Jump to content



Photo

overlord so weak and errata beat up in a dead body


  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

#41 thitan

thitan

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 04:51 AM

the power of overlord is in expansions.

in the core game (without convertion kit). I only won 2 first quests after this. I lose all quests. the heroes are very strong with itens and heroic feat. if all player knew how play they will use all heroic feat in all encounter. and will stay together using fatigue all the turn to gain movement. because some cards of the overlord don't break the movement he can stay use fatigue in one by one. and attacking all the time 2 times.


Edited by thitan, 13 September 2013 - 04:53 AM.

  • Robin likes this

#42 Kunzite

Kunzite

    Member

  • Members
  • 542 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 06:39 AM

As for knocking heroes down again as soon as they stand up, what monster are you using that does 3 reds worth of damage a turn in one attack?  Because that's what a raising hero usually gets.  Disciple stands them up, then prayer of healing.  3 red dice.  Is your monster attacking twice every round?  Because I don't know where you're getting 8-9 damage after defense rolls.  And yeah, Silhouette and Steelhorns can use their feats when dead.  Avric just stands them up first.  Then they use their feat.  Knocking players down really isn't that effective.  Especially when you get a tripwire from it and they're basically immune.  And if not, they probably get a skill check anyways

 

Act II there are a number of monsters with the CK that can roll blue, red, red. You have to roll pretty good to get your health up to nine to make the OL then work super hard to knock a hero down. Blue, red, yellow can provide you with surges you need to do nine damage, but the hero being at nine damage after a KO is really unusual. (On a side note, any of my LT roll another green dice. Ariad currently rolls Blue, Green, Green, Green. two surges = +3 heart. She can hit hard if rolled well).

 

But if you are talking about Act I, still, the monsters do their job with a blood rage. By the end of act I and the OL has no wins, you still have four exp. If you go warlord, two blood rages and bloodlust by the interlude means you have a possibility to drawing FIVE cards when a hero hits the dirt. Congrats, you have 1/4 of your deck in your hand with one, if not both of your dashs or blinding speed to get Zacherith down that waterfall (runaway quests are ALWAYS highly favoring the OL. the Interlude is NO exception).

 

When I did Shadow Ruin, I played Magus and still was making my heroes pay for anything they wanted to do. I also won two of the quests before the interlude. I would have won two in act II was well had I not made a dumb move in one of the quests (don't show off. Just go for the gold x.x).

 

And if you are fussing about gold, my group got away with 500+ gold once with two useable act II shop items. And I'm GLAD they did! With this crazy I am able to pull off (Bread has been very good about talking about there) they need ALL of the toys.

 

If you guys have Labyrinth of Ruin, play that with a really witty OL. The wins for the OL are astronomical, but the wins will not be easy. Kiddy gloves are off. This is where it becomes real.


"Bide your time and hold out hope."

~Count of Monte Cristo

 

NotesFromTheOverlord.tumblr.com


#43 Shooock

Shooock

    Member

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 06:49 AM

New relics in expansion do more strong heroes... and more quest give more gold heroes...

 

For balance they have thought to add Lieutenant Pack and is a step forward... (like me, they understand OL's relics are unused for large part of the campaign)

 

If this changed nothing necessarily have to add the possibility to equip the monsters ...

 

I don't want more attack for monster, i don't want more OL card... i love this system... but OL < 4 Heroes (don't believe in the fable "OL > 2 Heroes - OL < 3 Heroes - OL = Heroes", [a person woke up in the morning, and he told this story, and the world believed him])

 



#44 Radish

Radish

    Member

  • Members
  • 127 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 08:23 AM

We just finished a campaign with me as the OL using the new expansion.  I won in the end but it was incredibly close and came down to one roll where if I didn't kill a hero, the rest would have been in range to get to the objective and win.  However I definitely benefited from winning the unplayable, broken Heart of the Wild quest so that may have been the slight edge and a few very important rolls ended up as misses for the heroes since prior the heroes were walking through the finale with no difficulty and that swung it immensely.  Additionally I had the excellent reinforcement card which just gives monsters that the heroes can't expect and plan around which is a huge power swing in the overlord's favor that other decks just can't compete with.  I almost think that card is a requirement.  Lastly I realized late how good hell hounds were.  With pierce 3-4 they and the nagas with sorcery were the only things that could consistently get through the gray+black+brown dice that all the heroes (including the mages and scouts) were throwing.  

