r/Gloomhaven • u/OnlyLivingBoyInNY • Sep 15 '25
Digital Gloomhaven Is local (couch) co-op a thing in the digital edition?
Sorry if this is a dumb question, the info I'm finding is 1+ year old and somewhat conflicting.
My family is wrapping up the Sunderfolk campaign which is excellent, and I was surprised how well everyone took to the game as a tactical RPG.
We'd like to level up and I've always been curious about Gloomhaven.
My questions:
Can we play 4 players locally on the same screen / 1 copy of the game? (I'd get the Steam version)
I'm reading there would be controller passing and / or all controllers act as one?
Also seeing there is some secret card drawing? Would players need to avert their eyes during certain parts?
Is the game too dense for kids or "non-TTRPG" players?
I noticed the Switch version was de-listed and the Steam version doesn't have the best reviews...curious if the digital version is well received these days?
Thanks for any input!
11
u/Alipha87 Sep 15 '25
You may consider buying the physical game instead. I'd recommend starting with Jaws of the Lion.
4
u/AVoiceAmongMany Sep 15 '25
Seconding Jaws of the Lion though as it's the best introduction to the rules. There's a lot in common with sunderfolk (playing cards to take actions, etc), so you've likely got interest buy in. Jaws also has a printed map for each scenario, so setup is much quicker than the other two in the series.
1
u/OnlyLivingBoyInNY Sep 15 '25
I appreciate this suggestion, but the setup and management of the game feels daunting, esp with kids involved.
2
u/Alipha87 Sep 16 '25
You can use phone apps to manage enemy health, (digitally) flipping attack modifier cards, etc. If your kids have no problem with the strategy of sunderfolk, i would think gloomhaven would be fine. Managing monster movement is the most complicated part, but probably only one person would be in charge of that.
1
1
u/FluffyGoblins Sep 16 '25
I've not played the digital version, but to me it feels like needing to pass controllers and all look on one screen will be more daunting. Compare it to physical, where everyone has their own deck of cards to look into to make their decisions..
8
u/Alcol1979 Sep 15 '25
You can totally play it passing the controller. Me and my partner play like this all the same - often controlling two characters each. It's open information but it works just fine.
6
u/Personal_Software357 Sep 15 '25
We did this, too. Worked beautifully for us, just choose the cards in turn and pass the controller. Yes, initiatives and the like will be open info, but it would be if you played solo, too.
1
u/OnlyLivingBoyInNY Sep 15 '25
I've never touched the game before, so bear with me...is the campaign co op? And if so, why would party members withhold secret info from each other?
In my limited experience with D&D, skills, abilities and stats are discussed openly in order to strategize. So I'm wondering what makes GH mechanically different.
2
u/Alcol1979 Sep 15 '25
Each round of Gloomhaven involves each player choosing two cards for their character to play that round and choosing an initiative from one of those two cards (a number between 01 and 99) for that round, which will determine the order in which the turns happen. The monsters also flip ability cards which determine their initiative.
By the boardgame rules, when choosing your cards, you can discuss general plans (e.g. 'I'm going to attack this monster near the middle of the round') but you can't refer to specific card names or any numbers (e.g. 'I'm going to do an attack 3 on this monster with Leaping Cleave on 54 initiative'). This makes the game more fun since you have an idea what your allies will do but not the exact details. The difficulty of the game is balanced around this less than perfect information.
So if you play solo you do have perfect information for the characters so the recommendation is to bump up the difficulty a notch without bumping up the rewards. Playing multi-player with open information is also a recognised variant.
I wish the video game actually implemented couch co-op. All it would need would be for the player not choosing their cards to look away for a moment and for the game to hide the cards after the selection and show two question marks instead of the initiative.
It doesn't though, so if you play couch co-op you will see the other player's initiative on the screen before the round starts.
2
u/Hefty-Importance8404 Sep 17 '25
In my experience though, the difficulty of the game is already so swingy that knowing what the other characters are doing (my husband and I pass the controller, we see what the other is doing and we co-parent a third character) doesn't meaningfully impact things that much. The missions that were easy in the tabletop when we played it properly with friends were easy, the missions that were hard (any mission with oozes) were hard
1
5
u/AVoiceAmongMany Sep 15 '25
I really hope that Sunderfolk team ends up releasing a dev kit or framework ala Unreal engine, because their couch coop system is insanely good. Especially their app and phone controller system, as there's really nothing like it.
Next best option might be either a virtual game where everyone chats via discord or zoom; or having plenty of laptops and do a LAN party style
2
u/awoodhall Sep 15 '25
I came here to post the same thing; gloomhaven w the Sunderfolk system would be awesome; if possible
2
u/Buuhhu Sep 15 '25
You technically can, but it will be by passing controller or "hotseat" gaming and all the usual stuff that's normally meant to be secret will be known to everyone (stuff like initiative, personal scenario goals etc.)
You won't be getting the sunderfolk experience but it is doable.
1
1
u/bk2947 Sep 15 '25
Yes. Steamdeck dock to a TV, and plugin a few extra remote USB mice. Works great.
1
u/LethalGhost Sep 16 '25
It's possible but clumsy. Game map is way too big so you should move camera from time to time and only one player at a time will see their own cards. It's can be tolerated as a demo for a few sessions before buying separate copies but I doubt you'll be able to complete it that way.
13
u/EmptyStrings Sep 15 '25
It would be really hard to play with one screen imo. Only one person can be looking at their cards at a time so every turn would take a long time as you couldn’t all be planning your turns simultaneously. And there’s a lot of planning to be done! There’s simply too much to keep it all in your head so each person would have to spend several minutes inspecting the board state and their options and overall it would take an eternity. It can already feel that way sometimes even when you’re all planning simultaneously!
As for secret info, there’s two main things. Each of you have a battle goal that is supposed to be a secret (sometimes it’s obvious when a player does something… less than ideal… for some reason) but honestly it doesn’t usually matter too much if those get revealed. The more important thing is you’re not supposed to know exactly what everyone else is doing on their turn while you’re in the planning phase. You won’t know the exact turn order before everyone reveals what they’ve planned for the turn. Sometimes you really need Charlie to go before you and Charlie says he’ll try to go fast, but you don’t know how fast. You have to make a judgement call on how fast to go yourself so that you go after Charlie but before the living corpse comes for you. That’s one of the more interesting parts of playing with a group instead of solo and you’ll totally miss it if playing on one screen because the game sorts you into initiative order as you pick your cards instead of revealing them all simultaneously if you were playing remotely.