Jump to content



Photo

Jain Fairwood way too overpowered!


  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#21 C2K

C2K

    Member

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 12:55 AM


Then you have effect that let you "move up to x", where x in this case is double Jain's speed, but there are others. These are unaffected by things like tripwire, we already know, because that specifically requires a move action. What's more, these allow you to move without gaining or spending any MPs - with a lot of interesting effects. You may undertake them even when immobilized; apparently you can move through difficult terrain without penalties, since you are moving squares, not using movement; and a pit trap would not impede your movement in any way, just leave you stunned at the end of it.


 

 

I don't think this is right.  If you can't spend 2 movement points to enter a water space, you just can't move into it.  Its in the rules regarding water space. 

 

For Pits, if you move on them, you still fall down them and need to take a climb action to get out.  It doesn't end your action, but it still prevents you from getting out of it. 

 

And Lava spaces still do what they do when you enter them. 

 

I understand the ruling between actions that grant movement and the move action, difficult terrain occurs when trying to enter the space. 

 

Also, it should be known that some skills say "Take a move action" as part of their text.  Those skills are considered move actions and can be stopped by things that stop move actions.   

 

 

Edit:  With "Place" effects, you are still entering the square you are placing the model in.  It would still trigger the Pit Trap card.   Sounds like a lot of rules lawyering happens in a few games regarding movement.  :lol:


Edited by C2K, 09 November 2013 - 01:01 AM.


#22 Varikas

Varikas

    Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 04:30 AM

I want to clarify that its true that "move double your speed" dont give you movement points, thats clear, but its also clear that it dont say "move X spaces", so Jain with her Heroic feat would need to spend 2 movement to enter in a water space, cause in terrain effects "move your speed" is considered like movement points (but they arent).

 

 
""Though there is no official rules support for this, the intent is for "Move up to Speed" abilities to be treated like movement points when it comes to terrain-based things or similar. Essentially, it takes 2 of her movement to enter a water space.
 
Thanks,
Justin Kemppainen
Creative Content Developer
Fantasy Flight Games
jkemppainen@fantasyflightgames.com""

Edited by Varikas, 09 November 2013 - 04:30 AM.


#23 Silverhelm

Silverhelm

    Member

  • Members
  • 222 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 08:38 AM

Movement is a bit (over?) complicated in Descent.

Movement Points are specifically gained only from Move Actions and things that say "Movement Points". Movement Points enter a pool that can be spent at any point during the turn. "Move up to X" is a separate process (I don't want to use the word action here) that must be resolved immediately and completely before doing other things. It also can not be interrupted as it is not a Move Action.

That said, Justin has responded to me (I really need to get those added to the BGG FFG Sez thread) that Jain's Heroic Feat should say that the attack can be performed before, during, or after that movement. But no other actions (such as searching) could be performed during it as it isn't a Move Action.

Why on earth would anybody search during this move (feat). Pretty sure that's clear.

O boy more errata FFG is proud to announce rule book 2.1 called Descent: Errata 2.1

I think it's clear the intent of this game was to creat a simple game. I think it's becoming clearer and clearer its becoming complicated!

Edited by Silverhelm, 09 November 2013 - 09:38 AM.


#24 No Hero

No Hero

    Member

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 09:07 AM

There's this misconception that less rules = simpler game, and that's not always true.

A game with as much interaction as Descent needs a ton of rules to cover all cases, otherwise it becomes a game of exception. And then we need erratas and FAQ and whatnot.

 

...We might have gone "slightly" off topic here, so m2c about Jain: she's a very powerful character, perhaps the most powerful when in an offensive role of all scouts published (ouside the CK). Wildlander is perfect for her, because it's not as fatigue-intensive as other classes and attacking a lot means recovering a lot of fatigue - making her tougher. From the OL side, every group I played included wildlander Jain and it's a real thorn in the side, but not as much as say knight Syndrael or any hero with access to AoE.



#25 Silverhelm

Silverhelm

    Member

  • Members
  • 222 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 10:17 AM

There's this misconception that less rules = simpler game, and that's not always true.
A game with as much interaction as Descent needs a ton of rules to cover all cases, otherwise it becomes a game of exception. And then we need erratas and FAQ and whatnot.
 
