Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About larienna

  • Rank

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  1. I am currently on a tight schedule. I want to pre-order eclipe and order rune age at the same time to save on shipping fees, but if I also like wiz-war, I would also like to pre-order it at the same time to get everything in 1 order. But there is no official release date and the rules in PDF are still not available.
  2. I started a thread on board game geek about converting Starcraft as a deck building oriented game, but most people agreed instead that it would be awesome to have a 100% card game of starcraft with deck building features. It would play faster and be easier to transport. I thought that converting the Rune age system as Star Craft could actually be awesome. Here is the original link to thread. http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/7667029#7667029 I would like to make the suggestion to Fantasy flight, but I don't know where I could send a message. There does not seems to be a suggestion box, so I decided to post here so that comments could be gathered with the possibility to get attention from the designers if there is a demand for this idea. So, do you like the idea?
  3. quote: In the old version of the game, if you had a 4 strength, it pretty much meant you had to be more creative about getting through the dungeon because you knew that you couldn't open that porticullis except by a miracle. It meant you didn't waste time trying to screw around in the same room unless you were forced to. With Determination tokens you're instead telling the players "Don't worry, you just keep wasting time with that bridge or porticullis because if you're determined enough, then it'll just fall over eventually." True but you lose time, and in this game time is a valuable ressource. The only thing I don't like about combat is that your character stats does not influence the battle. There was some suggestions about giving each character an affinity to a type of combat card so that for example, they could win ties with that category or that they gain +1 to their combat card if they use card that matched their type.
  4. How about a muchkin dungeon quest expansion. You add stuff to the game that makes the character abuse the game. That could be awesome and reverse the odd: You have 115% chance to succeed.
  5. It's not just a matter of realism, and I understand there is a lot of randomness. But it's also a matter of game design. The time issue in this game is every important and very tight. if you count the number of turns to get in the middle in the optimal situation with no corridors, you have like 2 or 4 extra turn (according to the original game) that you can spend going in the wrong direction or trapped somewhere. Which leave very little time to search the treasure room. So the time is very tight and jumping 6 space ahead breaks the game. SInce you can chose your deviation side, Everybody will always enter the catacombs up/down and then deviate toward the treasure room. That is the optimal solution to maximise your movement toward the treasure room and gainning a lot of free turns. This is why I found the mechanic broken. As for die roll above movement equal movement deviation, that means that you will have a lot of chance to deviate and that you will always deviate (no chance to go straight). While with the original system I posted, the more you move the more you deviate. Which is similar to the original rules.
  6. Personnally, I prefer dungeon quest because I can play out of the box with almost anybody. While for the other game, I need to play with players that has some RPG experience for the level of rule complexity. Second, dungeon quest will probably be shorter, so more likely to get played.
  7. Sobody else suggested on board game geek to roll 2 dice, one after another, and you substract die B from die A. If the result is negative, you deviate to the left, if the result is positive, you deviate to the right. The advantage is that the player does not have to chose on which side he deviate but there is still the problem that you could move 1 space and deviate 5 space. So I added the suggestion that the value of each die roll cannot exceed your movement value which gives a maximum deviation of move-1. I'll have to check the odd distribution to see if there is no weird probability distribution.
  8. The way the deviation is calculated when you exit the catacombs is problematic. For example, you could move 1 space and exit the catacombs. Then you roll a 6 for deviation which makes you move 6 space in a direction. So you deviate more that you actually move. The variant below that I am suggesting tries to reproduce the deviation concept of the original game. It is pretty simple and requires no table. When it's time to calculate the deviation, you roll a die. if you roll is equal or higher the number of space you moved, you do not deviate. Else, the deviation value is equal to the die roll. If you want larger deviation, you can change it for "if your die roll is only greater than the number of space you moved, you will not deviate". So in this case, you can deviate up to your movement range. What do you thik?
  9. Well, it seems that I learned about the existence of this project too late. So I guess it will be at most some suggestions for an expansion.
