Spoiler warning: Part One contains no spoilers. Part Two, however, does have encounter spoilers for Night of the Zealot, The Dunwich Legacy, and the Path to Carcosa.



With the announcement of Finn Edwards in the Forgotten Age cycle we have our first one willpower investigator; Finn didn’t need to be a Rogue to immediately conjure the community’s reaction to his older brother from another mother, “Skids” O’Toole, an investigator whose reputation has been marred for having two willpower. In some circles this reignited the debate on just how important willpower is; some believe you can take the losses on the chin, others view willpower as one of the most important skills in the game. This article will take a focused look at the question in an attempt to get to the bottom of this question: just how important is willpower in scenarios?

Part One is a broader examination of willpower to understand how it functions within the games design. That is, to take a sharp look at design balance underlying willpower to understand the “why” and “how” willpower becomes important.

In Part Two, I will cover the statistical probabilities and particular treacheries in each of the three campaigns so far: Night of the Zealot, The Dunwich Legacy, and the Path to Carcosa. For those looking just for raw numbers and stats and don’t care about one persons pontification, head there.

Table of Contents

Summary (Part One and Two)

Treacheries are the primary if not sole time willpower is tested. Generally speaking, the data shows that an investigator will only draw 2-3 willpower testing treacheries over the course of a scenario. While that’s not insignificant and should be ignored at your own peril, it is also not the dominate skill that it is sometimes made out to be. Far from it, when we look at the actual effects of these treacheries many of them aren’t that bad. Failing one willpower treachery test is often not the end of the world, and some may mount to nothing more than a mild inconvenience. It is not unrealistic for an investigator to at times intentionally “choose” failure, knowing that (a) the price of success outweighs the inconvenience and/or (b) their resources are best reserved for more pressing treacheries. In short, you don’t need to pass every single test.

In contrast to intellect (primary means of investigating) and combat/agility (primary means to deal with enemies which otherwise shut you down), willpower is arguably the least necessary skill for non-Mystics. It isn’t something to be ignored, indeed there are non-treachery related willpower tests contribute to the current objective, but I don’t think it merit a premium over other skills; remember, any allocation towards willpower takes away from your ability to address some other element of the game. It is also the skill most easily remedied through high tempo, aggressive play — the fewer rounds it takes to complete the scenario, the encounter cards you will draw, and the fewer chances there are to test your willpower.



Introduction

Before getting into the nitty gritty we need to look at the mechanical operation of willpower: what is it? What does it do? What makes it important? As most players have already come to realize, willpower is the predominate skill tested by the encounter deck and the race isn’t even close; thus far, approximately 20-25% of the total encounter cards across all scenarios are willpower testing treacheries, and the runner up is in the 3-5% range. Willpower is therefore your first line of defence against a significant chunk of the encounter deck. However, it is also a skill otherwise devoid of meaning and must force itself into relevance; a delicate game balance must be maintained lest willpower slip into irrelevance. This balance is outlined via the below five elements.

What this article will not be is an exploration on encounter deck resistance via skill boosting and cancellation; for those looking to understand the probabilities in this game, I encourage you to check out my Skill Test & Chaos Bag Calculator in the Tools & Resources section. Rather, this article hopes to ask how valuable is willpower for resisting the encounter deck, and equip you with the knowledge to make that determination for yourself (with my own thoughts on the subject, of course).



A. Willpower is a reactive skill that does not help you win

Outside Mystics and a few niche cards, willpower is a reactive skill. Until the encounter deck calls upon you to test it, it does nothing for you. Generally, this occurs in the form of treachery cards, a place willpower enjoys is commonly tested lest you face a consequence for failure. Consequently, willpower inherently does not help you win, it “merely” serves to avoid a potential penalty several times during a scenario.



B. Willpower does not scale in multiplayer

With some notable exceptions, willpower is the only skill that does not have scaling consequences for the rest of the table. Consider intellect and investigating: the more players, the more clues there needs to be discovered; any deficiency by one player must be compensated by another. Much the same can be said of combat; boss enemies gain more health, more enemies spawn from scenario effects, and even more enemies spawn simply from the additional encounter card drawn each Mythos Phase. In short, your mere presence is a burden to the rest of the table so you better show them why you’re useful.

Willpower is entirely different. First, the consequences of failing a willpower testing treachery are limited to the player performing the test; if Skids bombs a willpower test, Skids and only Skids are affected. Second, the number of players present does not alter the number of treachery cards drawn by any one player (Delve Too Deep and Drawn to the Flame aside). In other words, the rest of the table can pretend like your willpower is 0 with no consequences to the rest of the table. The same cannot be said of intellect, combat, or agility.



