Jump to content

Robin13

Members
  • Content Count

    696
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from macamac in Encounters?   
    You got it right.
    An encounter is one of the (usually two) parts of a quest.
    On p.18 among steps between encounters, it is said that a hero player "flips his Hero sheet face up".
  2. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from Light Bright in A more cooperative Descent?   
    Remove the monsters and OL cards.
    Your players should be extremely happy about the "challenge".
    And serve them some antidepressants.
    It should help them face this hard life.
  3. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from mjfilla in A more cooperative Descent?   
    Remove the monsters and OL cards.
    Your players should be extremely happy about the "challenge".
    And serve them some antidepressants.
    It should help them face this hard life.
  4. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from Xinael in A more cooperative Descent?   
    Remove the monsters and OL cards.
    Your players should be extremely happy about the "challenge".
    And serve them some antidepressants.
    It should help them face this hard life.
  5. Like
    Robin13 reacted to Indalecio in A more cooperative Descent?   
    This man (Chav) summed it up very well. At the end of the day, players need to accept that they're going to lose a certain % of the quests they're going to play. Look, this game is built around this very concept, and still you get your XP even if you lose plus another shopping round, You lost the last quest? Too bad, now buy this Whirlwind and this Halberd and go slice some Goblins in the next quest. Look at me in the eyes when you say it isn't something to look forward doing. You get my point.
     
    You still get to develop your character, and I would push this even further and say that the only quest that truly "matters" is the Finale. But hey, lose the Finale, so what? Look at the past 30 hours of gaming and tell me you didn't have any fun at all. If your playgroup has severe objections to this then this game might not be suited to them. I don't know what kind of games they would enjoy playing though. 
     
    I hope for you they will come to the realization that this game is about something else. It is a fierce battle, yet you can still get tons of fun out of it and being able to put up a decent challenge every quest you play regardless who won the previous ones.
     
    I would NOT recommend that you dumb down your strategy/choices as the OL to let them win more quests. The only thing you could do imho is making them play rumor quests if you want to give them a little push.
     
    Good luck
  6. Like
    Robin13 reacted to kerred in What should(n't) players know? e.g. Frozen Spire   
    While hiding info gives fun surprises for the heroes, there is a very good reason I suggest letting quests be public:
     
    Because when I'm the Overlord, I can't remember everything on the quest, or read or interpret it wrong.  I give the book to the heroes and tel lthem to read it in their downtime to find objections or contradictions to what I interpretted.
     
    This helped a LOT of quests from being done wrong.
  7. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from mjfilla in What should(n't) players know? e.g. Frozen Spire   
    But it gives the OL a paternalist role. I don't see why the OL would be granted that big daddy profile in a competitive, non rpg,game.
    I would also anticipate heroes contesting his choices when things turn sour for them.
  8. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from Ispher in What should(n't) players know? e.g. Frozen Spire   
    But it gives the OL a paternalist role. I don't see why the OL would be granted that big daddy profile in a competitive, non rpg,game.
    I would also anticipate heroes contesting his choices when things turn sour for them.
  9. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from mjfilla in What should(n't) players know? e.g. Frozen Spire   
    Even if one considers that players MAY not have all the information, if one of them wants to have it, one MUST provide it.
    But, of course, a group of players can apply a houserule as it likes.
  10. Like
    Robin13 reacted to mjfilla in What should(n't) players know? e.g. Frozen Spire   
    Notice the remaining wording - "in short, unless noted, none of the information is secret". "None" is pretty clear - not just rules and victory conditions, but all of it is available to all players unless specifically prohibited.
  11. Like
    Robin13 reacted to amoshias in The future of Descent or all the types of expansions   
    It's weird that people say things like "if you don't want it, don't buy it, simple as that." Are you guys new to gaming/geek culture? Or culture in general?
     
