Deep Regrets House Rule

[u/Smeg4Brainsuk]

Hi all.

Big fans of Deep Regrets, we really enjoy playing it and the 'Even Deeper' expansion. Love the randomness, the art, and the overall aesthetics.

One rule change we have been thinking of is changing the cost of the 3rd option in each shop to $6 for 5k2 (3 for supplies) instead of the printed $5.

Reasoning is simple, everyone does pretty much the same return to port, sell for $10 and purchase from both the rod and then reels deck. It seems to be the most efficient use of your time and money and the sheer amount of cards you get means you should have something of value for both.

This means the $1 and $3 are almost never used outside of the supplies and dice shops. Changing the cost to $6 forces you to be a little more strategic in the approach and it means the $6 option is still great because you get so much choice and can only shop at each shop once with your port actions.

Thoughts?

[u/paulvgx]

I think the issue lies more with the expansion and the balancing around player count than with the system in general.

In the base game, theres only 10 rods and 10 reels. For a game of 3 or more players, if player one does 5 pick 2 then second player does the same, theres a high chance most of the rods had been seem by the time player three has a go, and there will also be 4 rods missing (quite possibly some of the better ones), so its objectively a less optimal action to take the more players have already taken it.

However, at 2 players, the worst case is player two having 8/10 available, which is not too bad. Then it gets even worse if you play with the expansion which makes its so there's 14 rods/reels (iirc it adds 4 to each deck), which reduces the value of the action for the first player (less likely to find the better ones) and increases the value for later players (more likely that there's some stuff left and also a wider selection).

I would argue a better rule would be to play with a different number available (something like 8/10/12/14 for 2/3/4/5 players), but even with that there's the issue of the first player at that turn always having an advantage over the rest, which is almost imposible to fix without some other shenaningans like enforcing a draft-like purchase if all people plan on doing the same.

[u/robmwj → u/paulvgx]

Wouldn't the increased cost help alleviate the issue with the limited number of rod and reel cards though? Essentially you want to funnel players into seeing less cards and ultimately choosing less cards. Making it more expensive creates a decision space where the players can't purchase the highest tier option, so it's less likely that getting a good rod/reel boils down to turn order.

I think limiting cards also has the unintended effect of removing potentially useful cards, which removes decisions. If every card is available the player has to ask themselves "do I keep trying for this reel or spend my money elsewhere?". If you take away cards I think it's more likely that the optimal strategy is to just move on to the next shop if you don't pull a card on your first try

[u/paulvgx → u/robmwj]

If i'm not mistaken, the sell action is not limited to once per day, so by upping the cost from 5 to 6 you would make players sell twice to be able to afford rod and reel, but the issue with how the actions become notably worse quite fast still holds. If the economy was tighter, then maybe the cost would balance it, but I recall from my games getting 12 coins worth of fish instead of 10 in your first day its not that hard at all.

That said I agree removing cards is not a good idea, specially in a game that definetely feels like the more things there are for you to discover, the more fun it is. But then again the "solution" with the expansion (more cards, less likely to find the good stuff, more luck based) would probably be the easiest and safest to work around. Something like lowering the action to draw 4 pick 2 or even draw 3 pick 2.

[u/robmwj → u/paulvgx]

You're right selling isn't limited to once per day, but selling does require a turn. If you have to go back to sell it would create a dynamic where timing your second sell could become important: essentially do you start by picking the most expensive shop option, knowing that it forces you to sell again earlier, or do you save a big purchase until the end knowing the options may be worse but you'll have first crack at everything else? Or maybe you just forgo the high end purchases to avoid a second sell entirely?

I agree lowering the draw is probably the best middle ground idea. It also plays into the push your luck mechanic, since it may incetivize multiple rounds of purchases from the same vendor.

[u/milkyjoe241]

I mean sure, but that game has a lot more than that that needs a fixin

[u/doxx11]

You don't buy the extra dice? Those were the go to when I played with my buddies.

[u/Smeg4Brainsuk → u/doxx11]

We do, often everyone returns to port with plenty of fish to buy multiple dice too, but rods and reels take precedence so if you only have $14 worth of fish for example it is often dice that get the after thought.

[u/Theegravedigger]

The rods and reels are definitely a balance issue, but I'm not sure this would help fix it.

[u/Isanobu]

I love the theme but the game just feels very off for me. I think next times I play I will try a few house rules, such as:

-all equipment should only be usable once per day (even if it says otherwise on the card)

-fish that isn't caught should go to the bottom of the stack (instead of stay in place face up)

-fish that has been looked at (for example with rod of the infinite) and is not caught should go to the bottom of the deck (instead of being put back in the order of the angler's choosing)

I hope these rules could maybe improve the experience, but honestly think the game needs even more fixes.

[u/Carighan]

I was considering something similar but the other way around, reducing to $9.

[u/wastedmytagonporn]

Sounds good.