Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Galvancito1

  • Rank

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain
  1. At first, I saw the conquest tokens as the quarters that players put into the arcade machine. Later, when the RtL came out I saw them as the power of the Obelisk of Travels: Every time the chosen heroes die, the Obelisk uses part of its power to resurrect them. If the Obelisk becomes powerless, it can no loger protect Tamalir and so the monsters invade the heroes village, so GAME OVER. With this understanding some friends and me have sometimes played difficult quests adding the "false friend rule". That is if a hero dies, their "friends" can choose not to resurrect him/her to keep the tokens. They can resurrect any fallen hero at the begining of any round, and thy only win if at the end of the quest they are all alive. The OL threat income and the monster stats remain as if all the heroes were on the board. Thematically it looks good and it also gives the heroes the posibility to explore a bit more of the dungeon. It is also pretty funy when heroes argue because they don't want to resurrect a fallen comarade while this one calls them names from the afterlife.
  2. Morthai said: aren't big monsters such as spiders suppose to have acrobatic like ability to ensure not to been so annoyed by stuff like single water or stone tiles? I thought i read something like that somewhere... and thematic at least spiders should be able to ignore such terrains... I don't see why being biger makes a monster more acrobatic. Thematicaly the monster is simply steping somewhere else to avoid hazards like lava, ice, mud or pits. But not steping on rubble doesn't automatically allow the monster to go through it. With dungeon water it's the same: it doesn't matter that you don't step on it (it's not even jumpable), as soon as you are over it the tentacles of the squids get you and you are eaten.
  3. I think he is refering to outdoor water (from SoB), which allows entry. The rules aren't very clear about it but I suppose that a monster whose base is partially in shallow or deep and partialy on a ship could ignore the effect of the water (but it would be moved when the ship does as if it was on the ship).
  4. Then RtL list is fine (at least for the Edge translations). What I am most worried about is the levels that have the exact same minions. That looks like someone made a mistake when copying the list.
  5. Hello. I received the SoB expansion for X-mas and I have been looking through the components. I haven't been able to play it yet, but for the moment I have enjoied looking at the cards and dungeons (figuring out what the creators had in mind). Now, while looking at the dungeons I found some problems with the minions at certain dungeons. Certain dungeon levels had the exact same minions as the prevous ones. Some others (particulary islands) don't seem to have any balance among the options (sometimes an option is clearly superior to other). So I have gone through all the dungeon levels and islands and made a list of minions list that are suspicious of having been mistranslated. Since I was at it, I did the same with the RtL and ToI. Here is the list of things I suppose that were different in the original version. Could you please confirm if they are? RtL: Level 3 option B calls for 3 master hounds and 1 socerer but the box only has 2 master hounds. Am I supposed to use a normal hound as a master one? Level 8 option D calls for 2 beastmen and 1 golem. Not bad, but golems don't belong to the AoD expansion. Is this correct? Is it supposed to be a troll or a chaos beast? Level 14 option D calls for 4 spiders and 2 ferrox. Ferrox are supposed to belong to the WoD and normally appear in option C. Again, is this correct? Level 34 option B calls for 4 beastmen and 2 nagas, while option A calls for 3 beastmen and 1 manticore. Is really a manticore supposed to be worth 2 nagas and 1 beastman? Options C and D are more similar to option A than to option B. ToI: Level 43 option A calls for "1 master wendigo and 2 master wendigos". I'm pretty sure that was supposed to