  10. I am very happy te learn that a remake of this game will be done. According to what I have seen so far, I am very happy with the adaptation. It seem like the kind of adaptation I would have done myself. I made a post on BGG and I only intend to repeat a portion of what I said over there. http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/543888/my-comments-about-the-game-so-far What I am going to try to do in this post is to make a comprehensive list of suggestions for Dungeon quest that maybe could be released as an expansion if the game is almost ready to be released. Key doors: In order to make sure the game is not easier to finish with more players since you can use other people's path to exit the dungeon, I thought of having key doors could solve the problem. The game would have door tiles with key number, when a player draw the tile, they get the key. Later on, only the player with the key can pass through this door preventing other players to use this path. One time use powers and items: In order to slightly increase the strategy in the game and give the player some control over the game, It would be interesting to have a large amount of "one time use" elements to reproduce the "Should I use it now or save it for later" syndrome. I thought first of using items which are probably already part of the game. But my idea is that each character could have 5 special abilities which are all one time use. At the beginning of the game, they chose 2-3 out of 5. Artifacts: These are simple permanent magical item. The twist that would add strategy is that you could only have one of these items. So when you acquire an new artifact, you need to choose which one you want to keep. Maybe you could start with 1 artifact and find other artifacts in the dungeon cards. No RPS Combat: I doubt that the new game use the same combat system than the original game, but I strongly hope that combat will not be resolved using a rock paper scisor mechanic. I would like the stats of the character to have more influences in the combat. Tile Punching And Plastification: This is more a pratical advice for designing the square tile punch tray. Make sure all the dungeon square tiles are side by side so that you could easily cut throught all the tiles using an exacto knife. It also makes it easier to plastify the tile first and then cut everything with an knife. In overall, the game must give to the player the illusion that they have a chance to succeed. By giving weak or limited special powers and abilities, it helps create that illusion. For example, you might get an amulet of fire protection that makes you imune to fire trap and when the dragon awakens, you roll 3 dice and take the 2 lowest dice for damage. If a player gets an artifact like this, he will say, wow, my chances of survival are much better. He will be more willing to risk passing through trap tiles, he will take more stuff in the dragon's lair, etc. But is he really in a better position? Mathematically, yes you have a bit more chances, but not that much. For example, If he does not draw any fire trap or if the dragon roll is 4-5-6 (9 dmg instead of 11 dmg) , the player is still going to get screwed.
  11. EDIT [some bug with copy pasting, trying to recreate post] HI I have just released by Hexagon map variant for Starcraft and I did not have the time to playtest much. If some of you are intending to play starcraft, you might want to try it and leave some comments. The objective of this variant is to be able to play Starcraft the board game on a battle field map rather than a space map. The basic idea is that each planet is composed of a 2, 3 or 4 hex tile that can be placed adjacent to other tiles. Each group of hex works like a planet for rule purpose. The tiles are connected with each other without the need of transports. But transport can allow you to fly over rivers and occupied hex. The files are available on my website and will eventually be available on BGG: Web Page: http://ariel.minilab.bdeb.qc.ca/~ericp/cgi-bin/boardgame/index.php?n=Variants.Variants200905220217PM Print Outs: http://ariel.bdeb.qc.ca/~ericp/cgi-bin/boardgame/uploads/Mainsite/Variants/Variants200905220217PM/PriOu_HexMap_110.pdf Rules: http://ariel.bdeb.qc.ca/~ericp/cgi-bin/boardgame/uploads/Mainsite/Variants/Variants200905220217PM/Rules_StarcraftHexMap_1-1-0.pdf Thank You Eric P626
  12. I am also looking for an information about the battle mist expansion which could allow me to recreate the game. If you find anything, I'll be very happy. There is some pictures on board game geek but it does not contain all the information I need.