    That's not the way people typically operate. Yes, there are some people who just pick and choose, buy what they like and leave the rest alone. And some people - there are plenty of them here - buy everything, regardless of whether they'll ever use it. (FFG loves these people :-) But there are MANY people who want to be involved in the game, but feel that the pace of expansions (How many supplements to this game in q2 alone? Seven?) prevents them from doing so. I personally am in the first group - but let me tell you, it is an enormous effort of will to not be in the second group. I won't be buying Manor, but every time I'm on CoolStuffInc, I have to resist the temptation to throw another Lieutenant into my cart.
     
    These are people who would be good for $50-60 a year, maybe $100 a year. But the pace turns them off and they stop buying stuff - and playing - entirely. It's happened to other games, Dominion being a HUGE example. Now, I guess - all things considered - that it's less work for FFG to sell 1k people $300 worth of stuff a year than to sell 3k people $100 worth of stuff a year. But it still doesn't seem like the best way to grow the brand. Still, looking at other FFG games, that seems to be their strategy - publish tons of games, drop the ones that fail, and use the ones that hit to suck as much money as possible as quickly as possible before people get bored.
     
    Jesus, saying it like that, I'm tempted to cancel my order for Shadows :-) Still, despite all its flaws, I like Descent :-)
     
    But the point is, by saying "Well just don't buy it" you show that you're entirely missing the point of what the original poster is saying. And if you've been at this for any time at all, WHY that's a problem should be pretty obvious.
  12. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from willmanx in Manor of Ravens   
    The expansion production rythm is becoming crazy.
    Sad to say, but that element is having me step down from the run.
    The rushing out of products can only mean sloppy playtesting, etc.
    I would not believe that during the first times I had the game.
    But now, it simply is humanly impossible for FFG to do nothing else but spill cardboard and plastic as you serve beer in a bar.
  13. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from willmanx in The future of Descent or all the types of expansions   
    Sure. I won't get it.I am relax, don't worry.
  14. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from willmanx in The future of Descent or all the types of expansions   
    Another mini expansion announced.
    The production rythm is crazy.
    In my case, it is killing my desire of continuing with the system.
  15. Like
    Robin13 reacted to Glorious Strategist in The future of Descent or all the types of expansions   
    This is an intriguing topic. I feel that descent has recently provided me with a unique dilemma. I'm a bit of a collector, so naturally I would like to obtain all of the Descent merchandise. However, with the frequency that new product is getting released, it makes it difficult for one to keep up with it all both logistically and financially. Also, I would love to acquire all of the small content releases such as the lieutenant packs, but the fact that you can only use 1 at a time makes that somewhat of a redundant investment, especially when you consider how may lieutenant packs currently exist vs how many campaigns are available.
  16. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from Light Bright in The future of Descent or all the types of expansions   
    The rythm of expansions production is too high for me.
    I however like the fact that expansions are not interdependent: this allows one not to have to buy them all.
    The background stories are weak, and players concentrate on the tactical challenges much more than on the fluff text (which is, for my ageing eyes, written so small that it is a real pain to read).
    Descent is not a dungeon crawler. It is a tactical skirmish game,set in a fantasy environment.
    I would really have loved to see a coop possibility included from the start, as well as a scenario generation system (my gaming partners don't have a regular time free to be able to persevere along a campaign - not speaking of some not liking the theme).
    I have a game that I like, but no serious player base to play it extensively with me : better solo possibilities (a coop system offers that) would have been welcome...
    Living rules (i.e. rules online that are revised according to errata and FAQ refining) rather than the parallel FAQ system would be welcome too.
    All in all, I like Descent a lot, but I am not far from stopping to buy further expansions.
  17. Like
    Robin13 reacted to amoshias in The future of Descent or all the types of expansions   
    Nothing kills a game faster than trying to suck every red cent out of the fan's wallets. Look at dominion. Most popular game for months, in every one of my game circles, until they published the third expansion inside of a year, then everyone gave up on it. It went from a go-to game for every gaming session to never being played inside of six months.
     