 

I think the problem with balance is related to several issues.  Quests are not really well thought out in regards to the incredible amount of hero abilities that can trivialize them.  In addition some are just not tested with people that are familiar enough with the game mechanics to exploit rules.  For instance in the quest where if heroes step next to spider webs and there is a chance spiders will spawn, as the rules are written you can walk familiars like geomancer stones or the reanimate onto those spaces (since they are not heroes for the effects of quest objectives, only for monster abilities or overlord cards) and the spider will not spawn and then when a hero is adjacent to the now occupied web square the spider has no place to go and the quest doesn't say that it goes to the closest space.  Even if they DID spawn the spiders are easy enough to kill it doesn't really matter.

 

That leads to the next issue in that monsters are too flimsy.  The overlord has to hope for hero misses since by the end of an act, most monsters are able to be one shot if the hero is tailored correctly.  If the quest has a reinforcement at the end of the turn you can assume that the monsters just won't get attacks at all.  The new treasure hunter was consistently putting out over 8 hearts worth of damage with pierce 2-3 so certain monsters just couldn't be taken.  The only limit to that is the 1 in 6 chance of missing which makes damage incredibly swingy in attacks that either result in dead or totally untouched monsters.  Many monsters also just have no way to break through hero defenses.  There are few things that limit heavy armor other than a few that don't allow runes, but still allow magic ranged staffs and none that affect bows.  Some have movement penalties but when a character already has a movement of 3 and 5 fatigue and maybe the +1 movement per turn out of action item this doesn't really matter.

 

Another issue is the skill check system.  With the new expansion and access to gear that increases stats along with re-rolls, using cards that require heroes to fail skill checks just can't be counted on.  In this game usually there is a situation where one turn makes the difference and having to rely on a 25% chance that something will happen just doesn't cut it. As the game continues the heroes become better at passing tests, but the overlord can't affect those odds outside of a few situations.  Additionally it's always better to have the sure thing (cards that buff monsters or spawn them) than ones that require the hero to fail in order for a complicated plan to succeed.  One of the ways I think I was able to win was ditching those cards entirely with the exception of dark charm (which didn't work once in the entire game).  An additional problem with the skill check system is that most parties contain heroes that have wildly different stats.  So a card will typically only be usable on one hero so if that player isn't the one you absolutely need to stop that turn you have a dead card that could have been something better like critical blow, dash or blood rage.  

 

I believe an errata change that needs to be made is that when a hero is down the ONLY way they can interact with the game at all is to be revived using an action.  Downing heroes only to have them all stand up when a healer gives them 1 heart with an ability that affects multiple heroes makes the penalty for death meaningless other than a card draw.  This is a big deal when in some cases the overlord only gets one monster a turn or none at all.

 

Certain characters are also just totally busted and ruin games.  Silhouette is one such character as several recent threads have noticed.  I played as her in a campaign a while ago as a thief type and it totally trivialized certain maps to the point where they made the overlord obviously frustrated with his inability to have any agency in stopping her.  

 

I don't think the overall problems are as simple as one side is overpowered.  I think most of the problems stem from the fact that with the Decent 1 ed character and monster compatibility pack there are just way too many variables introduced and no way to adequately test them all.  Even without that there are quests that have obvious holes that playing strictly by the rules can seriously exploit.