mean "1 master wendigo and 2 (normal) wendigos". The expansion doesn't have 3 master wendigos anyway. SoB: Level 60 (which is said to be one of the nastiest levels) calls for the very same minions as level 61. Just the same options. A: 2 master sorcerers, 1 sorcerer and 1 beastman. B: 1 master sorcerer, 2 beastmen and 1 oger. 2 master sorcerers, 1 ferrox and 2 kobolds. C: 1 master sorcerer, 1 beastman and 1 trol (is a trol worth more than an oger?) E: 2 master sorcerers, 2 beetles and 1 shade. What level do these minions belong? What are the minions of the other level? Level 64 calls for 3 medusas in option E (and 2 skeletons as well), but there are only 2 normal medusas and 1 master medusa. Am I supposed to use the master one as a normal one? Level 65 option B looks like an interesting mix: 1 master hound, 1beastman, 1 skeleton and 1 golem. All very different monsters, but the golem isn't normally used in option B. Is it supposed to be an oger? Levels 71 and 72 minions also have the same minion list. A: 4 razorwings and 2 sorcerers. B: 2 razorwings, 2 beastmen and 2 sorcerers (it looks like beastmen are worth the same as razorwings). C: 3 razorwings, 2 ferrox and 2 kobolds. D: 2 razorwings and 3 elfs. E: 2 razorwings, 1 master shade and 3 normal shades. Option D has the problem of calling for 3 elfs when there are only 2 normal elfs, I guess I'll have to use the master elf as a normal elf. In the island with an enemy ship (the hermit?) option D is clearly subpar, as it considers that a priest is worth the same as a golem, and that 2 priest are woth the same as a dragon (outdoors, where it can fly). Here is the list I have. A: 4 sorcerers and 4 skeletons. B: 3 sorcerers and 1 dragon. C: 3 sorcerers and 2 golems. D: 3 sorcerers and 2 priest (they must be some kind of archpriest or something to rival with dragons, golems and ice wyirms). E: 3 sorcerers and 1 ice wyrm. Finally, in semilast island (the bewitched island?) option A calls for 4 beastmen (and nothing more) while option E calls for 2 beastmen and 2 wendigos. Wendigos have been treated with some more respect on dungeon levels, why are they assumed to be worth just like beastmen? I may be wrong when comparing different types of monsters in advanced campaigns but since some of the minion lists were exactly the same, I thought it was worth asking. Thanks
  6. OK, here I am again with the imagens printed. The WoD tiles I had were in their box (we haven't used them yet) and guess what, there is no difference. They are identical to those of the core game. The ammount of each one is different so I'll try to describe them. The SoB copy I have has not been played yet and all the components are inside, so I can see the 3 pieces and compare them to the others. With that and the list I can give you enough information to separate all the expansion pieces. All the 6x6 and 6x4 rooms are in the core game. There are 2 types of 6x6 rooms: one with mushrooms and grass on the floor and another one with a big beast skeleton on a grey tiles floor. There are 3 types of 6x4 rooms: One room follos the style of the grey tiles, another room follos the style of the grass and mushrooms, and the remaining two are mostly brown with some small human skulls on a corner. Since the styles are very recognisable let's give them names: "grass-and-mushrooms" (with green), "grey-tiles" (mostly grey) and "brown-floor". There are 2 styles on the 4x4 tiles: grass-and-mushrooms and grey-tiles. The core game has 2 of each one. The WoD has one of the grass-and-mushrooms. The grass-and-mushrooms ones have groups of big mushrooms at 3 corners while grey-tiles ones has several skulls at one corner. The AoD has 2 more corrupted 4x4 rooms. The ToI 4x4 rooms are marked with leters (A to H) and all the other 4x4 belong to the RtL. There is also a big 10x10 room that belongs to the ToI and the piece you place the camp on that belongs to the RtL. The same 2 styles are used for the original L shaped corridors. The grass-and-mushrooms ones have no mushrooms this time, while on the "grey-tiles" ones you can see two broken sets of sword and shield (one of the shields