...We might have gone "slightly" off topic here, so m2c about Jain: she's a very powerful character, perhaps the most powerful when in an offensive role of all scouts published (ouside the CK). Wildlander is perfect for her, because it's not as fatigue-intensive as other classes and attacking a lot means recovering a lot of fatigue - making her tougher. From the OL side, every group I played included wildlander Jain and it's a real thorn in the side, but not as much as say knight Syndrael or any hero with access to AoE.


Less has nothing to do with it when you got to relie on a wonky 3rd party sight to keep track of errata/faq that is Frustrating for new players. They come here for answers then get directed to BBG for a game they bought. Or they got to contact FFG for constant "am I reading this right questions". This is why errata is frustrating and I'm not speaking for myself I'm speaking for the new guy/gal who picks up the game thinking its a smooth running game because it isn't and its getting worse.

Jane isn't that complicated to play with but if wording on games causes this much confusion the game will feel broken out of the box. Plot decks are next are they being written right? Or should we wait for the errata on those too?

#26 Steve-O

Steve-O

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,633 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 11:19 AM

Less has nothing to do with it when you got to relie on a wonky 3rd party sight to keep track of errata/faq that is Frustrating for new players. They come here for answers then get directed to BBG for a game they bought. Or they got to contact FFG for constant "am I reading this right questions". This is why errata is frustrating and I'm not speaking for myself I'm speaking for the new guy/gal who picks up the game thinking its a smooth running game because it isn't and its getting worse.

 

You're not wrong.  FFG has been struggling with vague or poorly worded rules since I starting collecting games of theirs.  Descent is worse than most due to how intense the competition between OL and heroes can sometimes get.  You can get lost in the rules debates if you let yourself.  You can make house rules to suit your own personal tastes if you're so inclined.  Or you can get frustrated with it all and either shelf the game or sell it off.  It may not be fair, but it's true.

 

At some point, we the customers have to take responsibility for how we spend our money.  Products that don't sell will either die off or improve.  So if you're not happy with the game, stop buying expansions for it.  In the Age of the Internet, I don't even think it's unfair to ask the customer to do research on a product before buying into the core set, so even newbies aren't really off the hook on this one.

 

Jane isn't that complicated to play with but if wording on games causes this much confusion the game will feel broken out of the box. Plot decks are next are they being written right? Or should we wait for the errata on those too?

 

There will almost certainly be issues with the LT plot decks that call for errata, or at least FAQage.  If you want to buy them just for the minis, you could do that and ignore the plot decks.  Or you could wait a few months and see how bad things get on the forums before deciding if the LTs are really worth it.



#27 No Hero

No Hero

    Member

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 12:00 PM

 

 


Less has nothing to do with it when you got to relie on a wonky 3rd party sight to keep track of errata/faq that is Frustrating for new players. They come here for answers then get directed to BBG for a game they bought. Or they got to contact FFG for constant "am I reading this right questions". This is why errata is frustrating and I'm not speaking for myself I'm speaking for the new guy/gal who picks up the game thinking its a smooth running game because it isn't and its getting worse.

You're not wrong.  FFG has been struggling with vague or poorly worded rules since I starting collecting games of theirs.  Descent is worse than most due to how intense the competition between OL and heroes can sometimes get.  You can get lost in the rules debates if you let yourself.  You can make house rules to suit your own personal tastes if you're so inclined.  Or you can get frustrated with it all and either shelf the game or sell it off.  It may not be fair, but it's true.

 

At some point, we the customers have to take responsibility for how we spend our money.  Products that don't sell will either die off or improve.  So if you're not happy with the game, stop buying expansions for it.  In the Age of the Internet, I don't even think it's unfair to ask the customer to do research on a product before buying into the core set, so even newbies aren't really off the hook on this one.

 

You make a very good point, but I guess the reason we're still here complaining it's that we haven't given up on this game already - always waiting for the next FAQ/errata update and always spamming FFG with clarification requests. In the end this game is still fun as hell, and if players trust the owner of the boxes (is it only me or does that person coincide  with the OL in most games?) to make fair and sensitive ruling for any issues the game can still proceed without a hitch. That's why I bought all boxes so far, and if the situation doesn't get dramatically worse I'll buy Nerekhall as well...