 

Overall if I had to make changes to "fix" the game they would be:

 

1. Remove the extra characters and monster entirely.  I think this is huge and probably the easiest thing for players just to house rule.  They add just way too many variables in a game where there are so many ways to exploit the rule system.  This also removes a lot of the "oh I didn't realize that character/monster did that in this situation" which happens a lot the first time an encounter is played and frankly the first time something is done is probably when the game is most fresh and fun.

2. Make heroes that are down not count as being on the board in any way.  The only way they can be revived is if another character uses a revive action on the token that is left on the board in the square they were downed in.  This removes a lot of weird exploits and makes character death a penalty.

3. Play test through every quest with each character archetype at least once with people intentionally trying to break every rule possible in order to notice holes.  Additionally fix broken quests like Heart of the Wilds.

4. Remove ALL abilities, items, etc that allow characters to increase stats or gain access to rerolls for skill tests.  The penalties for these are never really worth the difficulty and in a average group at least one character will have a stat high enough to be able to competently achieve quest objectives so it shouldn't result in heroes unable to complete quests.  Heroes SHOULD be failing tests fairly regularly, otherwise why even include a mechanic that by the end of the game is practically ignored.  If this requires certain cards to be rebalanced (such as web trap) that is fine.

5. Increase monster health, defense dice or something to allow them to take a hit.

6. Remove certain overlord cards ONLY if monster survivability is fixed (such as reinforce)

7. Monsters and heroes should only have access to massive (2-4) pierce OR additional hearts on weapons and abilities.  Sometimes this is hard to stop but I think it's manageable.  Pierce should be a way to consistently do a small bit of damage not as a way of adding an extra 2-3 damage points on top of 8-10 hearts worth of health.

8. Make weapons and armor somewhat class specific.  For instance mages with heavy armor in addition to damage mitigation abilities makes them better tanks than knights.

9. Take familiars much more strongly into account.  They are somewhat outside the game's rules as heroes in some situations and not in others so in many cases they break rules and it's unclear how the quests handle them or make certain quests where having an extra body to clog lanes or sit in certain areas makes the game incredibly lopsided in terms of balance.  

 

A lot of that stuff is way outside the scope of a simple errata but we have players that really like the game but everyone gets frustrated with how often encounters turn into either a blowout in terms of heroes just walking through monsters, the overlord completing a quest without any work because an expansion monster was able to get around a quest's rules, hero abilities not being considered for a quest and making it trivial, etc.  A lot of my proposed changes also hit heroes more harshly but as the op noted the overlord has already been tweaked down in several instances in regards to both cards and quest objectives so I think this brings everything more in line.



#45 AltWren

AltWren

    Member

  • Members
  • 100 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 10:46 AM

 

Looking for global balance is an illusion.

Wanting global balance is forgetting that luck and multiple factors make the endeavour impossible to reach.

 

Balance is a myth.

 

 

If balance is just a myth, why were the OL cards errataed?  Why was Castle Daerion changed?  I assumed it was because they were unbalancing.  Should they have been left alone and people having issues been told to be luckier?



#46 PlainWhiteBread

PlainWhiteBread

    Member

  • Members
  • 75 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 11:25 AM

Radish, I'm calling shenanigans on your claims: A lot of the game boils down to relying on luck, and knowing that should explain a lot of what you're seeing. As the OL, you also need to know when to play your cards and who to play them on; Trying to Dark Charm a hero with 4 willpower is a fool's errand, as is trying to trap a scout with 5 awareness and a lucky charm; using Befuddle, which forces them to reroll and add a shield to their result will help, but the game boils down to luck of the dice anyway. The items that buff the testing attributes are few and far between, and your heroes need to either pull them in the shop, or pull the treasure chest out of the search deck AND pull the item out of the shop deck.

I'm curious: How do all four of your heroes roll Black/Gray/Brown defense dice? What heroes are they, what are their equipments, and how did they afford all of that?

Looking through your lengthy list of fixes tells me you almost want to play another game entirely; Maybe the amount of luck rolled in this game isn't your group's cup of tea either?


