Card draw simulator
|Darrell Dark Horse, Expert, Best Investigator in Arkham||3||2||0||1.0|
LordHamshire · 384
Darrell is the Mark Harrigan of clue-getters. I think Darrell is better than pre-nerf double-clue man on Expert difficulty, he is absolutely insane. He can't play solo, but in a group of investigators, he is head-and-shoulders above the rest. I can't believe they printed him. I suppose most people don't play on Expert difficulty, so they won't see him as a problem, but wow.
Anywho, I like winning, so I'll play this deck when I'm made to be the clue-getter and feel like the campaign will be tough given the party I'm in.
- Death • XIII (1 exp) [cut 1x Live and Learn.]
- Forewarned x2 (1 exp each) [cut 1x Live and Learn and 1x Shed a Light.]
- Sharp Vision x2 (1 exp each) [cut 1x Shed a Light and 1x Analysis.]
- Nothing Left to Lose x2 (3 exp each) [cut 2x Burning the Midnight Oil.]
- Upgrade Deduction x2 (2 exp each.)
- Upgrade Perception x2 (2 exp each.)
- Upgrade Empirical Hypothesis with "Pessimistic Outlook" (1 exp,) "Field Research" (1 exp,) "Alternate Hypothesis" (4 exp,) "Research Grant" (2 exp,) "Peer Review" (2 exp.)
- Press Pass x2 (2 exp each) [cut 1x Analysis and 1x Eureka!]
- Upgrade Dr. William T. Maleson x2 (2 exp each.)
General Advice. On Expert, do not build Arkham Horror decks for what they will be when they have experience. Theory crafting is fun, but all Arkham Horror campaigns are designed to reward success immediately which will avalanche into more success and so on. I could make a deck that evolves into something more powerful, but it is unrealistic when rubber hits the road on Expert. Your only consideration, and I mean only, should be making the most powerful experience 0 deck you can make. Scenario one is by far the most important.
The Chaos Bag. Darrell Simmons really doesn't need a guide other than watching the chaos bag and referencing the scenario reference sheet for the symbolic tokens. Because he can consistently control outcomes in a very Mark Harrigan like way, it becomes more important to consider odds when deciding to use evidence. Keeping in mind we are building this deck for the first scenario and permitting the most inconsequential of spoilers, as a case study, let's say you have the starting Expert bag in "The Innsmouth Conspiracy" campaign and you are playing the Scenario 1, "The Pit of Despair." The bag will be as follows: 0, -1, -1, -2, -2, -3, -3, -4, -4, -5, -6, -8, , , , , , , , , , . The reference sheet for the scenario reads as follows.
- : -2 (-3 instead if your location is flooded; -4 instead if your location is fully flooded).
- : -2. If your location is flooded, take 1 damage.
- : -2. If you control a key, take 1 horror.
- : -3. If The Amalgam is in the depths, put it into play engaged with you.
Since this scenario's reference sheet is quite generous as far as modifiers are concerned, let's assume the location is fully flooded, (-4 is a frequently seen number on Hard/Expert reference sheets.) This would mean that in the bag functionally contains the following.
- Elder Sign: 1 of 22 (4.55%) tokens
- +0: 1 of 22 (4.55%) tokens, 9.1% chance of this result or better.
- -1: 2 of 22 (9.09%) tokens, 18.19% chance of this result or better.
- -2: 6 of 22 (27.27%) tokens, 45.46% chance of this result or better.
- -3: 4 of 22 (18.18%) tokens, 63.64% chance of this result or better.
- -4: 4 of 22 (18.18%) tokens, 81.82% chance of this result or better.
- -5: 1 of 22 (4.55%) tokens, 86.37% chance of this result or better.
- -6: 1 of 22 (4.55%) tokens, 90.92% chance of this result or better.
- -8: 1 of 22 (4.55%) tokens, 95.47% chance of this result or better.
- Automatic Failure: 1 of 22 (4.55%) tokens.
Let's assume you are an investigator attempting to get clues using basic investigate actions. In the abstract, what you stand to lose from a failure is an action, which is wasted attaining no positive or negative result (besides the "loss" of an action.) Each asset or committed card grants a certain percentage of a "successful action" equal the the difference of the likelihood of success before and after the advantage. The most valuable "jump" then is from requiring a -1 to succeed to requiring a -2 to succeed, but considering there are a limited amount of actions you can take, the game is not won on the back of 45.46% percent. What's more, is that often more is at stake than the waste of an action, one use of a Fingerprint Kit for example. So you want a higher percent chance, but how high? The only notable increases in the odds of achieving a favorable outcome is improving from requiring a -1 to succeed to requiring a -2, requiring a -2 to succeed to requring a -3, and -requiring a -3 to succeed to requiring a -4. Requiring a -4 or better to succeed and a -5 to succeed is so similar as to functionally be identical. It is not worth investing any resource to get a mere 4.55% advantage. The difference from succeeding on a -3 to a -4 is greater than that of succeeding on a -4 to a -8.