 

You are right about struggling with rulebooks also! Though I think second and third edition Twilight Imperium were very well written and not clunky at all (except for expansion stuff with strange races doing strange things)



#28 Silverhelm

Silverhelm

    Member

  • Members
  • 222 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 12:47 PM

Less has nothing to do with it when you got to relie on a wonky 3rd party sight to keep track of errata/faq that is Frustrating for new players. They come here for answers then get directed to BBG for a game they bought. Or they got to contact FFG for constant "am I reading this right questions". This is why errata is frustrating and I'm not speaking for myself I'm speaking for the new guy/gal who picks up the game thinking its a smooth running game because it isn't and its getting worse.


You're not wrong. FFG has been struggling with vague or poorly worded rules since I starting collecting games of theirs. Descent is worse than most due to how intense the competition between OL and heroes can sometimes get. You can get lost in the rules debates if you let yourself. You can make house rules to suit your own personal tastes if you're so inclined. Or you can get frustrated with it all and either shelf the game or sell it off. It may not be fair, but it's true.

At some point, we the customers have to take responsibility for how we spend our money. Products that don't sell will either die off or improve. So if you're not happy with the game, stop buying expansions for it. In the Age of the Internet, I don't even think it's unfair to ask the customer to do research on a product before buying into the core set, so even newbies aren't really off the hook on this one.

Jane isn't that complicated to play with but if wording on games causes this much confusion the game will feel broken out of the box. Plot decks are next are they being written right? Or should we wait for the errata on those too?


There will almost certainly be issues with the LT plot decks that call for errata, or at least FAQage. If you want to buy them just for the minis, you could do that and ignore the plot decks. Or you could wait a few months and see how bad things get on the forums before deciding if the LTs are really worth it.
Your not entirely wrong. Or they can release well writin material. Yea I like that better.

In a lot of ways this game is starting to feel rewritten. Instead of simply improving a rule or a balance tweak some game machanics are becoming unnessarly more complicated like "movement" for example. If they keep doing this the game simply won't play right out of the box!

There is a lot of well written game rules out there so i know it can be done! If a game is this poorly written then it doesn't need more and more errata it needs a NEW rule book that makes more since. Even if said rule books (because I'm pretty sure it won't stop at 2.1) were made atleast you'll feel like the game is being actually updated instead of the ever web searching you'll need to keep doing. Doesn't matter if new rule books started at 2.1 and ended at 2.9 this is the better way to update the game.

Edited by Silverhelm, 09 November 2013 - 01:32 PM.


#29 rfisha

rfisha

    Member

  • Members
  • 232 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 04:24 PM

Another thing to add is don't hesitate to put house rules in place.  Ultimately the game is about fun and if there is a gap in the rules or rule that doesn't fit your group, just change it.  I guarantee play testers haven't been through all the scenarios in the game and broken rules will come up.  It is just like a software, there will always be bugs.

 

Who cares if it is an official ruling with FFG - play with makes sense and provides the best balance with your group.  I suggest rather than always having the need to have an official rule, just play with what makes sense to your group.  After a few games it will work out.



#30 Robin

Robin

    Member

  • Members
  • 694 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 05:29 PM

House rules can be worse than the official rules, however.
And "making sense" is so subjective that it can actually be nonsensical.
But, putting those caveats aside, house ruling can be interesting.
For an example, one could transform Descent into a game of chess with space marines breeding cattle as in Agricola.
I am quite sure that some players would consider such adaptations as "logical" and an improvement to the game.
That is the bright side of freedom.

Now, of course, the challenge of trying to do the best of the system rather than changing it after one's whims would be lost.
But who cares.
I am personally thinking of trying the map tiles as Frisbee missiles, as I am convinced that the real intention of Descent is to be an outside game.
An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is an adventure wrongly considered.
G. K. Chesterton

#31 C2K

C2K

    Member

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 06:19 PM

I fail to see what is so complicated about this game.  Sure, there are a few strange interactions that should be clarified and the FAQ has officially ruled on those interactions.  However, I think people are grasping at straws in regards to a few things about this game's mechanics.  For the most part, movement and the move action are defined well enough for the game to function.  If there was ever anyone I knew that would try to warp those rules into their own context, I would not feel comfortable playing the game with that person.  I find this similar to miniature wargame scenarios where your opponent claims they have line of sight to a target because their is a small crack in a building. 

