Jump to content

Sausageman

Members
  • Content Count

    354
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sausageman

  1. This assumes you are free of fatigue at the time. With nigh on every skill costing fatigue now, I'd suggest that was pretty unlikely.
  2. hooliganj said: 1. D2 is a whole new game. A list of changes from D1 would be too extensive. Extensive, yes, but they aren't all as extensive as they might first appear. The biggest change, for me, is that quests now have an actual objective on BOTH sides, rather than the heroes attempting to kill X and the Overlord attempting to stop them (which, in Road to Legend equated to throwing so much stuff at them that they eventually bottled it and ran). Many of these quests have a 'race like' feel to them now too, in so much as 'Do X before Overlord does Y'. This has meant that the RADICALLY different 'death' mechanic (1eds teleport to town and heal up completely vs 2eds fall unconscious where you stood and you or another gets you up, generally with no where near full health) is actually there to slow heroes down rather than net the Overlord a tangible benefit. Defense changing from a static amount to a dice roll feels like a big change, but damage output has been reduced substantially with it, so it sorta evens out. On that note, there are no black dice any more - dice purely come from the weapon you use now (a shame, I feel). Oh, and surge abilities can only be used once per roll now. They have dramatically reduced the amount of effects out there now too. Stuff like 'burn', 'daze', 'bleed' etc are, in general, abilities that monsters have now rather than generic effects. There are only four generic effects that remain - poison, immobilise, disease and stun. This is a bonus I'd say, because there was a ludicrous amount of counter before… One of the other significant changes is with the Overlords deck. Gone is the 60ish card DECK of cards, and it's instead been replaced with 15 far more specific cards (with additional ones you can buy with XP to add, if playing the campaign). This means playing the overlord could get a little repetitive for some (though monster choices are far better, which may appease). And lastly, there's a campaign, and a good one, in the box, ready to go. It's not as in depth as Road to Legend was (I still hope a future expansion fleshes it out further), but it's FAR better than the weak 1ed campaign rules from the base set. As others have said, there are numerous other changes, but these are the ones that contribute the most in terms of making it feel new. IME.
  3. Triu said: No matter how well you right a rule, someone will find an unexpected way to parse it. Here is my proposed addition / clarification to the rules: If there is any disagreement about a rule, or its application in a given situation, each player states their interpretation. All players then roll the blue die, and the dispute is resolved according to the player with the highest number. If there is a tie, those players reroll -- as often as needed -- to break it. In the end there can be only one. That ruling stands for the remainder of the play session. The game's designer adds +6 to their first roll. I'm not actually sure if you're being serious here…We always work on the 'majority rule' theory. Also, we discuss possible rules queries before we even start (ones that we've become aware of through forum reading, for example). We've always found that it doesn't matter if we play a rule wrong, as long as everyone is in agreement with it.
  4. Steve-O said: wootersl said: I have a feeling we'll see an errata that makes using a potion an action. I'm sure they did it originally to let heroes heal without wasting an action and being at a disadvantage, but did not take into account the way players would find to abuse the system. But, agreed, it's all correct. Considering they ran into this exact same problem in first edition, and ended up needing to errata potions to be "one [of each type] per turn," I'm a little bit surprised that they made the same mistake again in second edition, particularly in regards to Stamina potions. That alone would lead me to believe they intentionally changed it back in second edition, although it still sounds like it's as broken as it ever was. Perhaps they were thinking the new treasure rules would limit the number of stamina potions that were likely to be floating around in any given quest. So heroes can use this sort of (admitedly broken) tactic, but hopefully not all the time. I won't take any position on the passing rules questions just yet, but I'm certainly interested to see how that discussion unfolds. Thats EXACTLY what I think happened. There's no way to buy potions, no way to get them any other way, the only way to get a potion now is through one of those search tokens - which are finite and one shot. If memory serves, there are only 3 stamina potions in the whole deck too, so AT WORST you'll be able to do the abusive move once per map. I honestly don't think there's a problem that needs fixing here.
