Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Thundercles

  1. Edited out stupidity on my part. Awesome.
  2. Big Remy said: Radical suggestion: Now that this rulebook is out, is anyone interested in working with me on going through it, finding all the FAQ/errata worthy stuff to report to them? I have the full version of adobe, so its not problem for me to add comment boxes in the places where we need/want thing clarified and then we could always send that to FFG and see if they can at least make an updated rulebook with the fixes available as a pdf for download. Big Remy said: Radical suggestion: Now that this rulebook is out, is anyone interested in working with me on going through it, finding all the FAQ/errata worthy stuff to report to them? I have the full version of adobe, so its not problem for me to add comment boxes in the places where we need/want thing clarified and then we could always send that to FFG and see if they can at least make an updated rulebook with the fixes available as a pdf for download. Current List I've noticed: Page 8: "each hero’s conquest value is reduced by 1, to a minimum of 0." - Should be a minimum of 1 as per KW's answer. Page 8: "for every full 25 conquest tokens the heroes’ total is above the overlord’s total, the overlord’s conquest value is increased by 1." - It's each hero's conquest value that is increased, not the overlord's. The overlord doesn't have a conquest value as such. Page 24: "If the anchor is raised, it is automatically flipped to its raised side. If the anchor is lowered, the hero tries to catch the anchor on the sea bottom." The if conditions are swapped: if...raised should be if...lowered, and vice versa.
  3. Antistone said: We should disguise random excerpts from the basic rulebooks as errata and see how you react. If you hadn't noticed already, my memory is pretty terrible . You'd probably get me every time, hahahahaha.
  4. Reactions... Page 6 is all bold. Page 8: "Overloard" typo. Also, what happens if the Heroes' "Home Port" is razed? Do they have to move the home port to another city before they can use the buildings in dungeons? Nanok Nerf: Doesn't make sense. He goes from being quite powerful to almost a liability. His problem wasn't that he was overpowered, it was that he didn't scale properly during the campaign (too strong early on, adequate at high levels). Then again, playing him just got very interesting, and keeping him in armor is going to require judicious skill and item choices. Runewitch Astarra's nerf still weirds me out. Is there anyone who's used her and can attest to her being fine/overpowered/sucky with the nerf active? Page 12 is all bold. Page 12-14: Begin at X level rules don't make sense: why doesn't the OL get to spend conquest while the heroes train? Am I just looking for an explicit reference that is already implied? Page 15 is all bold. Heroes aren't allowed to visit after a dungeon fleeing...but no such exception is listed for attacking lieutenants. Sharks are awesome, infinitely respawning death machines. Treachery has been removed from Lt. Encounters entirely, because water-based encounters have many added OL tools...Are there any land-based Lt's? Encountering an Lt. in a landlocked location and suddenly being on water is pretty weird. So if heroes still permadie in encounters, where are the glyphs on an Island map? They can't be on the revenge itself.... Page 17: Flee by moving off the edge of the map. Can you use telekinesis/knockback to force figures off the edge of the map? Page 21: Heroes with Soar don't die if you flee an island...so can heroes have soar now? Or is that just a catch-all in case heroes are somehow given soar later? Page 22 is all bold. Page 24 "If the anchor is raised, it is automatically flipped to its raised side. If the anchor is lowered, the hero tries to catch the anchor on the sea bottom." I think the first raised should be "lowered" instead. I think the second sentence is talking about raised anchors. I think the copy editor is having some difficulties. page 26 is all bold. If cannons explode, are they destroyed? Looks like no. Page 28 is all bold. Page 33: All bold again? Feat cards get tossed for the final battle, offical rulebook-like. Searching a Barrel allows for a Trap - Chest card....does a successful Treasure (treat Barrel as Chest) let you play a second one? I'm leaning no, on the concept that the Barrel drops treasure like a chest, but isn't actually supposed to be a new chest open. Same concept with Bone Heaps and Sarcophagi, but one could easily argue the opposite (2nd trap opportunity). Deep water drowns you hella fast. Deep water is like Nanok's Achilles' heel...or would be if he weren't nerfed so hard. Boulders are treated as walls! Take that Flyers/Acrobats/Stupid "obstacle" problems! They haven't fixed the problem with the old cards referring to obstacles and the new list ignoring that nomenclature entirely. They should really fix that glaring