AltWren, I've explained why the OL cards were subject to the errata, but here it is again since you've asked: With the combination of Bloodlust and Unholy Ritual, the OL is capable of holding their entire deck in their hand. How is that bad, you ask? Imagine a game where moving was pointless because the OL always had trap cards in his hand. Or imagine being killed by an Uthuk Demon Trap every time you searched or opened a door, because the OL always had it in their hand. Reinforce is an extremely powerful card that defies the reinforcement rules and drops an entire monster group, that can move and attack that same turn, within three spaces of the heroes. Imagine if the OL could do that every turn. None of what I said is encounter-specific, either; it runs hot all the time.

Can the heroes do anything that unbalancing for the majority of every quest? Even if the Treasure Hunter manages to pull the treasure chest and a bunch of gold every time, they're still at the mercy of the shop deck. You're not allowing them to rummage the shop deck for what they want when the chest pops up or between encounters, are you?

Castle Daerion was given, as others have mentioned, too much errata; The only thing that needed to be changed was when the militia spawned; The original reading of the campaign allowed the Overlord to intentionally fail the first encounter to get the first turn on the second encounter, which went against the spirit of the game. How does this work? When the militia start in front of the heroes during the encounter, they block hero movement and line of sight. They are also activated last per the rules, meaning that their activation forces all four heroes to pass their initial turn. Giving Palamon four movement points and a gray defense die was just overkill.



#47 griton

griton

    Member

  • Members
  • 484 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 11:29 AM

If you're using Basic II, the Uncontrolled Power card allows you to spend her surges, one of which you can make her take a fatigue, then spend the other on the move ability; the attack will miss because she didn't spend the surge to hit the dragon in the first place. 

If you don't spend surges on range, then the attack is a miss, and all of the results (including the surges you spent) are ignored, which means you couldn't have spent those surges anyway, and since with Uncontrolled Power, you HAVE to spend all of the surges, that means you first have to spend surges on range to make it count as a hit (if possible), and then you can spend the others however you want.

 

This was confirmed in an email from FFG.

 

 

One small detail about shadow dragons "shadow" ability. It ONLY works on adjacent models. Models with reach or range are not affected by it one bit, unless they are adjacent to the shadow dragon they are attacking....unless it's been FAQ'd.

Note that the Shadow Dragons' "Shadow" ability doesn't only affect attacks against itself. Any attack from a hero (or familiar treated as a figure) declared from a space adjacent to the Shadow Dragon requires the extra surge, even if it is a ranged attack targeting a goblin in the opposite direction. (I couldn't tell from this post if that was understood or not, so I figure it's best to clarify just in case.)



#48 Cursain

Cursain

    Member

  • Members
  • 132 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 11:50 AM

Note that the Shadow Dragons' "Shadow" ability doesn't only affect attacks against itself. Any attack from a hero (or familiar treated as a figure) declared from a space adjacent to the Shadow Dragon requires the extra surge, even if it is a ranged attack targeting a goblin in the opposite direction. (I couldn't tell from this post if that was understood or not, so I figure it's best to clarify just in case.)

 

 

You rock griton.  Thanks for pointing that out.  It's a major detail I missed and will exploit during my next game.



#49 Robin

Robin

    Member

  • Members
  • 694 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 12:09 PM

Looking for global balance is an illusion.
Wanting global balance is forgetting that luck and multiple factors make the endeavour impossible to reach.
 
Balance is a myth.