is upside down). The core game has 3 of each kind. The WoD has 1 grass-and-mushrooms corridor and 2 grey-tiles ones. The other turning corridors are doubled-sided and they would fit on a 4x4 room (which means they belong to the RtL), on a 3x3 room (which means it belongs to the ToI) or on a 2x2 room (which means it belongs to the SoB). There are no other corridors in the WoD. The other corridors in the core game are straight with three possible lengths: 2 spaces (brown floor), 4 spaces (grey-tiles) and 6 spaces (grey-tiles). All the AoD straight corridors are corrupted. The ToI corridors lengths are 1 space or 3 spaces (no other expansion uses these lenghts). There are also 2 2x2 transition pieces too which are used to fit a dungeon to an open area, these belong to the ToI. All the even-number-of-spaces long double-sided corridors belong to the RtL. The SoB has no straight corridors other than the portal. Both the RtL portal and the SoB portal are the same on both sides. The T shaped intersections used on the core game and on the WoD are either grass-and-mushrooms (with no mushrooms) or brown-floor style. The core game has 2 of each. The WoD has 2 grass-and-mushrooms ones. The AoD has 4 corrupted ones. The remaining ones are double-sided and they would fit on either a 4x4 room (which means they belong to the RtL) or on a 3x4 room (which means they belong to the ToI). The core game + shaped intersections are exactly the same as the WoD ones and they have the brown-floor style with a skull and an arm on them. The core game has 2 and the WoD has the other 2. The AoD has 2 more and they are corrupted. The remaining ones are double-sided and would fit on either a 4x4 room (RtL) or on a 2x2 room (ToI). Finally the dead ends. All the one-sided non-corrupted ones are exactly the same. The core game has 20, the WoD has 2. The AoD has 3 corrupted ones. The remaining 16 ones are double-sided. 6 of them show color portals and belong to the RtL, 1 has a square painted in black and also belongs to RtL. Now look at those RtL ones on the outdoor side and you'll notice that they show a wood in spring or summer. The ToI ones show the wood in fall or winter. The SoB has no dead ends.
  7. Steve-O said: Galvancito1 said: Before mixing my expansions I made a list, let's see... I think he wanted to know which actual tiles (ie: which printed images) went in each expansion. The rulebook for each expansion should have a list of components at the front to identify the types of tiles each included, but figuring out which actual images came from where, that's the rub. (Except AC expansions, which as he said are easy since they're double-sided.) It doesn't. Or at list mine doesn't. It normally says something like "10 corridors" or "52 effect tokens" but it doesn't say how long the corridors are or what tokens they are reffering to. I have now looked at the English version. It says how many rooms or corridors there are, but not how big or wide they are. If you are concerned about the image of the corridors, then you only need to if there is any difference between the core game and the well of darkness. AoD are all corrupted, RtL are double-sided (with a green forest at the other side), ToI have strange shapes (I think only the dead ends would need to be searched for) and SoB has only three (you'd need to keep track of those three).
  8. Before mixing my expansions I made a list, let's see... Core game: Map pieces: 2 6x6 rooms, 4 6x4 rooms, 4 4x4 rooms, 6 2x2 corridors, 8 4x2 corridors, 5 6x2 corridors, 6 corner corridors, 4 3-way intersections, 2 4-way intersections and 20 dead ends. All one-sided, none corrupted. Obstacles: 5 1x1 pits, 2 1x2 pits, 1 1x3 pit, 5 1x1 rubble, 2 1x2 rubble, 1 1x1 rubble, 4 1x1 water, 2 1x2 water and 1 1x3 water. Effect tokens: 16 poison, 13 fire, 12 web and 14 stun. Other tokens: 18 1-conquest tokens, 6 3-conquest tokens, 23 1-threat tokens, 9 5-treat tokens, 24 fatige, 45 1-wound token, 10 5-wound tokens, 34 1-coin tokens, 12 100-coin tokens, 6 500-coin tokens, all the 4 hero turn tokens, all the 16 order tokens (except for prolonged actions) and all the 12 training