Jump to content

Indalecio

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    792

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Indalecio

  2. Posted · Edited by Indalecio

    If I put an agent into play in the first encounter of the Shadowfall Mountain (Heirs of Blood), and the agent is still on the map when the encounter ends. Can I then port the agent on to the second encounter (as per setup rules) without paying the threat again?

     

    I´m pretty sure I can do that, the text is pretty clear to me, but I thought I´d had it confirmed by the community to avoid unnecessary arguments later on :rolleyes:

     

    Thanks.

     

    EDIT: No open groups in that quest. So no agent -_- Thanks to Charmy and Zaltyre.

  3. Posted

    I also got a response from FFG yesterday but I wasn't able to post it until now :)

     

    Rules Question:
    Hello FFG support, I would like to ask you about the following situation: A hero lies dead and Song of Mending (Bard class) is about to revive that hero, with both Lifethirst 1 from a nearby Crow Hag and Understudy (Bard class) in play. Both abilities (Lifethirst and Understudy) state "each time a hero recovers 1 life", so my understanding is that the hero is revived first due to Song of Mending, then both Lifethirst and Understudy abilities trigger, taking out each other. The result is a standing hero with 1 life. Is that correct? Thanks BR

     

    Answer:
    Your understanding that the knocked-out hero recovers 1 life from Song of Mending and that simultaneously triggers Lifethirst and Understudy is true. Because they trigger simultaneously, the active player (the Bard in this case) chooses in which order to resolve them. Normally, I believe, they would choose to resolve Understudy first for +1 healing, then resolve Lifethirst to block that +1 healing, leaving the hero with a total recovery of 1 Health. However, if they were concerned about a monster sneezing on that hero and downing them again, the Bard may choose to resolve Lifethirst first, thus removing the trigger for Understudy (the hero does not recover 1 or more health, the hero recovers 0 health).
     

    Thanks for playing,

    Kara Centell-Dunk
    Game Developer
    Fantasy Flight Games
    Zaltyre, The Cocky Rooster, Luijod and 1 other reacted to this

  4. Posted

    I always champion Basic II, but I think it's a matter of taste. I am using Basic currently in a campaign and I can't say that I don't like it, but I do miss my Befuddles and Mimic cards.

     

    Basic II is more impredictible than Basic I, which also has an impact on psychologic warfare. Just that fact alone makes me chuckle.

    But generally speaking Basic II has more variance in power than Basic has, mainly because everything comes down to attribute tests. Basic is safer and more stable in general.

    This is why Basic II feels like it requires slightly more management and expertise from the Overlord to run to best effect compared to its predecessor.

     

    I personally find cool that you are never garantee success when playing an ability. It find it fun, as opposed to unconditional card denial from the heroes' side.

     

    Basic III will be far superior to both. Monster-trait based effects are uncounterable by the heroes, and taking the best out of Basic and Basic II mixed into Basic III makes it the next generation OL deck. :ph34r:

  6. Posted

    I don't have the Crow Hags so I am going to trust Indalecio's research on this. I agree with the point that if they have the same trigger condition, the heroes decide the order so he could stand up. For the sake of simplicity:)

     

    Well actually the last post I made seems to make more sense (to me at least :D ), and the heroes would not need to decide anything since both effects would trigger simultaneously, with cumulated result.

  7. Posted · Edited by Indalecio

    I´m not sure because both Bloodthirst and Understudy have the same formulation: "each time a hero recovers 1 or more life..."

     

    Had Lifethirst stated would recover instead, then I would understand it as triggering before the actual life gain, thus triggering first and barring Understudy from triggering in the end (since the hero did not recover any life). But in the current state of that phrasing, it looks like both cards need to wait for the lifegain to be in effect (effectively making the hero stand up immediately) to apply. For lack of indication that one effect would take place before the other one (again, same phrasing), I assume both effects to be cumulative and take each other out.

     

    But I´m not 100% sure :)

  8. Posted · Edited by Indalecio

    Is there any chance you will be doing this for the OL decks as well? Warlord, Saboteur, Punisher, Infector,..

    That would be really awesome!

     

    Thanks for suggesting that I would make a good guide to OL cards.

    I intend to make one, but I haven't started yet. I´ve been busy lately, barely responding to some of the comments on the Plot decks guide.