 
If balance is just a myth, why were the OL cards errataed?  Why was Castle Daerion changed?  I assumed it was because they were unbalancing.  Should they have been left alone and people having issues been told to be luckier?
Those are modifications of some punctual elements of the game.
My point is not about balance issues in some details, but about the claim that Descent is globally unbalanced in favour of one side (OL or heroes).
Again, global balance is a myth, which has no serious basis.
No one can say that the game is broken and be credible.
An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is an adventure wrongly considered.
G. K. Chesterton

#50 Radish

Radish

    Member

  • Members
  • 127 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 12:50 PM

Of course I'm not trying to use Dark Charm on a character with a stat of 4, that's just stupid.  However try using it on characters that have a stat of 3 and re-rolls.  Or using cards that require failures after characters with 2 and 3 stats on their cards are now 3 and 4s due to getting new items.  Just like you say certain cards are useful against certain characters which is why they aren't that great when players learn to just play around that.  When you want your deck to be a lean 15 cards, you don't want to waste one on the card that forces a re-roll.  So now you have two out of your 15 cards devoted to something and you have to have exactly those two cards in your hand when the specific time is right.  I'm sorry but that just isn't worth the simplicity of having a card that adds two damage to monster attacks (and lets you replay it with a surge) or just two attacks straight up or having a whole extra group of monsters, sometimes on a map that was designed around monster scarcity.  

 

 

Black + Grey + Brown is not difficult to get.  For instance most characters start with grey.  By the second half there are plenty of opportunities for black dice armor, sometimes with negatives but mostly this can be worked around by giving certain stuff to the guy with movement 3 and some to the one who wasn't going to use runes.  Lots of abilities add brown dice such as the beast master ability and I believe that the dragon armor allows it once per turn.  On top of that there are accessories that give +shield if a blank is rolled which is amazing with a brown dice.  Getting high defense is not hard at all and monsters do not scale with this outside abusing ones with high pierce. 

 

We've played campaigns with this game multiple times with different heroes and overlords and the results are the same, someone ends up running away with it during the map instead of having a fight that is close a great deal of the time.  The idea of the game is awesome and when it works it's really fun.  However there is almost always a point when the heroes start increasing too much in power and the overlord has to go all in on monster buff cards and ditch stuff that hits their stats in order to have a chance and then it is usually up to the heroes to whiff attacks at important times.

 

Luck isn't an issue.  When a character can roll moderately and as long as they don't roll the X on the blue die will one shot most single square monsters and some 4 square ones that is a constant not luck.  In regards to skill checks look at these statistics here:

http://boardgamegeek...-attribute-test

At an average of 3 there is a 50% chance of passing which is not something to be counted on when the cards are in a deck of fifteen instead of an ability to be used semi consistently (such as zombie grab or whatever).  However that is still not terrible and within the realm of luck making the game more dynamic.

However once you look at re-rolls that jumps to almost an 80% success rate.  Using a card in that situation is either a waste or a Hell Mary play and not so much luck as it is a shot in the dark.  Wicked laughter plummets the hero success chance but as stated earlier requires the card to be in hand and is a one time use as opposed to re-rolls that are either once a turn or on every check.  So lets say the 3 party members have stats in the category for the card you bought with experience at 2, 3 and 4.  The players are smart and once they see you use that card they shift gear and now the player with a 3 has the re-roll item.  Your card is now only a better than 28% chance of working on one player versus any other card that buffs a monster and is effective against all three.  My beef is that luck ISN'T a factor, not that I don't like it.  Players are able to mitigate luck in many different areas so that sometimes rolling dice is just for show.  When players can combine abilities so that pierce 2-4 is on everyone along with lots of damage bonuses, the grey defense dice that most act 2 monsters share is meaningless.  Hero parties can get gear and re-rolls that buff their skill checks to about 75% for 3 of their 4 characteristics.  It ends up that success is the norm except for 1/6 or 1/5 chances for total failure.  In the last few levels of our last campaign, once the Treasure Hunter player rolled a hit on a monster the only reason to look at the surges and hearts was to see if he could use one of the surges to recover fatigue.

 

As I said I don't think this is simply a matter of heroes being broken since we've had games where the overlord just chain killed heroes.  I think it's a problem with abilities and item combinations that are untested and I think removing the character kit is a step in the direction of fixing this.  Next time we play (probably when Troll Fens comes out) I think I think I will suggest removing all extra monsters and heroes that aren't designed specifically for 2nd edition and see how it works out.