tokens. Treasure: 9 money tokens, 9 health potions, 9 vitality potions, all the 8 chests, all the 3 rune keys, the four relics used in quests 6 to 9. Others: 10 non-corrupted glyphs, 10 encounter markers, 2 grey stairs, 2 red stairs, 2 blue stairs, 1 monkey, the rat, both ferrets, the falcon, 1empos, the compas rose, the 10 doors and the breath template. Well of darknes: Map pieces: 1 4x4 room, 3 corners, 2 4-way intersections, 2 dead ends. All one-sided, none corrupted. Obstacles: 3 1x1 pits, 3 1x2 pits, 1 1x3 pit, 3 1x1 rubble, 3 1x2 rubble, 1 1x3 rubble, 4 1x1 water, 3 1x2 water, 1 1x3 water, 8 1x1 lava, 5 1x2 lava, 2 1x3 lava, 8 1x1 mud, 5 1x2 mud 2 1x3 mud. Traps: 6 skything blades, 2 dart fields, 4 boulders, 8 90º-turn boulder ramps and 4 180º-turn boulder ramps. Effect tokens: 2 fire, 1 web, 1 stun, 14 daze and 14 bleed. Other tokens: 3 100-coin tokens, 8 25-coin tokens. Treasure: 9 power potions and 6 relics (see quests 5, 6 and 9) Others: 2 green stairs, the bolt template, the wolf and the haunt. Altar of despair: Map pieces: 2 4x4 rooms, 2 1x6 corridors, 1 4-way intersection and 3 dead ends. All corrupted, all one-sided. Obstacles: 8 1x1 fog, 5 1x2 fog, 2 1x3 fog, 8 1x1 corrupted, 5 1x2 corrupted, 2 1x3 corrupted, 1 4x4 pit (ussually called "the big pit"). Traps: 2 2-space-wide crushing walls, 1 4-space-wide crushing wall. Effect tokens: 14 frost and 14 curse. Other tokens: 6 25-coin tokens, 3 100-coin tokens, 15 progress tokens and the 4 prolonged action order tokens Treasure: 9 invulnerability potions. Others: 2 non-corrupted glyphs, 2 red-corrupted glyphs, 2 green-corrupted glpyphs, 2 blue-corrupted glyphs, 2 encounter markers, 6 altars, 3 monkies the eye of Tara, the imp the shadow and the brightwing (isn't it a phoenix?). Technically the altars are treated as obstacles but they are not listed as such. I don't have a RtL list (nor the SoB one) but you can identify the map pieces because they are 2-sided. All the obstacles in RtL are new (most of them don't even look like obstacles although they are treated as susch), the only effect tokens are sleep (there are 6), the money and wound tokens have greater value than the ones in other expansions (25 and 2500 I think) and there are no new treassure tokens. The list of other tokens is huge, you'd better refer to the manual. I also have the ToI list if you want it.
  9. I have given been considering Ispher idea (two posts before this) and I have come with a variant of it. This may be no more than a stupid idea because I have never played a whole campaign but it somehow fits with what both Corbon and Ispher have been discussing about CT. It may be better suited for RtL than for SoB because SoB's leutenants and Avatar upgrades are said to be too powerful, hence any CT rerule idea would not help much. First: Take out Divine Favor (it would probably work against the arrangement rather than make it work better). Second: Don't consider the final battle as a phase as cooper, silver and gold are. Instead consider that the final battle consists just of exploring the OL keep. This will normally occur during the gold phase (not after the gold phase). Third: Let the cooper-to-silver and silver-to-gold trigger condition stay as they are. The campaign will level up to silver when the combined total of CT gets to 200 and to gold when that total is 400. However, the final battle will not occur at 600 CT, but on a different condition. Fourth: If the heroes get about 275 CT (this number could be different, but it surely must be between 250 and 300) then they discover the OL keep. After discovering it, heroes can move to it and enter it as if it was a normal dungeon, but they are not forced to do so. They still have to move through the map to get there and the lieutenants can still attack them to prevent them from entering. A lieutenant that attacks the group after the OL keep is discovered may not flee (he could still flee if the heroes attack him instead). Once inside, the rules of the OL keep apply: no fleing, no market or alchemist restock... This means that if the heroes get to that number of CT, they can force the game to