Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Montag451

  • Rank

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Virginia, United States
  1. My thinking: it's all in the wording. If it were altering the weather, it would specify it is altering the weather (giving -1 frost). The wording it uses is much closer to preventing wounds. Basically, you activate the card to prevent 1 frost from a character. Unless the rules say there's a special way to handle these effects, I would treat them the same as preventing wounds.
  2. Have you been playing solo? I've lost all solo games I've played so far, but we've won most 2-player games. Team combos can make a huge difference I've found.
  3. I have not yet played it, but have followed reviews and previews. It is a deckbuilding game, but aside from different scenarios that change the way you play a game, the different resources and factions stand out against most deckbuilding games. That said, there really isn't anything here for seasoned Runebound players except the setting. Where Runebound plays like a role-playing adventure game, Rune Age is more like a strategic wargame played with cards. That's not to say players of one game won't like the other, but the familiar setting really is the only connection between them. One thing to note on Rune Age is that the big criticism is lack of variety. Each faction only has a few different cards and each scenario doesn't have many neutral cards. It's ripe for expansion, but at this point no one knows if it will be expanded. But even then, it'd be a great game to pull out every once in a while, which is generally what you can expect from the stand-alone card games.
  4. MarkW said: If dice games aren't your thing, they aren't your thing. I don't think it being a dice game is actually the problem. If anything it's the opposite. ES isn't a dice game, simply a game that uses a lot of dice. Mechanically, it's a different sort of game. I think the most damning criticism I've seen thus far is surprising lack of strategy involved and very little player choices to make during the game. Everything hinges on the dice, and either you can make the dice work or you can't. I'm still interested (though I may have to buy to try it), but reviews have been very mixed. The details are consistent, just opinions differ, so it all depends on what sort of gamer you are. Which is a positive really; the game is probably sound, it's just not for everyone (but neither is AH). I'll take that over a flawed game any day.
  5. I forget where it stated it in the rules (don't have it with me at the moment), but I'm pretty sure there was a section stating that each action has a natural effect based on what action it is on top of that action's special ability. In short, you get a support token each time you play a support card along with whatever special ability is on that support card.
  6. A neat idea for another game. This really wouldn't suit Rune Age since your idea seems purely competitive in design. Rune Age can be played as co-op and even solo, so the idea of having a new mechanic designed with a competitive game in mind short changes a lot of the game design. I think the simplest way to expand Rune Age is to offer new faction cards at varying costs, as well as new neutral cards for each scenario. This would open up a lot more replayability and variety where it's currently lacking. The existing game has so much room for expansion (and needs it) I don't think a new deck mechanic should be added, at least not yet, just new cards.
  7. Just 1. Numbers are only used during a defense roll (or card effects).
  8. Nice to see some reviews coming out for it. I was little worried when some of the initial comments on forums and where-have-you seemed a bit mixed.
  9. 1. Yes, everything moves. It goes up or down based on the smaller section of the formation. So if a marine towards the top dies, the stuff up top moves down. If it's even, bottom cards move up. 2. Support Tokens. You can use these to get a re-roll when attacking or defending. If it's still a problem, some teams have cards to boost them when defending. Blue I think has a good effect on their support card (bear in mind, like many attack/defense bonuses they only apply to specific characters for some reason). 3. There's probably not a huge difference between the teams, it largely comes down to how you play during the game. That said, I've been using red team and pink(?) team a lot, though I have not won a solo game. 2-player games are pretty fun, and my brother and I have won both 2-player set ups so far. There are also a lot of house rules you can find on the forums that might help a bit. But I agree, despite the difficulty it's still a fun game.
  10. I would agree with most points if your hand was constantly changing. However, in DA, your hand is static. You only get 3 actions per team, and it's the same cards for the entire game. All of the second-guessing and whatnot becomes rather pointless when you immediately have a 50% chance of guessing what they'll play. And if you've got players who only play for themselves instead of helping the team in a co-op game, you either won't want to play with them, or you should just play a competitive game instead. The only thing it really does, and even then not to a very large degree, is prevent one player from running the game, but even then, having a leader isn't a bad idea anyway. It gives the group some one to rely on when they get in a jam and settle disputes. If players had an action deck, even a small one, that they drew cards from, constantly changing the contents of their hand, this rule would have significantly more impact on the game. As it is, it just feels very silly. "I can't show you my only 3 cards (or only 2 after the first turn!), but I can tell you what I have, what a dilemma." Maybe if each team had a different objective on top of surviving, that way it's still co-op and everyone's trying to survive, but different teams have their own goals and better motivation to work independently.
  11. Toqtamish said: Ascension has player interaction actually, especially with the expansion. Yes, it does have player interaction. But very little for what's supposed to be a competitive game. But I have not seen the expansion, so maybe there's better interaction. Probably doesn't help the randomness though, and the cards still look ugly
  12. I agree, those giant boxes with the inserts get annoying. Almost none of FFGs games need those big boxes, and could be packaged smaller. But especially for a card game, small packs or even a box the size of some of the other silver line products like Death Angel would work; it's a small but sturdy box, and can fit tons of cards and have room for some tokens.
  13. Rashley said: If you take the insert out of the box there is room for many expansions as well. With or without sleves. A lot of space is wasted under these inserts. Cheers! That's what I did with Call of Cthulhu. The inserts are pretty annoying anyway, and make for terrible deck storage due to the holes in the cardboard. You can easily fit a normal sleeve-carrying deckbox once you take out the insert. I've actually put my stuff in one of the big UDE starter deck boxes, which accommodates sleeves, and without the insert it fits in the box just fine.
  14. I'm still looking forward to it. You can probably use house rules regarding the neutral cards in the center (only 3 per stack in a 2-player game seems kind of low, even if we're clearly supposed to prioritize faction cards over neutral). I've played Ascension, and as a free iOS card game (free version you can only play AI) it's great casual fun, but I wouldn't pay money for it. Far too random and almost no player-to-player interaction. Rune Age, depending on the game type, has a lot of player-to-player interaction, and having faction-specific cards as well as neutral cards should help cut down the randomness of some deck-building card games. Plus the cards look really good.
  • Create New...