Jump to content

BotanyGuy

Members
  • Content Count

    103
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About BotanyGuy

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Oxford, Ohio, United States
  1. Co-op. We already have many PvP SW games out there.
  2. Stenun said: I really hope they keep the co-op nature of the game. I already own 4 different competitive Star Wars card games, I don't need a fifth. Second. Honestly, the co-op play of LoTR has made it one of the games I consistently play. Yes, this is mainly because I don't have any friends that are into LCG-type games (I buy most games in my game group), but because I can play solo, I find I'm playing the heck out of LoTR. Call of Cthulu LCG, though, has been set aside. Indeed, I stopped buying cards a while ago precisely for this reason. I think if SW switched to competitive, I would be less inclined to buy it. I actually enjoyed the game that was demoed at Gencon! Definitely not a very meaty bone they threw us. I do wonder the reason for the redesign. Was this a marketing decision or an actual decision based on game quality. Because honestly, I like the game I played before!
  3. Please let it be soon...although anyone willing to make some predictions?
  4. I've heard a number of complaints or disappointments about the fact that this game will be set in the "Terrinoth Universe," and I'm having a hard time understanding what the big deal is. Of course, I'm not familiar with the original, so I don't have a fondness for the original characters and/or story backdrop; however, I just don't see this as being such a big retheme. From what I can tell, the original had as much of a generic fantasy theme as it gets, and regardless of what the characters are named/illustrated/sculpted like, there's still the generic fighter, mage, etc. that explores a dungeon with a dragon and monsters in it. Also, I cannot see how a retheme will necessarily change gameplay, as the specific fantasy theme isn't important for this type of game. When Runebound came out, the "theme" was described in a few paragraphs at the beginning of the rulebook...there was no deep story-line, and the characters, apart from name and artwork, were mostly a stock fantasy cast. At worst, I think what we'll get here is something like Drakon, where Descent miniatures ("characters") are used, but the mechanics and gameplay have nothing to do with Terrinoth. I do feel that this is a somewhat cheesy marketing strategy by FFG to stamp the Terrinoth brand on all their fantasy games as well as "reuse" miniatures without having to reinvent the wheel. But that's business...I don't really fault them for that. Besides, like I mentioned, the Terrinoth setting of this game seems rather loose and I suspect no-one will care when they are actually playing the game. The one thing I would love to see, however, is that FFG NOT use the same 12 basic heroes in vanilla Runebound over and over and over again. Okay, the cross over with Runebound and Descent seemed reasonable. But honestly, I would have liked to have seen a little more variety in Runewars. And, boy, it will just bite if I see Mordrog and Mad Carthos in this DungeonQuest game! Honestly, though I love the "Terrinoth" games, I have no personal love or fondness for any of these characters! The good news is based on the posted illustrations, this is not going to happen. My question I would leave with you all (especially those familiar with the original game) is, what exactly is lost by the Terrinoth retheme of DungeonQuest?
  5. simpatikool said: For a Base coat, did you all use a primer? Like you would on say a metal miniature of the Warmachine/Warhammer ilk? Well, I'd LOVE to have some the Gamesworkshop paints etc, but I'm just too cheap. To prime the figures, I slightly thinned glue (elmer's glue) with black paint added. Once it dries it forms a very nice surface for the paint to adhere too (and it's not sticky at all.) I usually just use acrylics for painting and then I actually seal with, you guessed it, more glue (add some black, not a lot, to add a little more depth to the figures, as it fills in the cracks and crevices nicely). Again, once dry, the figures are not sticky, but they aren't "glossy" either.
  6. Wow, I got to play FoD again after a long break...well over a year. I forget what such a great game this is. I played the hunters (usually I played Drac) and it was an intense search from the get go. We were playing against a non-confrontational Drac who kept slipping from our grasp. Unfortunately, I had to leave midway through the game and abandon the hunters to their fate.
  7. I painted my War of the Ring units...all 200+ of them. I imagine it will be a similar scale for Runewars. This took me a little over a year of on/off painting in the evenings to complete. One thing that helps when it comes to painting "armies" is that you can usually work on all units of a particular type at one time, since they all have the same color scheme. For example, painting 36 orcs wasn't too hard since I basically used the same painting strategy on each. Tedious, but not difficult. On the other hand, I started painting my Runebound heroes years ago and only got through half of them before moving on. They are much more time consuming per unit, since there's a lot more detail to each hero. Of course, these same heroes will pop up again in Runewars (I will have at least 3 minis of each, given their appearance Descent, Runebound, and Runewars.) So painting holds a huge appeal to me, but I'm more concerned about finishing those heroes than for the 150+ army/neutral units!
  8. Why not quest markers like the ones in WOW:TAG with images of the players on them? That way, everyone knows where their quest targets are...even Sauron. I mean, think of poor Sauron...does he not have to keep track of quests and where they might be so that he knows where he should focus his efforts?
  9. This is par for the course for FFG. They do support their customers very well.
  10. This does NOT look like a Runebound clone...or a WOW:TAG clone...or a Talisman clone. The board does look a little like the I.C.E. hobbit board in that there is a map with little circles on it representing sites. But it looks and sounds pretty original in most respects.
  11. Okay, the game DOES look sweet despite the fact that there aren't any hobbit characters (to play as or kill!) At least the other major races are represented!
  12. Okay, I'm really excited to finally get some info on the game. And I know I'll probably get it despite the price tag. But I am a bit disappointed there isn't a hobbit playable character!
  13. Thanks for the quick response! I admit as I searched the rules this slipped by me. I will need to highlight the ref in the rulebook (thanks for pointing me in the right direction). Unfortunately, I interepreted it incorrectly for our first few games. Not again....
  14. I was assuming that the "main player" was equivalent with the "active player"; that is, you are only considered the "main player" when it is actually your turn. As such, some of the alien powers would only work when you are on offense (you are the active player) and not defense. As such, there is only ever one "main player." However, one of the variants (I forget which), references "main players", suggesting there can be more than one main player at once. Is it possible we made a mistake and a main player is anyone involved in combat that is not an ally? That is, both the offensive player and defensive player are "main players." Any help to clarify this is appreciated, as so many of the alien powers only work when you are the "main player."
  15. Thanks for the response. Funny thing is, our first game someone WAS the miser and didn't realize he needed to reveal immediately. Is this little piece of info really not in the rulebook? I guess it was supposed to be apparent that you reveal all aliens at the start. Oh well, we know now.
×
×
  • Create New...