C. Willpower necessitates threatening penalties

Willpower by itself is the least useful skill. Let me break that down. Willpower occupies the same space as combat and agility; these skills are also reactive in that they often do nothing until you engage an enemy. Enemy engagement is an immediate roadblock; if you cannot deal with that enemy, you will inevitably be defeated. Treachery tests, meanwhile, are one shot effects. Failing a treachery isn’t the end of the world, the player may continue on, though they will endure the consequences of failure (the “penalty”). Better yet, failure alone does not impose an action or tempo loss unlike enemies which usually impose some tempo loss (e.g. actions spent) to deal with them.

Willpower must therefore force itself into relevance via serious consequences for failure. Applying a cost:benefit analysis, the penalty for failure should exceed the costs of a reasonable prospect of success; if the reverse is true, players are conversely incentivized to take it on the chin.



D. Treachery cards are the cards most easily shutdown by player cards

Another issue treacheries and, by association, willpower face is that they are also the card type most easily shut down by player cards. Players have plenty of tools to cancel them or file them off to a more appropriate player; Ward of Protection, A Test of Will(1), “Let me handle this” and now “You handle this one!” are some of many ways players can directly or indirectly deal with treacheries. Where cancellation is not an option, there are also plenty of ways to brute force pass willpower tests be it through committing cards or using skill boosters. If that’s not enough, some treacheries can be mitigated by your board state (“oh no, you discarded my empty Flashlight, woe is me…”). That all being said, these are finite resources and/or have some additional cost, which brings me to my last point…



E. Willpower must be tested at a sufficient rate to be relevant

To prevent willpower from being rendered insignificant through player cards, willpower must be tested at a sufficient rate to be relevant. Consider the below chart that looks at the odds of drawing a particular set of encounter cards in a 30 card deck by X round. A “set” is whatever you define as worth responding to: is it just the two copies of Frozen in Fear or all seven cards in the Striking Fear encounter set? Whatever it is, the below chart will provide the danger of drawing one or more of said cards by X round.

For example, there is a 36.55% chance you will draw one or more of these cards by round 6. The charts in Part Two will take a closer look at the precise number of these cards you may draw. Note that it is only accurate for solo and where no encounter card surges.

# in Set Chance to draw one or more of the cards in the set by round… 2 3 4 5 6 2 12.87% 19.31% 25.29% 31.03% 36.55% 3 18.62% 27.93% 35.96% 43.35% 50.15% 4 23.91% 35.86% 45.44% 53.84% 61.23% 5 28.74% 43.10% 53.82% 62.72% 70.17% 6 33.10% 49.66% 61.17% 70.17% 77.33% 7 37.01% 55.52% 67.56% 76.37% 83.00%

The chart mostly speaks for itself but I will highlight one takeaway. If there are only two encounter cards whose penalty frightens you then the risk is relatively low; oh it will happen, you better believe it will happen, and when it does it may be a memorable experience for all the wrong reasons. The actual risk however is relatively low, and both the risk and the penalty can often be remedied through player cards. However, as the number of “dangerous” cards rises then not only does the risk but your ability to fend off the encounter deck.

Ultimately, you have to ask yourself what level of risk are you willing to accept, and at what cost to the other elements on the game. Unfortunately this is a zero-sum game where any resources allocated be it deck building, resources spent, etc. in some way detracts or leaves you less able from fulfilling some other aspect of the game; Agnes Baker, for example, has an impressive 5 willpower, but only at the expense of the rest of her (unimpressive) stat line. Do you include two copies of Guts at the expense of a Flashlight? Do you boost your willpower via Physical Training, or do you conserve your resources for a future Fight test? These are the questions you will have to answer for yourself.



Conclusion

The purpose behind this article isn’t to argue that willpower is a “bad” skill (it’s not), but rather illustrate how it can be come relevant. By applying a cost:benefit risk analysis we can see how willpower becomes important but also how fragile that hold is; there must not only be (a) a satisfactory risk of being tested, but also (b) a deterring penalty. If any of this sounds familiar, it’s because this is the same metric used to devise any (effective) criminal, punitive, or regulatory scheme. Ask yourself, have you ever drove past the speed limit? Was it because the fines are insignificant (to you) and/or the chances of being pulled over are slim? If either is true it is a technical design flaw in the system, and the same applies to willpower in Arkham Horror: The Card Game. In Part Two, I will look at the statistical probabilities of drawing willpower testing treacheries along with breaking down the penalty types so we can answer the question: how much important is willpower really?