end. Yes, this could happen during the silver phase (but heroes would not want to go there before getting ready). This way, killing themselves or staying for a very long time in the dungeons to force the OL to get CT will not help them getting to the OL lair faster. Fifth: If, on the other hand, the OL gets 275 CT (this number may also be different, I expect it to be a little bit higher than the heroes goal if not equal) then he can force the heroes to enter his lair. Yes, he could decide that those stupid heroes are a problem that he has to deal with himself. If you need a thematical reason for this here you have it: "The OL gets powerful enough to create a portal to Tamalir and start absorbing the power from the Obelisk of Journeys. The heros have now one only chance to stop him once and for all, so they enter the portal and assault his lair." Or "The OL becomes powerful enough to create a storm that takes the revenge direcly to his lair. Wind now blows so wildly that the revenge can't even return to its home port. The heroes know who the responsible is and so they enter his lair to finish this war." If the OL decides to challenge the heroes this way, then the Final Battle begins with the heroes entering the OL keep. He can also get to this number of CT, and wait some weeks before deciding to challenge the heroes (for example because he can end his plot in a couple of weeks if the heroes don't stop his lieutenants). The OL can challenge the heroes at the beggining of any week (before "time passes") after getting his CT goal. He's not forced to do this, and probably won't want to do it if his lieutenants are doing their job well. But as Corbon metion the possibility of not being sufficienly prepared to battle the OL puts the heroes under preasure. They know that if the OL gets too many CT, they will have serious problems. And yes, the OL might be able to challege them during the silver phase (though that would mean that the heroes were really bad players). Do you think this arrangement makes more sense than the original rules? I think the main weak point of this arrangement is that as long as the heroes can retain the lieutenants and the lieutenants preassure can keep the heroes from training, the gold phase could last forever. No side is forced to start the final battle. But the heroes can't win utnil they enter and the OL has no reason to allow them to train once he knows he cannot finish his plot.
  10. Let's leave the hero CT count option for the moment. It's interesting but such a major change requires a lot of playtesting and, as far as I know, the current combined-CT-count works well in RtL. (I don't know, I have never played a whole RtL campaign.) Now, back on to SoB. Say we take the Divine Favour out, we revise the problematic dungeoun levels, we rerule that the lieutenants go back to their initial location when fleeing (as in RtL) and/or we make it harder for them to flee encounters. Would it work? I just got a copy of SoB and some friends want to start an advanced campaign so I want to do everything I can to make it playable. To give some trouble to the lieutenants I have an idea: Since all lieutenants are swimmers of flyers (or a boat), they will all start at an edge of the board. My idea is to forbid them to flee through any edge other than the opposite one. So if the siren starts at the west, then she can only escape through the east (an so on). This way, Lieutenants with minions cannot just wait while their minions do the job and flee if things get nasty. If the avatar cards are too powerful that's another thing that could be adjusted while maintaining its spirit. For the exploding skeletons, for example, a different die could be used (white?). Or it could be used instead of an activation (rather than anytime during its activation). Or it could target one hero only. Or it could be a normal attack with explosion 1 targeting the skeletons square. Any other idea? It is also possible to allow the heros to enter the OL keep before the final battle if the OL needs to destroy just one more city to finish instead of forcing him to destroy all the 7 port cities.
