, like a lot of people, tried and failed in the past to get hold of Battlelore 1st Edition, which should have meant that when FFG finally announced that they were putting out a second edition, it should have been a big deal. However, by 2015, I’d gone full circle and decided that I own more than enough of the Commands and Colours series already (I’ve downsized my Memoir ’44 collection, still have C&C Ancients with a couple of expansions, and I sold Napoleonics as it didn’t get to the table often enough). As 2-player head-to-head games get pushed out by cooperative and 3 or 4-player offerings, I let Battlelore second edition pass me by, without even reading enough to know that it was set in Terrinoth
Now though, it feels like FFG have decided to really push Terrinoth, with added theme, just around the time I found myself getting my first games set there:
Around the time that the Runewars Miniatures game was gathering steam for its big release, FFG also announced a co-op expansion to Runebound due for the autumn – this was enough to make me start digging into the world, and I was intrigued by what I found there.
I decided to start getting some the Terrinoth games: I bought Rune Age via Facebook, (as it was cheap, and offered co-op play) acquired a copy of Descent (traded for Star Trek Frontiers), got the aforementioned review copy of the Miniatures game, and rounded out the set by taking delivery of Runebound 3rd edition, courtesy of eBay.
So what is this place?
I won’t lie. Terrinoth is quite generic, certainly at first glance. There is a human faction, an undead faction, and an elven faction – the humans (almost always the most generic faction in any setting) are mostly spearman and cavalry, whilst the elves have bows, ride wild beasts, and hang around with Ents. The undead are mostly endless ranks of skeletons that do their best to regenerate, aided by dread Necromancers, but they also ride giant, angry-looking worms, which is a bit of a twist. The final ‘main’ faction, the Uthuk are a bit more unusual, a sort of human-demon hybrid group, but as they’ve yet to be spoiled for the Miniatures game and I haven’t played them in Rune Age, I can’t offer too much more detail about them yet.
Despite all these tropes, it definitely does feel like there are things about Terrinoth that stand out. An obvious one is the Runes that seem to power most of the magic in this world – remnants of a mighty artefact from an earlier age, destroyed in order to keep it from the hands of the man who now leads the armies of the undead. Thematically, it’s an interesting idea of power being harnessed from an object whose creation is now long-lost.
It also makes for some interesting game mechanics: in Runebound, you cast Runes (~flip cardboard discs) rather than rolling dice, and acquiring better Runes is a key element of the game. In Runewars Miniatures, the Runes play a slightly more passive role: round-by-round they are re-cast to determine the ambient levels of different types of energy: certain units will then be able to gain movement, combat, or even healing abilities equal to the number of rune-symbols of a certain type in play.
I’ve also come across a lot of references to Dragons in Terrinoth, and they look interesting, albeit based on relatively sparse information at this point. The dragons certainly don’t owe allegiance to any of the main factions above (in fact, it seems that they were in charge of the whole place, in eons past), but they do sometimes pop up to intervenene in the ongoing conflicts of the humanoid folk, so I’ll be watching with interest to see whether they ever appear as anything more than enemies to fight.
Descent from where?
Terrinoth is probably not helped by the fact that Descent, which seems to be far-and-away the most successful of the Terrinoth games, is also probably the one which leans the least heavily on the setting. Descent: Journeys in the Dark – 2nd Edition, (to give it its full name), is a top 100 game with lorry-loads of expansions, and which got a big boost to its popularity with the release of a companion app last year, making this 1-vs-many game playable solo or fully co-op. Descent has been rated over 15,000 times on BGG, with an average rating of 7.8, that puts it at 65 in the overall ranking.
The trouble is that whilst the Heroes you control in Descent are tied into the races of Terrinoth, most of them wouldn’t feel at all out-of-place in a game of D&D.
So far I’ve only played the introductory campaign of Descent, and made a brief, if so far rather unsuccessful start on the main campaign, and I’m hoping that as we go along, we’ll start to see a stronger sense of setting for where all this action is taking place.