inconsistency. Blast is now optional, along with Bolt and Breath...so Ironskin doesn't make Blast runes/Sorcerers useless. Does Command work on Constrict? No, constrict is not an attack: "instead of attacking". Dark Prayer subtle change: Surges rolled = +1 range, +1 damage. Surges spent = +1 threat. This could mean that Fear doesn't prevent Dark Prayer's damage, just its threat generation. Then again, surges spent on fear "can't be used" for another purpose; if it had said "can't be spent" I'd have a better argument. Avatars ignore Ghost and Ironskin. Excellent. Leap update incorporates FAQ ruling: was that in Tomb of Ice? Don't remember..... Flying change: "A flying figure may end its turn in a space containing an obstacle that inflicts damage without suffering damage or effects from that obstacle." Used to just be move through, end turn is nice. This doesn't affect Aura, Flying creatures get full damage still...Also, heroes not having soar conflicts with page 21. The ridiculous Sorcery vs Ironskin argument didn't get represented (Figures with Ironskin negate sorcery for the entire attack, protecting everyone included in the attack). Soar no longer grants "ignore terrain" explicitly, although it implies that terrain is ignored as long as the figure isn't swooping. It's kind of a stretch from the RAW though. "heroes cannot have soar" error in the Sorcery entry is back. Someone forgot to check/fix the errata for the RtL book before copying it verbatim. Page 44 is all bold. Dude, copy editor, step up. Mata and Kata powerup: hilariously awesome.
  5. http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=971 A time to read...
  6. Diary display's a little broken in firefox 3 right now....The after-you-post page is fine, but accessing the list of diary entries is basically broken and it's, uh, displaying your code in a debug script. Also, none of the diary entry titles seem to link to the right place: I assume it's the same bug. In the interest of your server's and users' security, you should go ahead and scrutinize input (like description fields) very fiercely. Letting users post raw text that can be interpreted by the browser (i.e. html tags, javascript hello world buttons ) to any text input is bad. Gonna try using the system later, but I can't think of any additions I'd make off the top of my head. Good ideas so far, keep it up. dude, theasaris, heroes who die in encounters are taken off the map until the end of the encounter. It's in the RtL rules.
  7. Yes to all three, actually. For number 3, it says on the card that you count Range and LoS as if you were attacking from an adjacent square.
  8. Quick note on #2: You can't a Crushing Block trap adjacent to a Pit space in Vanilla Descent. It's against the rules. You can, however, play a Spiked Pit trap card on a hero after you move them with Crushing Block. This is because the list of "Obstacles" in the original version of the game includes Pit tokens.
  9. Played it once: it took one of the players two turns to hit level 8 (level 10 wins). Since you fight so many more monsters per turn, you outstrip other player's abilities to backstab the hell out of you pretty quickly.
  10. Another small quibble....The number of players is 2-5, because the Overlord is a player. I must agree with Oboewan that to call the Overlord a "game master" is to largely miss the point of the game. Also, since you didn't mention some missions getting ridiculously hard, I would theorize that you didn't play Quest 7 or missed a rule somewhere (I'm guilty of both). It also sounds like you're basing the difficulty of the game on the first few introductory quests, which would be pretty silly. However, the overall assessment is fair; you touch on most of the important points, even if you missed the lack of scaling of difficulty based on player count (this is why all the missions were so "easy"). Tips: -If you're doing voiceover work, take the time to edit out any speaking mistakes. I mean, Steve makes several tense errors (and has a tentative grasp on pluralization) and Michaela stutters a couple times; if you have the time to make fancy logos and videos, you have time to do the audio in chunks as well as several takes. -Don't change the nomenclature the game uses without mentioning the original names. It makes you look ignorant ("game master", "village", etc.) -For most games, especially FFG's games, especially Descent, the expansions are such an important part of the game that failing to mention them leads to an impression that the problems you discovered have gone largely unaddressed by the manufacturer. The "Players always winning" thing, for example, was (brutally) fixed in the first expansion. The omission is especially glaring given the repeated suggestions to customize the game in order to make it better. I did like the extended shots of the components in action, the emphasis on showing the unboxed game, and review's underlying structure. Good luck with your video reviews.