  5. Skywalker said: esin said: New to adventure games and this game looks interesting, but between both this and BGGs boards there seems to be confusion on the rules. This is apparently supposed to be simplified from the first edition, yet there are rules set so that your line of sight can be blocked by the very target you're trying to hit? I'm not sure if I can coax my friends into playing something obtuse like that. Thats certainly the most uncharitable spin you can put on the matter. A more charitable spin may be that Descent has simple and quick LOS that leaves no room for doubt. This is excellent in a board game of this nature. Does it produce the most realistic result? Not in a few instances, but that is a small cost for the simple and clear mechanics you get. The above example is almost impossible too. As it's a corner to corner thing, if the only corner you can trace a line to is the 'back' one, then yes, the figure would block it's own LoS. However, the chances are, you'd be able to draw a line to one other corner. I can't even fathom one scenario where you can only see one corner of a square and it's a 'rear' one…
  6. Rico said: Double move + Dash is how you get your fat goblin out. Hold onto both Dash cards until the end run! On this subject, am I right in saying you can play multiple 'dash' cards on the same monster? Allowing them to move a ridiculous amount of squares?
  7. Steve-O said: KristoffStark said: I find it interesting that you don't consider Descent to be an "orgy of endless special abilities and powers," when that is exactly what the class cards seem like to me. Maybe there's just not enough volume for it to qualify as an orgy yet. I'm sure that will change as expansions start coming out. Agreed. It's a threesome, for sure. Bloody great fun, and I can't wait to experience it again, but I certainly wouldn't object to an orgy of class abilities and, more importantly to me, upgrade options for the Overlord (because, adding a card to a deck is frankly, really boring…)
  8. Antistone said: The game is played on a grid. I think it is extremely unreasonable to assume that anything smaller than a gridspace takes up space unless the rules clearly state that it does. Especially when you consider that you're dealing with actual physical pieces - they can't make the physical pieces wider than the squares they take up or else you won't be able to fit map pieces next to each other, and they can't make the black line infinitely thin or else players couldn't see it, so graphically the wall HAS to intrude at least a little ways into the space. They literally could not do it any other way. So that tells us nothing at all about their intent. I disagree completely. Mansions of Madness managed it just fine for starters.
  9. Terragen said: I disagree with your opinion stating that the black lines are "simply decorative". The rule book states clearly that any black border is impassable. We have been playing that you cannot go diagonally through these corners, because you can see there is black border covering the white lines. Taking the rules literally, we play this way. I came to the forum specifically to find an official answer to this. I can't remember how we played it, but I definitely agree with you. Looking at the doorways in the building tiles, you HAVE to assume those black walls extend into the tiles to prohibit diagonal movement. Ultimately, you're only talking a couple of movement points difference, so in practice it'll probably make little difference, but for colour, I definitely prefer to think that these walls block movement (and for that reason, I don't like moving/drawing LoS between diagonal blocking terrain).
  10. any2cards said: hooliganj said: any2cards said: Blood Apes 1x2 To truly recreate the feel of playing with Blood Apes: Every time you move the proxy model roll the brown defense die. If you roll 0 shields, tip the model on its side. You can try again if you want, or leave it tipped over and try to remember where it was standing. This is way too funny. The Blood Apes always reminded me of a surfer on a surf board. Maybe that is why they could never stand up on their own. We thought that too. Which is why we nicknamed them 'Silver(back) Surfers'…. Bad pun.