Edited by Radish, 13 September 2013 - 01:40 PM.

  • AltWren likes this

#51 PlainWhiteBread

PlainWhiteBread

    Member

  • Members
  • 75 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 01:41 PM

Luck is always a factor. Always. While you can reroll to increase probability of success, 80% success is still not guaranteed.

The best laid plans are still at the mercy of blind, unrepentant luck.


Edited by PlainWhiteBread, 13 September 2013 - 01:43 PM.

  • Cursain and Robin like this

#52 Cursain

Cursain

    Member

  • Members
  • 132 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 01:49 PM

I agree.  How many football teams have went into the Superbowl as favorites, and lost?  Luck is always a factor.  As long as we're rolling dice, it's a major factor.  Anybody that's played a game with dice, should know this.



#53 AltWren

AltWren

    Member

  • Members
  • 100 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 04:24 PM

 

 

Looking for global balance is an illusion.
Wanting global balance is forgetting that luck and multiple factors make the endeavour impossible to reach.
 
Balance is a myth.

 
If balance is just a myth, why were the OL cards errataed?  Why was Castle Daerion changed?  I assumed it was because they were unbalancing.  Should they have been left alone and people having issues been told to be luckier?
Those are modifications of some punctual elements of the game.
My point is not about balance issues in some details, but about the claim that Descent is globally unbalanced in favour of one side (OL or heroes).
Again, global balance is a myth, which has no serious basis.
No one can say that the game is broken and be credible.

 

 

Oh, well, I wasn't saying that.  But can I say some areas of the game are broken and still be credible?  Like, "Silhouette as a treasure hunter is broken because it lets the party get 250+ gold plus a map.  This is much more than other treasure hunters collect."  How was that?



#54 AltWren

AltWren

    Member

  • Members
  • 100 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 04:26 PM

I agree.  How many football teams have went into the Superbowl as favorites, and lost?  Luck is always a factor.  As long as we're rolling dice, it's a major factor.  Anybody that's played a game with dice, should know this.

 

I hate luck.  And it hates me.



#55 PlainWhiteBread

PlainWhiteBread

    Member

  • Members
  • 75 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 04:36 PM

Oh, well, I wasn't saying that.  But can I say some areas of the game are broken and still be credible?  Like, "Silhouette as a treasure hunter is broken because it lets the party get 250+ gold plus a map.  This is much more than other treasure hunters collect."  How was that?

That's a valid statement. Silhouette is just incredibly good at the Treasure Hunter job, moreso than probably most of the scout class characters. Fighting games do this all the time, bracketing characters into tiers based on their effectiveness. Silhouette is probably one of the top tiers in Scout, along with Lindel and probably Arvel Worldwalker.

Hands down, the worst -- Bottom-tier -- hero out of the lot is Eliam. A warrior with a brown defense die (and before Labyrinth of the Wurm had a worthless Hero Ability until he could get another 1-handed weapon) and no stats above 3 was just a recipe for disaster. His feat doesn't make up for it.

 

I hate luck.  And it hates me.

 

It seems like at times, if I didn't have bad luck, I'd have no luck at all. I hear you loud and clear.


Edited by PlainWhiteBread, 13 September 2013 - 04:43 PM.


#56 AltWren

AltWren

    Member

  • Members
  • 100 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 04:45 PM

 

That's a valid statement. Silhouette is just incredibly good at the Treasure Hunter job, moreso than probably most of the scout class characters. Fighting games do this all the time, bracketing characters into tiers based on their effectiveness. Silhouette is probably one of the top tiers in Scout, along with Lindel and probably Arvel Worldwalker.

Hands down, the worst -- Bottom-tier -- hero out of the lot is Eliam. A warrior with a brown defense die (and before Labyrinth of the Wurm had a worthless Hero Ability) and no stats above 3 was just a recipe for disaster. His feat doesn't make up for it.