  11. Parathion said: Corbon said: But one of the reasons that english is the international technical language of choice is because it is capable of extreme degrees of precision. Wow, I always thought English was used throughout a major part of the world as well as in science and technology because of the extension of the British Commonwealth, coupled with the allied victory in WW2 in combination with the dominating position of the US in politics and economy in the last decades (which saw the major part of the globalisation process as well). It never occurred to me that it could be a superior quality of the language itself - thanks for enlightening me! Man I gotta jump in here. English can be painfully precise as well as annoyingly vague, and its spread is, in fact largely due to English-speaking country supremacism. In this case, Corbon sounds like he's done more research, but you'd really have to go and look it up to corroborate his claim. Meanwhile, paration, you've been arguing from the vox populi standpoint for most of this thread: the trouble with "common usage" and "common knowledge" is that most people are usually wrong (incidentally, people saying the wrong thing and spreading the wrong knowledge are two ways languages evolve). Thus, parathion, instead of sarcasm, may I suggest references to credible sources? Meanwhile, I gotta go with Remy. There's been no indication that threat per turn = #heroes x current turn#, and it doesn't take long to realize that encounters would be hilariously broken in Copper if this were indeed the threat formula.
  12. Yeah, tentacles sound like props, or possibly the first figures ever to not block movement. In any case, if they are props, are there special rules for attacking props? shnar said: Tentacles are not, in the classic sense, figures/models. They are cardboard counters, similar to RtL's peasants. What that means though to LOS and Movement, I don't know, since I do not have the rulebook yet Come on Sally! Get that marketing department to publish the PDF!!! -shnar Villagers are figures, even if they're not actually made out of plastic. All rules that apply to figures in general apply to Villagers. In this case, I was using the word "figures" to refer to the creatures that populate the game: the precedent for using the word "figures" in this way comes from the rules for the Boulder prop.
  13. This rule would imply that tentacles are not figures....
  14. honestly, the only time it matters is when flying monsters or trees are involved (Fog LoS rules are explicit). If Trees (and thus, LoS-blocking terrain) block LoS going into them, then it basically breaks outdoor encounters (invincible heroes) ; I think any decision on the subject should stem from there.
  15. Painter said: I don't fully agree with this last post. I think civility is important, but consumers have a right to express frustration. The Compendium is full of errors, and has been out for months and months, without a word from FFG. I have been a loyal purchaser of Descent and other products, and I think it's OK to voice frustration. I think it would reflect more poorly on FFG to take the position described: "What? You are upset by the flaws in the product? You want an FAQ so you can make use of this item you paid money for? Don't forget to say PLEASE!" I would hope that FFG would view this list as a resource for producing the FAQ, and that's one of the reasons I keep posting here. I think the mere fact of posting shows some faith in the company that the posting will matter in some way. Expressing frustration doesn't have to be done in an aggressive or confrontational manner. In the past, frustration has been expressed successfully by compiling error/question lists and sending them in (which resulted in FAQ's and FAQ updates), not by attempting to shame Kevin or FFG with a Challenge.
  16. darkkami said: Just curious. Did Kevin ever get back to you? I have been asking nicely privately with my FFG contacts and now I call them out publicly. Why are you not supporting your creations? You used to do this all the time FFG, so why did you stop? Was it because now you have a controlled support that you can count on to buy the new hot product before moving on to the next? I think that number can safely be assumed to be around 2,000 because that is how many War of the Ring collectors copies are being made. I cannot believe I am doing this! I used to consider myself one of the largest FFG and Blizzard fans (having contacts with both) and now both companies have taken the wrong turn down the path of greed over the path of passion. If I am wrong FFG then show your pride by proving me wrong. So far I have been told to keep quiet and that is all. Kevin do you still have the same passion for Descent that you did when you made journeys into the dark? It would seriously calm my concerns if you would just defend yourself. Why are there so many errors in the quest compendium? Are you really going to just keep quiet as a fan, that has submitted tons of material for FFG games since Runebound first edition, calls you out. Of course you are. Why defend yourself and risk saying something you will regret when you can just let the other fanboys handle the challenger for you, as the errors still go unfixed and they still continue to buy the products. By the way I liked how when Kevin posted in here how everyone thanked him instead of question him. Maybe this post went to far, but I am angry. The store I found the compendium in, plastic wrapped the book so I could not read through it before buying it. After talking with the employee working their the next day he told me the manager did that