  11. any2cards said: I guess I just take a more draconian approach to protecting my games … you f**k something up, first I beat the sh*t out of you, and then I take your money to replace what you f**ked up. LOL. Even the nicest of my friends might feel a bit jipped if I demand 50 quid from them to replace a game when they f*cked up one card… I think it's safe to say, sleeves are just easier
  12. any2cards said: Thanks for sharing your insights. Before the game ever came out, and we were all just discussing the various previews, my biggest issue were the size of the maps, and the customizations for both heroes and overlord (classes, cards, and lack there of). I think you experienced some of the things I felt were going to happen. I am just not quite sure the replayability level of this game as of yet. It does, of course, open the door for expanding the game significantly. I think replayability isn't too bad. We've done half a campaign, and haven't seen two of the five Act 1 quests at all, and also only saw one of the interlude quests. At the very least, you can play the campaign twice without too much duplication. Then you have the monster groups which can completely change the feel of a level. I REALLY liked the way monsters were implemented now. FAR better. As for the size of the maps, they look small, but there's a lot of detail going on in them. The stories revolving around them are pretty cool, and because a quest is two encounters, you do have a larger map, only it's split into two parts Besides, when you hit the interlude, those maps are MASSIVE, and we found it quite daunting…
  13. ReNeilssance said: I did not, I'm afraid. I still might at some point, but I think the issue I'm going to have is pitching the high concept of the game to my friends. Saying 'who wants to play a game where you are cyberpunk thieves running a data heist on an advanced corporation' sells everyone on Infiltration for instance, but saying 'who wants to play a game where you are various heroic characters raiding a dungeon in a fantasy world' is, I think, not going to sell it over just playing with everyone's hand-crafted, much-beloved D&D characters, even though it is a different gaming experience. Am giving serious thought to your suggestion of Wiz-War instead though, have read up on it and it sounds brilliant. And so much cheaper! I wasn't a huge fan of Wiz-War. It was one of those nice theories, but the execution wasn't a patch on it. Shame, but I suspect nostalgia is playing a big part in it's success. As for pitching Descent, why not go for 'a dungeon bash game that we can finish in an hour or so' (campaign aside). If you're ever short on time, you'll get far more done than you would in a D&D game. And who knows, they may actually get hooked and what to play the campaign then (where they sort of craft their own characters. Sure, the customisation will never compete to an RPG, but it's a board game, it never will).
  14. fitsou said: First of all! No one can answer that? fitsou said: what do we do with those proof of purchase tokens??? Second i have only the 2nd edition is it worth it to buy the kit? No - the conversion kit allows you to use the plastic from the 1st edition. Unless you have a load of minitures you want to use to substitute those.
  15. My Descent 2 finally turned up just in time for a games weekend we had planned, so on Saturday we played for 12 or so hours straight (!) and finished up just entering act 2 (the interlude quest EASILY taking the lions share of the time). Now I've had some tangible experience with the game, rather than just theoretical stuff, I'd thought I'd share my experiences and impressions. First off - the new hero miniatures are really nice and very well detailed. Almost to the point where I'm a little concerned the older ones will look quite rubbish by comparison. Also, the new board sections look REALLY nice (and they have straight edges, unlike the old D1 versions. Thank the maker). I was initially slightly worried with the number of them, but having them all double sided really felt like there were a lot of tiles. This is a good thing. Ok, onto the campaign. The story in the campaign was far more pronounced now, which I liked. I also really quite liked the '2 encounters per quest' thing - meaning heroes that were kicked in early on stayed that way unless there was a healer to help out. Also, the goals in the quests were varied and FAR more interesting than just 'kill the dungeon leader'. Also a good thing. That being said, there were a few things I didn't much like, when compared to the Road to Legend campaign. Travel was simply an exercise in drawing cards. It never FELT like the party were travelling anywhere. I really liked the overland travel in RtL, using the map and venturing further away from the safety of your home City (or getting closer to exploring other cities). I hope something like this is further fleshed out in future expansions. And on the subject of towns, i didn't really like the assumed 'travel back to town at the end of each quest', and the forced selling of all search items. I played the Overlord in the campaign, and the overwhelming feeling I got was I was more of a competitive games master rather than a tangible