    I just need to decide of a format and I´ll certainly go through this in a similar fashion to how I dealt with the plot cards (e.g. geek list of some sort). The good part is that I have a lot more experience on average with most of these OL cards, since you can buy them in virtually any campaign. As opposed to plot decks which need to be have a 1<->1 relationship to a campaign. It's hard to accumulate experience for each plot deck in those conditions.

    Atom4geVampire reacted to this

  10. Posted

    I have a small doubt regarding the use of Lifethirst in the following situation:

     

    A hero lies dead. Song of Mending (Bard class) is in effect and would heal that hero with 1 life. Lifethirst 1 is also in play from a near Crow Hag monster. Understudy (Bard class) is also in play, allowing a hero healing 1 life to heal another 1 life.

     

    Would the hero be revived with 1+1-1 = 1 life total?

    Or would the hero still lay dead? (Lifethirst triggers first so Understudy does not trigger).

     

    What I think is that the heroes decide the order of triggering of the abilities since it's their turn, therefore the hero would stand up. I´m not completely sure, though.

     

    Has anybody asked this before?

     

  11. Posted · Edited by Indalecio

    lot of people waiting for gloomhaven, shadows of brimstone had a lot of hype a while back, dunno if it lived up to it and it's current state (was too expensive for my taste in germany, and didn't really like the release model with 2 packs etc.).

    I backed Gloomhaven but I´m not sure why anymore. Actually I do, but I´m so irritated by the designer at the moment. Otherwise I pledged because I like the Legacy aspect of it. I also like the fact you are forced to retire and thereafter take on a new advanced character. From a tactical point of you I also liked the system as you need to choose which one of the two effects on the card you want to play to carry out. I think that was the thing that dragged me into it. It's quite innovative compared to some other things we keep seeing on KS. But the game won't compare to Descent anyway and it's definitely not a dungeon crawler in the traditional sense of the word.

     

    imo there isn't really that much you can do with a co-op dungeon crawler, in the end you'll be moving figures around and roll dice for combat. maybe some deck-building in the mix and more extensive systems (folklore has crafting, but haven't really looked into it), but that's it.

    not complaining tho, I just don't expect anything groundbreaking when it comes to mechanics. ;)

    I think there is room for new mechanisms. I have myself designed some game parts with a system that I would call different from what the genre has to offer, although calling it a "good system" is probably a stretch since I never made it out of the demo stage.

    I think the main problem here is people's expectations. People don't really want new mechanisms in dungeon crawling. They just want Warhammer Quest all over again with some updated systems carefully picked from other succesful games. Even Euro games, see Conan (bad game btw).

  12. Posted

    I lost a quest featuring Ariad because of this item handover mechanism, so it's definitely useful.

    The heroes found some powerful sword thanks to Treasure Chest, and slayed Ariad to pieces with it by handing it over to each character in turn (they all were at melee range). Even if they had to waste move actions on this, it was still worth it to be able to attack 4 times (actually more because of feats and fortune tokens) with a RRB weapon instead of taking weaker shots from distance. I really need to find out what this weapon was but it was a blood bath.

  13. Posted

    Tristayne's deck is one of my favorites too.

     

    But honestly, a plot deck shouldn't normally be the key to winning quests at all. I am aware that you can chain some of Tristayne's plot cards since they cost you 0, which in turn adds up to the bill when you think retrospectively about what made you win an encounter, but it still cannot be the decisive element in your success. The problem in that case is more the fact that D2E is articulated around dice rolls (and card draw). Bad rolls set you back a lot, and good rolls increase your position drastically. It's a reality. So in clear, it doesn't matter if you add two damages to a succesful attack from a plot card, the issue is that this succesful attack shouldn't actually net you the quest. Abilties allowing you to re-roll some of your dices are therefore very powerful compared to effects that do seem nice but only increase an edge you already would get anyway.

     

    Mainly, the heroes know you have these plot cards and when you are expected to activate them. They cannot counter a plot card, but they can dictate your play in numerous ways. They can trap you in a situation when you´d think best to play a card while it's not, or to spend the threat on something just so you cannot afford playing the real threat. Obviously 0-cost cards are trickier to handle, but they can still force you to exhaust it so it cannot be played elsewhere.

     

    I´m not saying heroes can always counter your plot cards, or that plot cards are meaningless as they don't affect your odds of winning overall, they do sometimes, but they shouldn't be the core of your strategy. To use a high-reward plot card efficiently, you almost always need to perform a sequence of plays prior to playing the card, involving monsters, positioning and OL cards. For instance, you can Shiting Earth the heroes, but it's only powerful if you can follow up with something to capitalize on the new position of the heroes.