 

I play this game in with a group of friends, and I have played quite a few times at conventions with complete strangers, and those games have never had the problems being presented here.  Leave the rules lawyering to DnD and just have fun playing Descent.  ;)


  • rfisha likes this

#32 No Hero

No Hero

    Member

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 06:34 PM

House rules can be worse than the official rules, however.
And "making sense" is so subjective that it can actually be nonsensical.
But, putting those caveats aside, house ruling can be interesting.
For an example, one could transform Descent into a game of chess with space marines breeding cattle as in Agricola.
I am quite sure that some players would consider such adaptations as "logical" and an improvement to the game.
That is the bright side of freedom.

Now, of course, the challenge of trying to do the best of the system rather than changing it after one's whims would be lost.
But who cares.
I am personally thinking of trying the map tiles as Frisbee missiles, as I am convinced that the real intention of Descent is to be an outside game.

 

Ah, sarcasm. Always a great way to feel clever without actually having to think of a point to add to an argument.

I'm sure you are smart enough to se the differences between trying to play Descent Agricola Freesbee 40k and trying to make its own movement rules easy to understand and internally consistent.

 

I play this game in with a group of friends, and I have played quite a few times at conventions with complete strangers, and those games have never had the problems being presented here.  Leave the rules lawyering to DnD and just have fun playing Descent.  ;)

Descent is great fun, but that is different from saying that it is a well-written rulebook. Rules lawyering becomes necessary because there's so many fallacies, so many things left unsaid. House-ruling on the fly and letting the argument drop is certainly the best solution... But it still would have been better if it wasn't necessary.


  • rfisha likes this

#33 Light Bright

Light Bright

    Member

  • Members
  • 91 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 11:49 PM

I'm in college and play with friends, we are new and argue over the flimsy wording of this game. We took Robins advise and played frisbee with it and now we enjoy the game thank you Robin.
  • rfisha likes this

#34 rfisha

rfisha

    Member

  • Members
  • 232 posts

Posted 10 November 2013 - 12:12 AM

 

House rules can be worse than the official rules, however.
And "making sense" is so subjective that it can actually be nonsensical.
But, putting those caveats aside, house ruling can be interesting.
For an example, one could transform Descent into a game of chess with space marines breeding cattle as in Agricola.
I am quite sure that some players would consider such adaptations as "logical" and an improvement to the game.
That is the bright side of freedom.

Now, of course, the challenge of trying to do the best of the system rather than changing it after one's whims would be lost.
But who cares.
I am personally thinking of trying the map tiles as Frisbee missiles, as I am convinced that the real intention of Descent is to be an outside game.

 

Ah, sarcasm. Always a great way to feel clever without actually having to think of a point to add to an argument.

I'm sure you are smart enough to se the differences between trying to play Descent Agricola Freesbee 40k and trying to make its own movement rules easy to understand and internally consistent.

 

I play this game in with a group of friends, and I have played quite a few times at conventions with complete strangers, and those games have never had the problems being presented here.  Leave the rules lawyering to DnD and just have fun playing Descent.  ;)

Descent is great fun, but that is different from saying that it is a well-written rulebook. Rules lawyering becomes necessary because there's so many fallacies, so many things left unsaid. House-ruling on the fly and letting the argument drop is certainly the best solution... But it still would have been better if it wasn't necessary.

 

 + 1 to both those points, and that is obviously where I was coming from. Board games are a bit like software in a way - there is only so much play testing that can be done and 'bugs' are sure to surface. I play Talisman from FFG and even after the fourth version there are still some really bad design decisions in the game. Awesome game otherwise - just iron out the wrinkles with a few agreed house rules and makes the game so much more entertaining.  Designers don't always get it right for everyone, as you can see with the LOS and movement rules. I personally like them, but I can definitely understand why they are criticized so heavily.

 

We haven't needed to put any house rules in place at the moment, but we found out we haven't been playing the revive heroes rule properly (we have been playing you cannot heal a character unless they have been revived) and we play random heroes.  Our current campaign is 4-3 with two games coming right to the wire and we have enjoyed playing the game so far.