foe. I liked the fact that I might be the Demon Lord or something in RtL, and that I had specific power ups or abilities that pertained to me. The overlord in this campaign was basically faceless, and only mentioned in flavour text. That definitely felt like it was missing. On the subject of the overlord, there really wasn't a lot of customisation available for your XP. In fact, I'd go as far to say that it was quite dull actually. Adding one card to your 15 card deck (or replacing, depending on your whim), with limited options to boot, thought that was an opportunity missed. The thing I thought I wouldn't like was the lack of levelling up monsters now (the copper, silver, gold, diamond thing) but I actually really liked the Act 1/Act 2 monster thing. With all monsters staying on an equal footing, it means that I was constantly trying different monsters to see how they played - that's a good thing. One real problem we seemed to have in the game were with attribute checks. While I didn't find that they played a MASSIVE part in the game, we were finding that, even test a 'solid' attribute of 3 or 4 regularly ended in a fail, and those poor guys that had attributes of 1 or 2 were near enough always doomed to fail. This made me wonder whether they should be 2 grey dice rather than black and grey (the black dice is EXTREMELY good/bad, depending on why you're rolling it ), or whether we'll see another hero action come out where they can concentrate to add 1 to an attribute for the next check, something like that. More often than not, those attribute tests simply meant tripping up or whatever, but the interlude quest we did required three successful attribute tests for the heroes to win it, and unless you're playing with a full group of four, you WILL be weak in at least one of those, meaning you're highly likely to lose the quest (through rotten luck rather than bad play). This was a shame. I very much appreciated the smaller scale of the maps. The interlude aside, we flew through the levels, rarely taking more than hour for any of them. If that. Oh, and I do miss treasure chests too. The search cards were 'ok', but there is nothing like the feeling of cracking open a chest and dishing out the spoils. While I didn't play a hero, I did feel that there weren't enough class abilities to keep them interesting. I'm hoping again that expansions fix this. All in all, for the most part, I'd say that Descent 2 is definitely improves over Descent 1, and I'm really hoping that a future expansion or two will fix or alleviate the small gripes I have with it. I'm curious to see what direction they go with these too, as, as soon as the conversion kit arrives, I doubt I'll EVER need new heroes or monsters, but those that only have D2 will likely be crying out for them.
  16. any2cards said: Ice Wyrm's could be particualrily bad. Swallow: If a hero is defeated by this monster, remove his hero token from the map and place it on this monster's base. The hero cannot be revived until the monster is defeated, at which point his hero token is placed in one of this monster's spaces. Oooof, that is nasty. Could lead to a situation where the heroes auto lose if it swallows all the heroes. Or is it limited to one hero like the previous version of swallow?
  17. any2cards said: Thank you so much for posting a picture of the sleve, card in sleve, etc. Gives me a better appreciation for the thickness, etc. I sleeve my cards for a few reasons. One, cards seem to have a thing for picking up little bits of dirt (especially CCGs - little black flecks that bug the sh*t out of me). Two, if playing on a flat surface with no covering (like a table), cards can be tricky to pick up. I have one friend who constantly uses his nails to resolve this, which completely f**ks the edges of cards. These two reasons alone would be enough, but it also protects cards against shuffling, and the dreaded drink spill… It costs me a little to sleeve all the cards, but it's a small price to pay for peace of mind…
  18. Unclechawie said: The really sad part is that to sleeve all the cards you need for packs of sleeves (smaller mini-american size). Unfortuantely, unless you have another game to use them on, 48 of the fourth pack go to waste. Makes me wonder if FFG did that on purpose to sell more sleeves. I know it's not a ton money but if you don't want to buy that 4th pcak, just unsleeve to of the condition cards and leave them in the box. Sadder is that, certainly in the UK, you can't get those mini American sleeves ANYWHERE. Starting to wish FFG just charged a few quid/dollars more and just added sleeves in with the game
  19. On the subject of weapons, has the Off-Hand bonus ability been ditched? I really liked the idea of dual wielding.
  20. Coldmoonrising said: On the other side, having multiples of the archetype could cause potential issues with shopping for gear, that's the only down side I see. Don't feel too bad. In first ed RtL campaigns, I always encouraged the group to diversify as much as possible to avoid multiple folks clamering for the same gear/skills/dice upgrades. I'll be VERY surprised if, in my campaign, we don't get one of each archetype - if for no other reason as to see what each brings to the table.