  14. Posted

    I agree with the above poster, if you cannot get it all then prioritize the boxed contents and the H&M packs (and even then some of them are not that good compared to other very good ones). It breaks my heart to say that the LPs aren't worth the money, since the master villains in your campaigns deserve a figure worth the name, but in the end they only add marginal content to the game compared to the rest of the expansions.

    SoyGreen and Keiran reacted to this

  15. Posted · Edited by Indalecio

    None of the aforementioned games are established games. That includes S&S, Folkore and the rest of the dungeon crawlers from Kickstarter. I was extremely anti the S&S hype because I thought the game completely lacked inspiration. Folklore had some interesting mechanisms but combat was flat as a pancake rolled over by a truck. The other game with giant insects from Finland I forgot the name about (EDIT: Perdition's Mouth)was also too restricted and the wheel was weird. There are many of these games which look interesting but either take too much from other games (eg nothing unique or unseen about it) or just fail to suggest any good mechanism to the genra.

     

    So yeah, we can write a reminder on our calendars and say that none of the aforementioned games will be remembered by anyone but their backers in 5 years time. Except Myth maybe since its failure will always be remembered by the KS/BGG community.

     

    I´m still waiting for a genra-breaker dungeon crawl game with unique mechanisms to be released. Masmorra is cool but it's not really the same experience.

     

    There is simply no game like Descent on the market at the moment. There are games with overlord roles but they are strictly less deep and interesting.

     

    Alone, a spanish game presented at Essen Germany last year (I sat there for the demo) will feature up to 4 overlords against a lone hero. Not sure the game will be good, but that's quite an interesting concept. Although it's sci-fi and Star Wars probably always wins at it in the end...

    Keiran reacted to this

  16. Posted · Edited by Indalecio

    I was thinking, while reading about automatic dice rolls on the other thread, that having a simulation mode on that app would be quite interesting to have, or at least as a great testing tool for FFG. Namely that a program like an extended version of this app would run the game from start to end, heroes included. While sounding ridiculous, it might be valuable to generate statistics and trends about hero/class composition for a particular quest, in order to help setting balance between the two sides.

     

    You can see below a picture of the FFG team looping campaigns through this tool and getting the statistics out of it

     

    computer.jpg

    Luijod reacted to this

  17. Posted · Edited by Indalecio

    The efficiency and power of a plot deck is highly variable depending on which one you decide to choose. As you gain experience with the game, you will likely find that the heroes will be winning more and more often than before, and to remedy "balance" you will find these plot decks to be a welcome addition to your arsenal. I would recommend not to play with them for your first games and introduce them gradually as heroes start picking up the game.

    Don't forget that you have other options than ignoring a deck or deciding to play with one. You can choose one and only use the base card. You can deliberately ignore the purchase of some more powerful cards just because you feel the game is at its best balance power-wise between the two sides. You can let cards lie on the table without actually activating them. I think plot decks are a nice way to adjust balance whenever needed. I have almost never seen a plot card net me a quest. I´ve had decisive moments where a plot card was key to executing a sequence of play, but it was mostly backed up by OL cards or a specific type of monster. Never a plot card alone.

    Rumor quests are a subject of discussion among the community. I personally think they give too much advantage to the heroes. I would never play one myself unless the gain was great and more or less garanteed.

    H&M packs gives the OL more monsters to choose from, but also more monsters for the heroes to fight against. My hero players may be on the marginal side of the community but they always welcome new and fresh additions to the game in form of new monsters to toy with. Balance wise I think you exagerate the power of these packs. Sure, Kobolds are a big deal, Crow Hags are still under discussion too. Otherwise everything seems to be fair. The base game monsters are very powerful themselves so it's not like they are outdated by the H&M packs, on the contrary.

    I always play with plot decks as they give a theme to the role of overlord.

    I think the only overpowered cards around are on the heroes side, luckily they are not many of them. Crossbow, Logan Lashley and a few other weapons come to mind.

    Zaltyre and Letanir reacted to this

  19. Posted · Edited by Indalecio

    Trying to think about a situation when a hero would defeat a monster and die by his/her own attack, when defeating the monster would grant the hero a search card into treasure chest into an armor giving extra health. But Mimic grants the card to the closest hero, which has to be somebody else.