Although Descent is the big name in FFG’s Terrinoth offering, there are plenty of other games available, and they make more of a point of referencing their setting.
Runewars (not the miniatures game) only has around 6,500 ratings, for a fractionally lower 7.7 average, which puts it at 120 in the rankings.
Battlelore 2nd Edition is actually placed just above Runewars in the rankings at 118, thanks to a 7.9 average, although that’s based on a mere 3,500 ratings.
Rune Age is probably the lowest rated of the various Terrinoth games (I’m deliberately ignoring older editions), with only a 6.9 average, although the 3,600 people who have rated it were still enough for it to make it inside the top 200.
Runewars Miniatures is still too new for ratings and rankings to mean much – it’s got an 8.1 average, but based on only 186 ratings, it’s only recently squeezed inside the top 3000 games out there!
Runebound is notionally the flagship product in this series (all these boxes feature a reminder that you’re in the “Runebound Universe” rather than referring directly to Terrinoth). However, it barely scrapes into the 500 on Board Game Geek, with ‘only’ 1,800 or so people having contributed to its 7.6 average rating, and I was a bit dubious about what made this the ‘lead’ title.
I’ve only managed to play Runebound a handful of times since getting it, but my initial suspicions were quickly dispelled – Runebound definitely feels like the game that gives you the best sense of the place these games are taking place in, and the level of scope on offer for simply exploring the world is great. As already mentioned, it has currently been rated fewer than 200 times, which leaves it languishing somewhere just inside the top 500, but I’ll be watching this one carefully as the “Unbreakable Bonds” expansion lands sometime in the next few months – given the success of reinventing Descent as a fully-coop/solo compatible game, I’d expect that FFG are hoping for a similar success with Runebound.
Of the Terrinoth games, Rune Age seems to be officially out-of-print (not listed on FFG’s website under the list of Runebound games), whilst Battlelore is languishing, having seemingly reached the end of the release line (there seems to be a general understanding that there’s nothing more coming for this game, although I couldn’t find an official announcement). Descent seems popular despite no new content on the horizon, and it seems only logical that the changes to make Runebound co-op/solo-able, will broaden the audience. Runewars Miniatures is still pretty new and being marketed hard, but the vague bits of information I’ve been able to glean from industry insiders suggest that it’s not selling all that well, possibly because of the price-point.
Working on the basis that there are (essentially) 4 games active in the range right now, only 3 are really on my radar – The Runewars board game (which may or may not still be available) seems to have some shared ancestry with Twilight Imperium, which instantly flags it up as being too large, long, complex and heavy to make it to my dining table more than once.
Descent we’re already playing: half-a-dozen games isn’t really enough to form a detailed opinion, but overall I like what I’ve seen, even if I have a few concerns about the components. Rune Age I’ve played solo and I hope to introduce it to others soon. Runewars Miniatures I have a core box & a couple of expansion bits: I’ve really enjoyed the handful of games I’ve played, and it looks like it’s got some really interesting mechanics, along with some really interesting army-building decisions to be made once you have more miniatures. That said, it’s definitely one of those games where I’m only going to be able to play at the FLGS (my wife doesn’t really go in for table-top wargaming), and it has the potential to be a real money-sink, so I need to decide soon how far to plunge down the expansions rabbit-hole.
Right now, it’s fairly clear that Terrinoth simply doesn’t have the depth of the Arkham Horror Files, and so it isn’t going to capture the imagination in the same way. That said, I am curious to see what FFG do with this setting, and whether there will be more to come in this universe: games that make more of the narrative and the setting, more explicit links and crossovers between existing games, or even some good-old tie-in fiction. With the end of the FFG/Games Workshop partnership, it definitely feels like FFG have a gap in their range that they’re looking to plug, and it will be interesting to see just how far they will go in tying this setting to some of their signature products – Runebound LCG anyone?