  13. Just some quick comment. another idea I had for the next version was to index the actions you could do to the number of bases you have. Most people suggested that it could create a run away leader syndrome. The idea is simple: On each turn: Each base allow you to do 1 interplanetary movement 2 produce up to 3 units (protoss is 2) 3 produce a technology. 4 and even maybe play an event cards. So the more bases you have the more you can do and and more you are able to attack and crush your opponent. Making an elimination game less impossible. It Forces your ennemies to capture your bases to power you down. To prevent player elimination, If 1 player lose all his base, the game ends and the player with the most VP wins. I would probably test it because it looks neat.
  14. Thanks for your comments. I recently had a chance to play the original video game and following this, I will need to change some things in my variant. So the rules posted above will not be the final version. Example of changes: - Cloaking makes you invicible if there is no detector. - tech tree errors : ex: Ultralisk now requires hive. - Borrowing will not work like cloaking. - Inplementing stuff from the expansion: New units, heroes, stock piling, etc. SImple, you change your plan. In in the middle of the plan execution something goes wrong, you can still decide to change production, designate new targets, etc. In fact the order system should represent what you want to prepare yourself against. I have experience in the video game many situation where: OK, I am building troops to attack my opponent, but meanwhile an ennemy force comes in. So I decide to use my force to defend a base instead. So I don't lose everything, but if I did not produced any troops now I would have lost my base. SO in real life and the video game, there are situation where you can readjust your path. I like having tech upgrade on cards and that might be what I inted to do in my next version. I am thinking about making a dice less combat system. The problem is if you know that it's impossible to win, you would never attack. What I was thinking is that all tech upgrade add hidden cards to your hand ( they are not drawn) then when you fight you reveal your cards and resolve the battle. The problem is once a player has revealed their cards, you know what tech they have and you know if you can win or not. So it will create Galaxy setup: It had happened many times to my that I got stock in a loop of warp point preventing me from attacking anything else than 1 planet. When players place navigation routes, it can create these loop holes. Right now I did not had any problems with setup, but I could put some toughts on it. Simultaneous orders: If indeed there is a problem, you can resolve the same order in clockwise order. It might depend with who you are playing with. Mobilize: I agree that interplanetary attack is slow. So you expand very slow. But kicking out invaders and defending your planets is fast. Techtree and chips: I realise that I could replace the faction sheet with cards for each unit, tech and module for the next version. This way, for battles, I could place the unit cards close to each other and place the units on the card. So It might get easier to resolve. What is a Tokens: ANything you want: glass bead, bingo chips, pennies, etc. "Hot spots": I don't like it either. The original objective want to prevent the "sit and wait and win" syndrome by camping conquest points. Giving points by conquering base was a way to promote attack. I tought that finding a third way to force the player to risk going out would be interesting. Frist they were given for free by controling an area but I tought it was too easy. Also since interplanetary mobility is not so hot, it was had to contest other players planet. So either I will remove it or replace it with something else. In the expansion there are scenarios, I could use stuff from that expansion. Combat and targetting: Like I said, I might do a no dice system. As for targetting, in the version poste here, Indeed you could not kill a unit stronger than you. Then I realised that in the video game, a group of marines could kill a carier. So I decided that units could combine their attacks by adding their assist value to another unit. For example a vulture : at 5 helped by 2 marines +1 each, can kill an ultralisk with 7 health. So 3 units is used to kill 1. If I use randomness, only the units that hit can target, all other units must assist. If I don't use randomness, it does not matter who hits or not. An argument To justify the use of randomness: It has occured to me many times in the video game that the units were not well placed according to the ennemy's formation, and some units could actually not had a chance to attack the ennemy and they died. Dice rolls are used to represent this kind of situations that could occur and that you must deal with since you cannot plan everything. Anyways I still like your comments and I hope the next version would be much better. Thank You
  15. HI Last time, I got my hands on a copy of battle mist for sale at 5$. When browsing board game geek, I realised that there was an expansion for that game. Since it's probably not on sale anymore and BGG had really few information, is there somebody who can tell me what was in that game so that I could recreate the expansion myself. A scan of the reference sheet, hero cards or any other components would be really interesting or some re-transcription of some information would also be useful. Thank you
  • Create New...