  21. Just to echo what others have said, these are two different beasts. I've roleplayed for years, and am currently playing a D&D 3.5 game. There are only the vaguest similarities between the two games (being character customisation and getting loot, and even then, D&D as an RPG has FAR more options in both). D&D takes far more effort to play, certainly as the GM, whereas Descent is essentially pick up and play. It's also significantly shorter - an RPG can span into years, Descent will be in the 20 hour range. They're Apples and Oranges really, and the two can co-exist fine. If you're interested and can afford it, then go for it. Just a warning though, Mansions of Madness it ain't - don't go into it expecting that and you won't be disappointed.
  22. Unclechawie said: Unclechawie said: Sausageman said: Unclechawie said: In regards to the sleeves, that should be fairly simple to figure out. I don't see any reason FFG would use different size cards from what is in the main game. So basically, you'll simply need 2 sleeves (ACT I and ACT II) of the appropriate size (don't remember off the top of my head) per monster type that was in the first edition (again, don't remember off the top of my head). Unless you are buying sleeves for the hero cards (oversized) that should do it. How many is that? And are there any smaller card sleeves needed? Since I don't have the 1st Edition game I had to rely on the information contained on the www.descentintothedark.com website. It shows 25 first edition monsters. Thus 50 sleeves. The monster cards from the 2nd Edition are "Bridge-sized" per the 2nd Edition rulebook. So overall, you'll need: 152 Small Sleeves (Base Game) -FFG Yellow - 1 5/8" X 2 1/2" - 41mm x 63mm 132 Bridge-sized Sleeves - FFG Green - 2 1/4" X 3 1/2" - 56mm X 87mm Base Game - 82 cards Conversion Kit - 50 cards Hope this helps. Typo: Should be 134 Bridge Sized Sleeves. Thanks very much for the information and time. Slightly moot in that I can't actually get any bloody sleeves at the moment, but it's appreciated nevertheless Sidenote: Holy cow that's a lot of sleeves…
  23. HisstKa said: Will the square sleeves work for Civilization combat cards? Yeah, I came here to ask just that.
  24. Unclechawie said: In regards to the sleeves, that should be fairly simple to figure out. I don't see any reason FFG would use different size cards from what is in the main game. So basically, you'll simply need 2 sleeves (ACT I and ACT II) of the appropriate size (don't remember off the top of my head) per monster type that was in the first edition (again, don't remember off the top of my head). Unless you are buying sleeves for the hero cards (oversized) that should do it. How many is that? And are there any smaller card sleeves needed?
  25. Slinthas said: Also, I don't know how your 'cleric' is adding i grey dice, since cleric is not a class. - Cleric is the Archtype, Spiritspeaker is the class….I work on a game called Rift, where Cleric is the Class, and Spiritspeaker would be the soul, its just a terminology difference, means the same crap. Nitpicking that seems a bit rediculous. As for the ability its called: Stoneskin - it reads When you or a hero within 3 spaces is attacked, before dice are rolled, exhaust this card to add 1 additional grey dice to that hero's defense pool. So yeah thats how the Cleric (and it IS STILL A CLERIC just because it subspecialized in Spiritspeaker) adds an extra grey dice. I promise I'm not nitpicking further, but this confused the hell out of me The archetype is Healer, which is then divided into two classes, Spiritspeaker and Disciple. I keep mistakenly calling Disciple 'Cleric', which I think was why I found this so confusing. But, for anyone that's reading, this is the correct (as far as I understand it) terminology
×
×
  • Create New...