#35 Silverhelm

Silverhelm

    Member

  • Members
  • 222 posts

Posted 10 November 2013 - 12:14 AM

I fail to see what is so complicated about this game.  Sure, there are a few strange interactions that should be clarified and the FAQ has officially ruled on those interactions.  However, I think people are grasping at straws in regards to a few things about this game's mechanics.  For the most part, movement and the move action are defined well enough for the game to function.  If there was ever anyone I knew that would try to warp those rules into their own context, I would not feel comfortable playing the game with that person.  I find this similar to miniature wargame scenarios where your opponent claims they have line of sight to a target because their is a small crack in a building. 
 
I play this game in with a group of friends, and I have played quite a few times at conventions with complete strangers, and those games have never had the problems being presented here.  Leave the rules lawyering to DnD and just have fun playing Descent.  ;)


And I agree but apparently a lot of people do have a problem or there wouldn't be so much "errata on the fly". Errata doesn't change much for me but errata is created for those who want changes. If someone don't understand how something is written then errata creation begins, if someone is having a balance issue with something more changes. They have enough data to make a new freaking rule book! They can even add a section for each expansion and plot decks...all I want is the errata in my hand ill use what I want I don't need anybody to tell me that lmao!

And Robin we play are game on a table outside so it is a outdoor game..

#36 Robin

Robin

    Member

  • Members
  • 694 posts

Posted 10 November 2013 - 01:50 AM

Thanks for having noticed that I was just having fun writing my post.
I don't think that I am smart.
I certainly don't say that the rulebook is an easy read.
But I do notice that most of house rules are just "gruge" rules and hardly have anything to do with good design.
Descent is far from perfection, but it is not the disaster that some people try to convince others that it is.

Edited by Robin, 10 November 2013 - 02:34 AM.

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

#37 No Hero

No Hero

    Member

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 10 November 2013 - 04:16 AM

Yeah, sorry about that but sarcasm always rubs the wrong way on the internet. Lack of visual clues, all that.



#38 Robin

Robin

    Member

  • Members
  • 694 posts

Posted 10 November 2013 - 06:03 AM

Yeah, sorry about that but sarcasm always rubs the wrong way on the internet. Lack of visual clues, all that.

Forum/chat/email communication can often turn bad, because of the absence of body language, of  the"absolute memory" (you can dig in the past words permanently inscribed and inject them into the more recent arguments - which does not occur in a normal conversation), the immediacy of answering, etc.

 

Now, I must admit that my background is wargaming and that - contrary to RPG and other looser gaming environements - wargamers usually shun house rules.

That is due to the need of a common basis of rules for competitive playing.

It also can be linked to the fact that wargamers facing a tactical challenge like to do the best of what they have at their disposal, rather than change the conditions of the problem to make it easier to solve.

But that said, there exist heated debates and flamewars about the level of "historical accuracy" of rules even among that gaming community - with poor results, as one's idea of "reality" and "logics" is much more subjective than one usually admit.


Edited by Robin, 10 November 2013 - 06:12 AM.

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

#39 No Hero

No Hero

    Member

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 10 November 2013 - 06:31 AM

What do you mean by "historical accuracy", you mean resemblance to actual historical data? As in, you play historical tactical wargaming? I don't have any experience of that, in my area guys mostly play GW games

 

I like your problem analogy, because it fits perfectly. One thing is trying to solve a problem with the data you have at your disposal, like you say, I can respect that. But when the presentation of the problem is in poor form and in part contraddicts itself, it's another issue altogether.

 

I try to house rule as little as I can as well, but our hosue rules for this game are less "I don't like this so I'll change it!" and more "This is unclear/unstated, so either I rule it out now or we stop for 5 minutes (AGAIN) while I search for a FAQ, and if we are unlucky the issue remains and the game breaks"



#40 Robin

Robin

    Member

  • Members
  • 694 posts

Posted 10 November 2013 - 08:53 AM

Yes. I am a lot in historical wargaming (Advanced Squad Leader).
Up to now, I haven't needed to house rule a problematic aspect of the Descent system, as the FAQ or FFG direct answers have clarified things enough.
But I definitely would house rule an aspect if I don't find an answer to a dilemma, until a clarification is found.
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