because he had read about the issues in the forums and did not want people to read through it and not buy it thanks to glaring errors. Thanks Kevin. For the first time ever I feel ripped off by a company I have given many hours and dollars to. I will still buy Sea of Blood. I will be looking for errors. I expect it to be error free just to make up for the errors in the Quest Compendium. Want to live up to my challenge? Show me the passion you have by insuring Seas of Blood to be error free. I know you are a good person Kevin fight the corruption and do what is right. As consumers, we have a right to take our money elsewhere. That's it. Being able to do that empowers us a great deal; however, at no point are we entitled to, say, "call someone out" or post a 6-paragraph rant about consumer anger and expect any kind of response. The vendor/purchaser relationship is full of power imbalances, so it's very important to avoid losing any advantage. Respect for opinion brings with it an expectation of civility: failing that expectation naturally results in a loss of that respect, leaving "purchasing power" as the only method of communication. If Blizzard and FFG even bother speaking with their customers anymore, it's more a sign of patience (and consideration for that purchasing power) than anything else. There are many methods to communicate with a company in order to address problems with their practices and methodologies. Your post makes it harder to continue using the forums for that purpose. I, for one, do not have a personal connection to these game creators, so I must remain as civil as possible; this includes thanking Kevin or any of the FFG staff when they take time out of their schedules to cater to the officially designated open soapbox. It's called positive reinforcement, and companies use it all the time when dealing with consumers like us. If I had some kind of direct connection (and experience, time, etc.) I would draw up a presentation to attempt to demonstrate my views, or possibly a business model proposal. However, even if I just called them up like a buddy, I would still tread lightly when attempting to tell them how to do their jobs. I think I'm getting a little sidetracked here. Is there a current, comprehensive list of the errors in the compendium?
  17. James McMurray said: From the FAQ: Empty Spaces Chests, Glyphs, Potions, Coin Piles, and Rune Keys do not count as empty spaces for the purposes of playing traps. They do not block line of sight, and figures may move through as normal. That's one of those "debatable" FAQ rulings, since it allows the OL to make those tokens inaccessible using Crushing Block. Because of Crushing Block, "Empty for traps" and "Empty for ending movement" cannot be the same.
  18. I don't know if you're allowed to use leap after attacking on your turn. I mean, if you leap but don't roll, it makes sense that you should be able to attack after landing, but it seems like attack should negate leap.
  19. i) cursed items are only special in that they inflict curse tokens. They do not differ in any other way from normal treasure. I don't know what the encounter actually says, but you don't need to consider cursed items when seeing which item or items get stolen. ia) cursed items are no different from other treasure and do not require special consideration. ib) no. You can't lose curse tokens by losing cursed items. ii) Dark Relics cannot be dropped or unequipped. Any other mechanism that could cause item loss can cause a hero to lose a Dark Relic. Finally, please, this thread is not the place to bring random questions you may have. Please post them to the forums if you desire answers. As Parathion demonstrates, this thread is ostensibly for posting official answers from FFG.
  20. So, no OL would ever be so silly as to do this, but if a Boulder moves into a space containing a Soaring creature, what happens?
  21. Another interesting (to me, anyways) part of this situation is that, after the Feat card resolves, the attack is once again ruled either Successful or Missed. Basically, its Success "refreshes". However, this is not true of the Crushing Blow card, whose resolution encompasses both the change in the result of the attack's "Success" and the resolution of the attack itself. Thus, while Crushing Blow can clearly be played after the Feat in question (anyone catch its name?), playing the Feat after Crushing Blow is nonsensical. Playing the Feat to interrupt Crushing Blow should still make sense, however. Crushing Blow can't interrupt the Feat, since (I believe) CB is not an interrupting card, but Feats are by their nature special interrupting cards. In a previous interrupting case, if the target is removed (kill the hero targeted by Dark Charm), the OL Card fizzles, but that's a particular case for two reasons: one, the card's effect is already completely resolved by the time you interrupt what is essentially its aftereffect, and two, the situation here is a removal of a trigger. I'm still on the side of submitting the question for official answering, especially since the situation manages to be subtly unprecedented.
  22. In your list of changes for power potions, you mention that a hero might drink several power potions in a single turn (presumably to boost multiple attacks). Do power potion tokens still get removed from your hero sheet when you drink another potion of any type?
  23. The funny part is that the rules seem to be attempting to follow the KISS principle (no, not the "manufacture a rock band with face paint for fun and profit" one). Every new simplification just serves to obfuscate the rules further.
  • Create New...