 

 

I had a thought once of giving characters values between 1 and 4.  I'm pretty sure Descent one did this too, but mine were going to be used differently.  An average party would total 8 (very few characters are worth 4) and if the party cost goes above 8, the OL gets more advantages such as more cards, starting XP or an extra monster group.  Likewise, if the group wants to build a party full of Eliams, it would lower the OLs starting hand.  Just an idea.



#57 CaelanCross

CaelanCross

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 10:33 PM

We've played campaigns with this game multiple times with different heroes and overlords and the results are the same, someone ends up running away with it during the map instead of having a fight that is close a great deal of the time.  

I think the above sentence perfectly sums up my entire Descent 2 experience so far... someone is always getting bent over the kitchen table in this game; the victim might change from day to day or map to map but it is always going to happen and despite what I have been "hearing" a few people say, I don't believe it's the result of luck or skill, it's just the way the game was made.

 

Call me old fashioned but when I play a competitive game with my friends I want to see a hard fought match where "the best man wins" bc he was either lucky or brilliant or both, but in this game it seems like that between the silly mechanics, often poorly thought out quest objectives and mountain of variables with hero/monster abilities leading to potentially game breaking exploitation (i.e. OL card combinations letting them keep their whole deck in their hand or heroes earning 500gp a map) that the winner is decided before we even set up the board.  

 

Maybe that works for some people and they don't mind waiting for their turn to stick it to the other guy, but it's just not a situation that I am finding to be very fun.


  • AltWren likes this

#58 Robin

Robin

    Member

  • Members
  • 694 posts

Posted 14 September 2013 - 03:11 AM

AltWren said

Oh, well, I wasn't saying that.  But can I say some areas of the game are broken and still be credible?  Like, "Silhouette as a treasure hunter is broken because it lets the party get 250+ gold plus a map.  This is much more than other treasure hunters collect."  How was that?

 

Of course.

My point is about people saying that the whole game is broken and unbalanced in favour of one or the other side (I just read a thread on BGG where a poster considers that the OL dominates in all cases).

Silhouette's heroic feat does seem overpowered, I agree.

Castle Daerion was broken, because of the bad timing of the Militia setup/entry of game.

At that level, all games know well founded debates (e.g. SW about the Diplomat power at two player level, ASL about scenarios being "three legged dogs", etc.), but players rarely jump to the conclusion - like it is quite common about Descent - that the producers are stupid, that the game as a whole is crap, etc.

I hardly see people whining that Arkham Horror is unbalanced, even though the investigators can get severly thrashed because of some bad dice rolls. AH players cope with that and don't spend their time attacking the game's value as a whole.

 

I do also consider that one cannot avoid stumbling upon an unforseen problem generated by the combination of multiple factors.

That happens in about all games which have some level of complexity and which present a variety of scenarios.

We cannot avoid being the "definitive playtest bench".


Edited by Robin, 14 September 2013 - 03:13 AM.

An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is an adventure wrongly considered.
G. K. Chesterton

#59 CaelanCross

CaelanCross

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 14 September 2013 - 09:23 AM

Nobody complains about the difficulty in Arkham Horror bc it is a "survival horror game" that is meant to be hard, players win and lose as a team and you appreciate each victory bc you have to fight so hard for them.

 

Descent is like a game of monopoly were one random player can run around the entire board once per game and buy as many properties as he wants; how much enjoyment can you get from winning or losing a game like that?

 

Now don't misunderstand me, I love the idea of Descent and this whole genre of games in general but... it just feels like I would have to re-write the half the rule book and errata nearly every quest in the game just to make it work :(



#60 Robin

Robin

    Member

  • Members
  • 694 posts

Posted 14 September 2013 - 10:03 AM

I don't share your global judgement on Descent.
And I don't think your analysis is thorough enough to be convincing from a rational point of view.
An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is an adventure wrongly considered.
G. K. Chesterton




© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS