Jump to content

Indalecio

Members
  • Content Count

    792
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Indalecio

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 02/02/1980

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    http://-
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Sweden

Recent Profile Visitors

808 profile views
  1. I have a few "dead games" at home that I keep coming back to. Not sure why the fact they´'re dead (as in no more expansions will be released) would make me play them less. I think you can have fun with Descent even if the game is discontinued. I´'d almost say grab it before it runs out if you´re that interested. But if you´'re fine with waiting for a 3rd edition or whatever is coming next, you have other games on the market that are really cool too. I guess my point is that Descent, despite its uniqueness, is not the only game out there.
  2. It's more of a gamer's wet dream than anything else to be honest. You are correct that established companies use KS as well as small ones, but it's either because they use KS as a massive pre-order system, or their game is essentially (or almost) KS exclusive, or they are truly minis specialists (or claim to be). Sure there are other rather big companies doing well there with non-mini games, but that's more occasional and not quite the same category as the one a KS edition Descent would fall into. On top of that we are talking Asmodee here and there surely are political/PR ramifications for using KS as a platform for raising funds to making games. Of course, you never know, but I´'d be extremely surprised. FFG has never been a name in the mini industry, nothing wrong with their minis, but let's face it their standards are no near the top of the range if you compare them to what true mini specialists are producing nowadays. Quality has evolved dramatically, and backers expectations on quality has gone up accordingly. Minis is mostly what has made other games close to Descent succesful on KS. Closest I can think of right now is probably Swords & Sorcery minis quality-wise, but again it was a small company so again there's no precedent for a mammoth company like FFG to do well on KS on a mini-centered game. On the bright side, there are so many games like Descent released on KS that would help you scratch that itch anyway, and I´'d bet there will be even more in the future.
  3. Indalecio

    Runemaster my nemesis

    I think the Disciple should be your first kill priority. Try to keep him at low health at all times so you can kill him whenever you need to damage control the Runemaster. Use Web Traps to isolate the heroes and create distance between them, which in turn negates most support abilities. I think for you to win encounters in this type of scenario your only option is to go on alpha strike mode before your monsters die, so be very conservative with your cards until you see your moment. Then luck with decide whether you can pull it off or not. I would suggest to try to lure the Knight into wasting protection abilities against some decoy attacks. Then attack with the support from your Warlord/Basic cards once that's gone. Basically don't bother bringing down the Knight until the other two are dead. Use numerous monsters against Pierce, since Pierce makes elite defense monsters worse. Goblin Archers and Flesh Moulders in the base game. Barghests are very good too, plus they have Howl to annoy stamina levels. Obviously Shadow Dragons remain your best monsters and you should keep these Dark Mights so you can trigger Fire Breath when applicable. Dark Charm can do some damage and should be your best card in that scenario, but basically Warlord and a couple of Saboteur cards shoudl be thrown in as you start gathering some XP. Blood Rage is the best Warlord card in your case as none of your monsters will be alive anyway so that supports your alphastrike strategy the best. Stuff happens in Descent but I would not hold high hopes for keeping monsters alive ahead of a possible rematch or backup plan, you´re going to go big and win or lose terribly, no in betweens. With only the base game you are in hardcore mode. Expansions would help you a ton. Servants (Call of the Raven, Chains that Rust) force your heroes to waste actions against endless bodies. Against killing machines that's perfect. Stamina disruption is even more present in these expansions. Then Terrify condition basically shut down surges (and therefore Runemaster all together). Changelings are good, Kobolds, Reanimates, Hellhounds are good and numerous attack monsters. Basically a lot of your monster choices depend on what gear your heroes have. Kyndrithul plot deck would eat that Runemaster alive. Okay not quite like that, but almost. You basically harm abilities directly by making them more expensive to trigger along with other things. It's the ultimate toolbox against heroes relying on super powerful abilities.
  4. Indalecio

    The Future of 2nd Edition

    I think of Descent (and Gloomhaven) as a tactical game more than an adventure game. I guess the requirement on "adventure" is emphasized by the fact fantasy to many means adventure. Whereas in Descent, it's more like you know what you get into in advance and try to fulfill the mission, as opposed to opening doors to find some random treasure. The problem with exploration is that it makes for unlogical situations. Skavens in one room, skeletons in the next one in Warhammer Quest etc. Boss is a Troll, nice. Hero Quest had a taste of exploration but the layout was stil fixed and the feeling only lasted the first quest, but I get what you mean by that. Not saying it's bad, I´m playing the D&D adventure game system with everything mixed together and the map looks crazy after a game (espcially now that jungle tiles have been released, they look odd next to my castle ravenloft tiles lol), plus the monsters can be just everything. I like that a lot and can get past the non-logical argument for the simple reason that it's fun. Kind of brainless, party-game ish where you´re not really immersed in some sort of story for once. But of course it's not the same fun as in entering a dungeon and let your GM guide you through the rooms and encounter the characters/monsters in a RPG. It gave me an idea. I don't know if you´´re familiar with the EXIT games, where you are stuck in some place and try to resolve puzzles to get out. Maybe Descent could propose a game system and then release a series of one-off quests where you basically know nothing about and try to get to an outcome. Maybe the Overlord could have different set of information than the heroes, and you would play from different premices. Could be cool. Or, make a huge scenario with several sections of map - some of them could be randomized - and allow the heroes to explore it.
  5. Indalecio

    The Future of 2nd Edition

    Ultimately I think Gloomhaven needs to stay Gloomhaven and Descent needs to stay Descent. I like both for different reasons and I don't feel like a game being a mix of these two would make a better game necessarly. I think both have strong cases and rely on different pros, and they also have their own flaws as well. In terms of things that "could be" ported into Descent without altering the very essence of the game: - I like the hexes too. AoE attacks are more targeted, moving feels more natural (Descent feels like Hero Quest-y in that), diagonal movement is removed, better way to handle pull and push effects. Only downsides are that the map layout can look a bit weird sometimes, and doors don't work very well. - Remove terrain from Descent maps and use the tokens instead. Art takes a hit, but it makes tiles way more replayable. For custom quests that must be a huge benefit. Also that also means you can have abilities to remove terrain (like the Cragheart who throws enemies on obstacles to destroy them), which is an interesting option. - Keep the dices in Descent, but make more variation, as in dice customization. Dice Forge allows for a total customization of your dice and I´d like to see this in a game like Descent. - Gloomhaven dumbed down silly LoS rules to oblivion... and I think it works a lot better this way for my personal needs. Sure, it becomes less tactical in terms of positioning but the game flows way better and gone are the discussions on whether any given figure gets LoS or not. - I like traps on the map that go away when you walk on them. - It feels like some Descent abilities could use a cooldown so they don't get spammed turn after turn. In Gloomhaven they are one-offs (to some extent), which means they FEEL powerful, unlike in Descent when casting your lvl 3 card feels like the all day long every day thing to do. - The element system is very nice and encourages co-operation. It's a nice touch which gives a little variation, namely (for those who aren't familiar with Gloomhaven) that you get added effects if you use an element, or you can wake elements by doing some of your actions. If player A creates Wind then player B can be enticed to using an ability that uses Wind for better throughput. There isn't much more, some stuff is a way more tricky to introduce: - Conditions in Gloomhaven are very similar to Descent's but they are tied to the card-driven game engine. A few could see some use in Descent, like Disarm (weaker Stun to remove attack action) or Muddle (disadvantage on attacks, could be implemented in Descent). Invisible condition sounds insane for a game like Descent, though. - Descent doesn't scale very well to power creep, the act-driven campaign system, XP system and OL card purchase systems would need to be revisited to accomodate an open world type of campaign system like in Gloomhaven. Not sure Descent would be Descent after that, though.
  6. Indalecio

    Another house rule on "X"

    Well yeah, doing it this way is a big nerf to monsters with brown defense dice, so here you go. Also there's quite a few effects triggered by the X from hero abilities or feats that you need to house rule if these characters are played. Same goes for a few OL abilities. I was about to read your other thread regarding OL strategy but after reading this I cannot comment to it because you basically are playing the game on a **** of a house rule. No offense meant, it's just that the X is such a core rule to the game.
  7. Me too. Plus they do a deluxe version where everything is pre-painted. Wish they had that for Descent. MD arrived last week, and some of the minis are insane. I haven't played the game yet, though. I don't know if I ever will given the competition!
  8. Porting D&D heroes into D2E sounds like a good idea. But using Ashardalon as a monster also sounds like a ton of fun. Or these elementals from the most recent expansion. Even the tiles were good in that expansion (for a WotC product). They´re way better than Gloomhaven's anyway You know they´'re releasing Tomb of Annihilation soon for even more D&D joy you could throw into Descent?
  9. Some time ago a friend of mine mentioned that it should be possible to write off a burn condition by stepping into a water space.
  10. Indalecio

    Pros of Chains that rust

    The Bilehall/Chains combination is still a big question-mark to me. They're both good expansions in terms of components, art, mechanisms, story, etc. but I'm still not sure FFG thought these out well enough in terms of game balance. I have to play more of these campaigns in even more different settings to get a clear picture, but from what I could experience myself, the "Descent hardcore-mode" these two boxes seem to imply sort of invalidate more than half the cards in the game, as players are effectively pushed to play cutthroat to even stand a chance. I like playing competitively, but in that case it was more like planning for the best possible action otherwise you're screwed (ie no room for testing the waters, or for recovering from bad luck). That includes the tainted cards mechanism, which I like very much on paper (plus they're funny to read) but that we (all sides) found as causing the game become swingy as hell. The heroes have zero reason not to spec or buy items toincrease their health to unseen levels or to boost their defense, which means the OL has to chew through 100+ shared health with various levels of defense (making Knight awesome for instance) and can do nothing else in the meantime (like denying treasure chest). That means you HAVE to pick the same monsters over and over as your open groups because there are so few monsters that can achieve that required level of attacking potential. Similarly, the OL has zero reason not to hoard every card and then go for an alpha strike; the heroes then get swamped in a area of the map as they lose their revival tactics (a key feature of the game btw) and waste tons of actions trying to heal few points of damage all game instead of evaluating the risk of getting killed when taking a different action. Strategy has taken a hit in these campaigns, and so has variance in the game, because I think the classes (both heroes and OL) that were barely playable before became stone unplayable in these. Yeah, I´ll add an Infection token on your hero so I can get +1 damage on your 16 health 3 defense dice rolling hero with the cloak that makes damage go to stamina. A bit pointless? I thought earlier that other campaigns did that too to some extent, but Bilehall/Chains seem to take the cake here. Bluntly put, you can say goodbye to a lot of subpar cards just because you cannot afford making subpar choices in these campaigns, which is a shame. I´'ve painfully experienced a few attempts to test some OL cards and monsters in a couple of campaigns where I was already way ahead of my opposition just to witness how it could swing back to me and put me in a difficult position later in the campaign. It's not forgiving in any way, and I would argue that it wasn't that fun either. In another campaign, Bilehall (famous for being OL favored) was so hard for the heroes that Chains (advertised as being more heroes-favored to compensate for the Bilehall nonsense) became a joke. We were finishing encounters in 30 minutes time, and I think I ended the campaign with 5 unspent XP. The first encounter of the Finale (Profane Nexus I think) was arguably on the same level of balance as Death on the Wing enc 2 with a win turn 2 or 3. For the Finale it was quite a poor experience in our opinion. I played this one three times with the same hero opposition and they tried different tactics that I could easily anticipate. As standalone campaign maybe it's fine, but with Bilehall involved I don't see how you can recover from the Bilehall heroes-ownage later in Chains.
  11. Indalecio

    The Future of 2nd Edition

    Speculation time, woohoo! I don't think there is a Descent 3.0 coming anytime soon, because I don't see any reason for doing one, and if I say that then it must be true. Anyway, sales are good for this game, there are apps on the market, gameplay is established regardless if there are grey areas or not, and there seems to be a dedicated fan-base despite concurrent products hitting the market constantly with arguably better gameplay and (not so arguably) miniatures. Releasing D3E would necessarly mean releasing new gameplay, as you don't just release a new game to put new templates on your cards and I think the miniatures are still okay for quite some time (we'll see if they still meet the standards in 1-2 years time, though... some games are currently releasing miniatures that completely puts the FFG ones to shame). Which is good for the wallet. I'm starting a Gloomhaven campaign next time and for once I don't have to worry about having to interrupt the campaign to come back to Descent because an expansion just got released by FFG, which happened to us all the time. There is also this general trend nowadays to streamline games to death when releasing new iterations. I like streamlining as a process, as I am not the kind of person enjoying games taking ages to finish, but there's still a danger that something working properly gets dumbed down to oblivion just to be able to advertise the game to a broader public. I´ll pass on the artistic direction going anime instead of oldschool role play art to attract the masses (videogamers in particular). Sometimes it is good to wait for feedback before releasing more products. We´'ve been spoiled with tons of material. I feel like the latest campaigns were on the edge of exploring new directions for the game, although they did not go all the way and were made a bit too conservatively to my taste. Maybe (this is speculation) FFG is coming to a crossroad where they could either release more "stuff" to enrich the game without touching the core gameplay (in which case there is no rush), or design new types of campaigns introducing more interesting mechanisms, therefore extending the product's life. The latter being a bit risky. There must be a roadmap for this game, and I think the most plausible reason for the lack of recent news is that the game is not prioritized at the moment, possibly because the game has already a lot of content and sells well anyway, so focus is put on other product lines trying to grow to that level of establishment.
  12. I agree the rules are quite loose on the matter. But yeah in that context, I would assume action can only be a move or an attack. Which means he can either double move, or move and attack (and vice-versa). I don't think he can even open a door, although monsters can do that. Some things are not quite logical.
  13. Indalecio

    Naughty Overlord!!

    I clicked on this thread expecting something else 8)
  14. Indalecio

    Why choose melee over range?

    The third option Melee + Reach is probably the best out of the three. You normally want to avoid shooting from long distance so you don't miss your attack, and you normally don't want your movement ability to be too restricted because of melee range, as well as avoiding monsters/OL effects triggering on being adjacent to a monster.
  15. Hi guys, I´m finally done writing my guide to OL cards, which you can find at the following link: Guide to Overlord Cards Hope you find it useful. Don't hesitate to comment on the list directly, so we can centralize eventual discussions at one place.
×