Gloomhaven - Tactical Combat in a persistent world!

That does definitely sound like a bug.

I have noticed a few AI pathing bugs recently, I think. The most common one is when the AI has a ranged attack and is quite far away, it sometimes just fails to move. I suspect the number of possibilities is too large and the code panics and just does nothing.

I haven’t even played the boardgame. I hear this talk about understanding how AI moves (which makes sense, since you the player have to move them) and what you can do with them… yeah, definitely makes me feel like I’m working at a disadvantage in the digital version. No wonder why this game is so hard for me. Well, that and I suck, probably. :)

The rules are relatively simple most of the time but have very complicated edge cases. The key thing is the AI likes to target enemies who are near to them, breaking ties towards lowest initiative. And it will never trigger a trap if there’s another route to where it wants to be (however long and even if it means it can’t move this turn).

The basis of exploiting the AI involves limiting the number of options it has so it is ineffective (usually by failing to get within range for its attack). Traps are most useful to prevent movement, rather than to actually be stepped on. This is one reason why ranged attackers are much more dangerous: it’s really hard to convince them not to attack you.

I’m close to taking the plunge. I enjoyed the board game for a while, but I never get it on the table any more. Other board games compete for the table space!

Has anyone tried the beta? Apparently it contains some (but not all) of the changes mentioned in the video above.

Haven’t tried the beta but I’m eagerly awaiting for it to release to the main branch!

So… I have had my 4th retirement, the Sun character. (Scoundrel, Brute, and a little-used Cragheart previously)

My current veterans are my original Mindthief, now level 6, accompanied by a level 5 Two Minis and a level 7 Music Note. Now I have to decide how to proceed.

I could go with three characters, which I tend to think is the ideal number. Except Music Note seems made for/built for a four member party. But still, that is a possibility.

Or I could add a Scoundrel, Brute, Cragheart, Spellweaver, Tinkerer (Ha! Ha!) or Triangles. Or a new Sun. Gloomhaven is at prosperity level 4, so I believe that any new character could start at level 4, including the Spellweaver who has a little experience and is at level 2. But sooo prone to exhaustion in long scenarios.

At least part of my decision rests upon how well Two Minis will work without Sun. That Bear deals unbelievable amounts of damage, but also runs some reckless risks, and without Sun to absorb a fair amount of the damage, I wonder whether that will work out so well. On the other hand, with Music Note filling the enemy deck chock full of curses by mid-mission, maybe it won’t matter.

My Mindthief-Two Minis-Music Note-Sun party did very well, but if there was a weakness, it was definitely ranged damage dealing. Particularly of an AOE sort.

Any thoughts from those of you with more experience in the game?

I did. It wrecked all my save games! Even when I uninstalled, my saved games were gone, and I had to start over. I when back to the main branch it because if their betas wreck havoc on saved games, this might happen again as they update the beta.

Oh my, that’s horrible! I’m glad I asked. Maybe I’ll just play the main branch for now. About to download it.

Game is so much fun, I really didn’t mind all that much. Even when replaying a mission.

I’m surprised by this. The spellweaver’s recover all cards ability should give her a bit longer than most characters, provided you don’t go spending loss cards too often (or worse have to lose cards to prevent damage). You should be able to level her up to 4 now anyway and she would certainly give you ranged and AoE damage.

Anyway, spellweaver would be my vote, but I’m probably a bit biased as she was my first character. Keeping the bear alive may be a problem though.

I am impressed so far. It’s a very nice implementation of the board game. I finished the tutorials and started a rogue like game — which ran me thru a couple tutorials again, even after I chose to skip the. But that’s okay. I need the practice. It sure is nice to have the rules enforced.

I guess the roguelike mode automatically starts me with a scoundrel and a tanky guy. Fine with me. I assume I’ll get to pick later.

I assume this is what they are calling Guildmaster mode. If so, yes, I think their tutorial series of missions introduces all the starting classes two by two, and then you can choose from among them, as well as picking your party size.

But as soon as you feel you’ve got it, I highly recommend switching to the Campaign. It’s just so much better done, in every way. (Unless you are simply delaying for that update, of course)

My indecision on this (one of my favorite things about this game is pondering decisions to death) may have led me to a whole other solution.

I took a Triangles character on a bit of a trial run – a replay of an old mission. Not very satisfactory, in large part because of a weird bug: the game repeatedly failed to give +1 attack simultaneously for the Soothsinger’s Power Ballad song and the Elementalist’s Formless Power bonus. However, I realized that in this one mission, I had taken the Triangles character more than halfway to retirement, and that it would be trivial to get him to retirement in one more go. And this would open up the Lightning class, which I found to be very good in Guildmaster mode. And since it can soak up some damage, I think that that is probably the way I will go.

I do like playing the Spellweaver, but I seem not to have the knack for doing it right. To my eye, a low level Sellweaver has to burn cards – she has so few non-burn attacks that I quickly have to resort to burn attacks or else burn a card retrieving other cards through a rest. And of course Reviving Ether only works once. I probably have my deck set up poorly or else I am missing some strategy… On the other hand, her retirement goal involves exhausting, so I could just take her along for a while and let it happen. She certainly provides amazing firepower as long as she lasts.

On a similar note, there’s no provision in the game to look into how an AI will behave. When I play the tabletop version, I can look through a monster’s cards to get a sense for that monster’s behavior. Does it have ranged attacks? How often and what kind? How mobile is it? Is it fast, slow, in between? Will it stun, wound, or poison? Does it generate or consume mana? What types? Will it heal itself? Will it summon other monsters?

You know, the basic behaviors that make a dragon different from a skeleton which is different from an elemental which is different from an “ork” or “warg” or whatever. All of that is played 100% under-the-hood in the digital version, with no way to reference it. Yet it’s right on the table in front of you when you’re playing the physical version of Gloomhaven.

For all the talk of this being a good digital port, it sure does manage to overlook some fundamental elements of the boardgame.


just started a new chapter in JotL physical, and in the first fight with 2 characters, I drew two times -2 for my party, and one x2 for the monster. I hate this game (because it hates me, too).

I have the tabletop, but haven’t played it (or the digital yet). But isn’t this cheating? Or is there a mechanism where a player is supposed to do this? Other than just by noticing what a monster’s AI does while you’re actually playing the game.

I don’t think the monster action decks are considered secret–certainly not in the “spoiler” sense. Some players will undoubtedly prefer to learn by experience but there’s no rule against looking at them as you set up the table. At least that I saw.

Ah, cool. I assumed they were more sort of secrety like the characters being boxed and hidden until you used them. If they can be seen with no sort of rule breaking, then not being able to check them out in the digital version is a pretty major difference.

I mean, I’m sure someone’s about to jump in and contradict me with a chapter and verse citation in the rulebook, but I certainly never played that way.

That’s a fair criticism. I know I did casually flip through the monster deck when playing the board game, at least on occasion. Still, doing so didn’t help me much, because I’m lazy and forgetful.

I suppose one could justify the digital game’s approach on the grounds that it challenges us to learn monster behavior by observing the monsters’ behavior in-game. I fear, though, that I’m too lazy and forgetful to learn like that. :)

On the other hand you can see at a glance what cards are left in the combat modifiers deck, giving you the exact odds of drawing a non-negative modifier for either the monsters or yourself. I don’t believe anyone playing the boardgame carried those odds in their heads, other than the vague notion of “I’ve used my +2 and a couple of my +1’s so I’m not likely to kill this one in a single blow”