  11. I know this thread is supposed to be finished but I don't know where else to post it. Several months ago, this post appeared in this thread: Ispher said: One of the most important questions of this new FAQ, of which a whole expansion depends, should be: How is (or: how to make) Sea of Blood winnable (with more than a single digit percentage probability) for heroes against a competent OL who plays to win? Under the current rules, Lieutenants seem to raze cities (or bindings) too easily and too soon to allow the campaign to last until the final battle. This is so because: a) When fleeing, Lieutenants don't go away like they did in RtL, as they can come back the very following turn. b) Lieutenants spawn at various places instead of a single place like in RtL, so heroes cannot protect part of the map like they could in RtL. c) Like in RtL, it is almost impossible to kill a Lieutenant against a competent OL, as they can be placed very far from the ship, then flee on their first turn. d) When chasing Lieutenants, heroes stop making the campaign progress after a while (when Islands have been explored), as they don't earn Conquest anymore. This gives the OL even more time to siege and roll for razes with the Lieutenants that are not currently chased. The "solution" to this could be to stop chasing Lieutenants and enter dungeons, but with unhindered sieging, the OL also seems to have the upper hand. Proposed solutions (ideas are of course welcome): A. No Lieutenant can be spawned before the Silver Age. B. Razes happen on a blank, not on a surge. C. It becomes progressively harder to raze cities: after 2 cities razed, the OL needs 2 surges (not necessarily in a row) to raze a city; after 4 cities razed, he needs 3. Or: one more surge for each city razed (1 for the 1st, 2 for the 2nd, 3 for the third, etc.). D. Lieutenants cannot flee. E. When fleeing, Lieutenants return to the OL's Keep. If it is landlocked, they need 1 week to get to the nearest city. F. When fleeing, Lieutenants are removed from the map. They may return to their spawning location when the OL rolls a power enhancement (surge?) at the beginning of a week. G. Sieges are broken whenever heroes successfully sail through the map. H. ... This should really, really be addressed in the FAQ, so that a party has good chances to enjoy a SoB campaign until the end. Now, I just got the Spanish version of Sea of Blood for Christmas and, when reading, I found that one of these proposed solutions (E to be exact) had been used. According to the Spanish instruction manual, when a Lieutenant flees, it goes to the OL's Keep. Nothing is said about having to abandon a land-located keep though. So it is the same as in RtL. Now, I know the translatoros may have just copied and paste the paragraph from RtL, but I guess that's is the closer we can get to an oficial way to solve this balance issue. Thanks for reading.
  12. The main reason I have not to accept the change (other than in the AoD) is the fact that in the Card Revision the new text does not appear. Any other card that has been modified appears with a couple of exceptions: -The explosive chest card and the divine retribution card do not appear, but the only change made to them has been asked and answer. -The acrobat one does not appear, but it doesn't have any effect unless you buy the expansion it appears on. Ok, ice from the ToI and certain obstacles from RtL may need the change, but I recall a question about that in the FAQ, and I wouldn't change anything in the original game either. -The leadership card has been asked about, but the new text is not on the FAQ as neither is the change. When I first read it I hadn't bought the AoD and I was shoked that it mentioned the fatige point. My card didn't say anything about a fatige point. I looked back at the card and I couldn't find anything about a fatige point, but it seemed quite clear for whoever had asked the question in the FAQ. So I assume it only refers to the AoD version of it. Since the new text does not appear on the Card Revision I suppose they don't consider it necessary to make any changes to it. I would accept a permanent change of the card if prolonged actions were something common, but they only appear in AoD quests. If feat cards allowed heroes to do prolonged actions to get certain objectives (which would actually be a great idea) I would change the card and forget about the original one. Anyway, there are other cards that have to be changed for certain expansions only. Parry, for example, must be changed for the RtL only. I had bought RtL before buying AoD so I thought it was the same idea. Nothing in the book says that it is supposed to be used out of those quests. Think about it, must heroes playing a WoD quest need to pay a fatige point to use sush a specific card just because the players own the AoD expansion? It seems ridiculous to me, specially when the WoD had already made the necessary changes to 12 cards. If I ask FFG to officialy answer about that they'll most probably not answer at all. The FAQ has not been updated since 2010, the 2nd Edition is getting all the publicity and some stores no loger have the first edition. I dare say FFG doesn't want to waste any effort on this edition anymore. In addition, different people seem to have been designing the last two expansions (the manual follows a different format and certain things are no longer called the same) so even if I do get an answer it may not reflect the original designers intention. Finally, the AoD is probably the most unbalanced expansion of Descent and it's not uncomon to house rule part of its features or not to use them at all (dark glyphs are the prime example). So why bothering asking?