    I've been playing this game for about half a year, and in that time there have been two expansions and about a dozen "supplements" or whatever you want to call them. In the next few months there is another expansion, two big supplements and a bunch of smaller ones coming out. The boardgamegeek forums are full of people who are buying every little bit, even though they'll never use half of it - but for most of us it's more likely to lead to burnout than more profit for FFG.
     
    Want to make this game better, give it longevity? Stop buying every little thing that comes out, so that FFG doesn't burn out their fanbase.
  18. Like
    Robin13 reacted to Kunzite in Credibility Lost   
    This only proves one thing to me. I must teach my younger siblings to play this game. They are ready ^.^!
     
    You have a smart daughter, btw. My hat is off to you. 
  19. Like
    Robin13 reacted to Steve-O in Castle Daerion militiaman   
    I agree. Without explicit permission to activate, I would concur that the militiamen could not be activated the turn they were placed. However, the quest rules trump general rules and allow them to activate first turn in this quest.
  20. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from skidlz in Expansions - which one to buy   
    It is at least more logical than buying the expansions and not the base game. ;-)Now, not everyone has money to buy all expansions for all his games - especially if one plays many different ones.
    Of course, if Descent is the only one that one plays, buying all expansions is the best way to go.
  21. Like
    Robin13 reacted to griton in Multiple attacks   
    You are correct, but for the wrong reasons.
     
    Elementals can't attack and use Fire because fire specifically says that it is an attack.
     
    If an action (which by necessity will be marked with an action arrow, because it is an action) doesn't mention that an attack is made, then it doesn't count against the "1 attack per turn" limit. So for example, an Elemental can either:
     
    Do 1 of Fire or a normal Attack and 1 of Earth, Water, Air, Move, Open Door, etc.
    Do 2 of Earth, Water, Air, Move, Open Door, etc.
  22. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from Light Bright in Question about "The Masquerade Ball" Win condition.   
    I agree about the poor wording.
    Some concepts seem to have been badly thought out, and we are now entangled in complicated rulings (typically the movement "pool" notion, as well as the numerous "non movement" movements such as Oath of Honor, create a useless mess IMO).
  23. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from Whitewing in Question about "The Masquerade Ball" Win condition.   
    Tasressurect is simply trying to explain that rules are useless and that subjective, authoritarian interpretation of a self proclaimed "pope" is better than following the rules.
    If those who try to play the RAW as written remind him of his mother, it simply shows that he must still recover from his oedipian complex and stop posturing as a paternalist enlightened dictator. He must back off being daddy for his mom.
    (pseudo psychanalytic sarcasm here).
  24. Like
    Robin13 reacted to Whitewing in Question about "The Masquerade Ball" Win condition.   
    No, you are being completely ridiculous. The victory condition is moving off the map. However, it specifically and very clearly states they have to do something else in particular before being allowed to do so. Problem solved. In the Masquerade ball, it never, and I mean NEVER, says anywhere that they must rescue at least 1 guest to make the roll. That's where you are losing it. You are inferring that based on a chain of logic that is not clearly spelled out or written. You are saying because it makes sense to you, that this must be the way to play it. But that is not what rules as written means. It means, you play the rules as they are written, and that's all. In the Desecrated Tomb, it specifically states you have a certain objective to complete before you are allowed to move off the map, and then the victory condition is having moved off the map. In the Masquerade ball, the victory condition is winning the die roll, but there aren't any conditions levied upon being allowed to make that roll.
     
    And yes, that is the way the overlord wins in the first encounter of masquerade ball. And I have no idea what you are trying to say by "instantaneous win condition". It's meaningless gibberish. He wins the instant the die roll fails to be less than or equal to the guests rescued, and loses the instant the die roll succeeds. Why is this so hard to understand?
     
    Your analogies and examples are incongruous.
  25. Like
    Robin13 got a reaction from Light Bright in Question about "The Masquerade Ball" Win condition.   
    Thanks for chiming in Justin.
    I am nevertheless wondering how the original design did not notice the problem initially.
×
×
  • Create New...