  13. Is part 2 (and any other) on a different topic or has it not been post yet?
  14. I gess there is another topic fot this but I cannot find it (sorry). If this has already been discussed, pleas link me to the corresponding topic. We have been playing the core game for quite a long now, and last 3 times we decided to use the dark glyphs. Now here is the problem: they are unbalanced. No, I don't mean that they are too powerful (they are, but that's not what I wanted to focus on). What I mean is that they are umbalanced among them. All of them have the same treachery cost: 2 treachery (of the corresponding color). Treachery cannot be changed form a color to other, but at the end any remaining treachery is put together to get extra cards so we should assume that a red treachery point has the same value as a blue treachery point. (Am I wrong to think this? Is a treachery color more powerful that other just by its color?) However the effect of each glyph are very different. After a couple of games I can tell that spending 2 treachery points in a blue glyph is a waste. They basically do nothing at all. I at least the OL could keep both cards that would be something, but he has to discard one of them. He can't even draw 2 cards mix them into his hand and discard 2 other cards, oh no, he has to discard one of the received cards. OK, at leas he gets something: his deck is running and he is getting good cards. The red gplyph on the other hand is really powerful. It's probably more powerful thatn it appears at first glance. Any hero (usually a runner) who usually tries to get the treasure, activate the gplyph and escape will get the party in trouble if that glpyh is red. He will find 2 extra enemies when he activates the glyph and 2 more when escapes trhough it (if he does). Not escaping means his death, but doing so means his party's death at the hands of 4 sorceres. Let's face it, the OL will always choose sorceres when possible (why is the spider even an option)? Once all the sorceres are in play, the OL may decide that beastmen or skeletons are possible. He won't give beast any thought. Oddly enough there is no option to choose ferrox, apes or priests (probably to prevent the OL to spawn too many powerful monsters). Finally the green glyph. Where do I begin with this one? 2 conquest out just by choosing it makes a better option than any green treachery card. OK, the binding spell on a map full of boulders may be better but you get the idea: There will always be 1 (sometimes 2) green glyphs on the map because they are just too good. But wait! that's not all they can do, they also don't work at all. With the other gplyphs the heroes could at least choose if they will take the risk, but here that's not an option. Not been able to use a glyph is worse than having a problem every time you use it, and 2 extra sorceres are not going to take 2 conquest tokens from the heroes without some effort. So even if the heroes chosed not to use a red glyph at all, it would not annoy them so much as a green one. Not to mention those maps where heroes need to return to the town at the end (buried alive for example) where a correctly placed green glyph means game over. So the green glyph will always be more powerfull than the red glyph, which will always be more powerful than the blue gyph. With some irony the game designers called the least powerfull glyph "power glyph". And they all cost the same. If there was some random involved I would understand that (the OL could be luck enough to get a green one or unluck enough to get a blue one), but he is choosing them at will at the beggining of the game. "Hmmm, today I'm feeling pretty evil, let's add a green glyph wahahahaha". Has anyone tried to fix this with some house rules. This is what I would do: -Red: have the OL roll 3 (or 4, we'll have to playtest this) 12-sided dices. Each side is a kind of monster: 1for kobold, 2 for beastman, 3 for skeleton, 4 for spider, 5 for razorwing, 6 for shade, 7 for hellhound, 8 for beetle, 9 for sorcerer, 10 for priest, 11 for ferrox and 12 for ape. He chooses 2 of them and spawns them. This arrangement makes the glyph a bit less powerfull and allows for more different mosnters to be added. The OL must face some random (as so will the heroes who want to risk using the glyph). Another option would be to force to OL to pay some threat to spawn the monsters or to just let him play a spawn card (instead of just letting him spawn for free). -Blue: A possibility is not to force the OL to discard one of the cards. Another is to allow him to discard a different card. Another possibility is to have him draw 3 cards, discard one, keep another and put the third on the top of his deck (so that it will be the next card he gets). The idea is to make this glyph a bit more powerful, so that it can be about the level of the red one. -Green: (Uhg) The first idea is to let he heroes get the 3 conquest tokens and leave the rest as is. Another idea is to le the heroes use it by discarding (without effect) a feat card, this would be consistend with the original design, as there were no feat cards when AoD was released. Yet another possibility is to make it worth 3 treachery points instead of 2 (come on, it is too powerful for just 2). Do you have any other ideas? The dark gkyphs are not the only unbalanced issues from AoD. The lone troll is another problem (compared to the lone oger and the lone golem) but let's go one step at a time.
  • Create New...