     

    Edit: And you wouldn't even be able to equip it anyway, so nevermind. Although Zaltyre has very likely designed a custom quest with that very mechanic just to mess up with us, though ;)

  20. Posted

    Good job!!

     

    My main reaction would be about the monster list. I find hard to categorize monsters in general. Some monster groups really seem to fit some specific role, but you can find flexibility in most of them. Which means I don't necessarly value a monster group just based on what it seems to be best at doing, I would always take the quest rules into consideration first. I sometimes pick slightly worse monsters for a task so I can get the flexibility of having them do something else if I ever need it.

     

    Otherwise I respect the fact you champion Basic, but I think you underestimate what Basic II can do.

  21. Posted

    Wonderful job, Indalecio. Many thanks.

     

    While my group is heavily weighted to the "playing for fun" end of the spectrum, I absolutely approve of you reviewing the decks from the "playing competively" side. As you mention in your introduction, with no way to know a group's playstyle, it's impossible to evaluate a particular deck's usefulness - but at least by sticking strictly to the mechanics you can do a more objective analysis.

     

    For the cards you consider weak (particularly in view to threat cost) have you considered making any house-rule changes? If so I'd be interested in seeing them.

     

    Thanks!

     

    Regarding your question, I personally don't think there is any possibility or room for house ruling the weaker cards without affecting balance. You may be able to pick a few cards and adjust their cost to match their power, but too many cards do nothing or even worsens your position as the overlord. With this being said, I think it's part of the deal to have that kind of variance in the power of these cards. If you made every low-rated cards more efficient (actual worth using) then it would make plot decks a lot better than what they curently are, thus increasing the threat these cards represent to the heroes. I don't think any hero group with sense would accept that.

     

    But basically, "fixing" the cards by adjusting the costs would affect the threat token economy system, and even maybe affect the decision for playing rumor quests. Maybe localized house rules for some of the cards you really insist on using but are unplayable in the current state of things.

     

    I am not really keen normally on introducing house rules especially to fix minor things like these. House rules affect balance in the game and create a special state among the players. I tend to avoid that and embrace the flaws the game has so I can at least play the game as intended. Then sure, I´ve been designing new game modes to other games so it's not like there is no room for inspiration. But let us say plot cards are the lesser of the evil in terms of issues with Descent, I would fix other things first before touching plot decks.

     

     

    I like the guide though I have different experience with different decks. For now I have a question about Merrick Farrow card Dark Pact.

    First of all there is small mistake in guide in which you say that OL can choose a hero for this card while card says that this choise is made by hero players, which makes this card much worse.

    And I wonder about the card effect, I'm not good at English, so I can't really tell what card means. For example if chosen hero has to suffer 6 damage and use this card, would he suffer 2 or 4 damage?

    Btw, can OL decide not to use this card at all?

     

    You are right about the error in the guide, thanks for pointing that out, I´ll correct it.

    And no, the Overlord doesn't get to decide whether to use the card or not. The heroes do.

     

     

    In your example, he would suffer 4 damage. The damage is reduced by 2. You are correct that the heroes choose who gets the pact. Indalecio may want to update that on the guide :-)

    I think it's a pretty awful card myself.. And no, you can't choose to not use it. It is a necessary evil of taking Merrick's deck

    I think I was blinded by the mistake saying the OL could decide which hero would be picked. I´ve played the deck three times total and the heroes always got to decide, so I don't know what took me when I wrote this. And yes Merick is a double-edge sword :)

  23. Posted

    I should probably thank you for reading this as it means you still haven't clicked on "ignoring" my posts on these forums :)

    Honestly guys click on that ignore button to get rid of the real trolls or the people advertising things, not to shut down a discussion...

     

    I still don't get why you insist that FFG is supposed to make bad business-decisions and why you insist that FFG can't make an expansion that targets both traditional and coop play. Imo the idea that both game-modes compete over the same design resources is totally unfounded and lacks any rational. After all, all their content so far is balanced towards the traditional style and still viable for coop, because they balance the content via the coop app. Why would they even want to change that? Why would they decide to not balance the content via the coop-app for just this one expansion and instead make it unusable for tradtional Descent? (while throwing off the balance to all the existing content)

     

    About the "bad decisioning", I do not think releasing an app for a game is a bad marketing decision, and I do not believe either that releasing a variant to a game that will appeal to many more players is a bad idea at all. If we look at this thread alone, the number of posters we have never seen posting here before seems to indicate that there will be interest far beyond the existing community, which is again hardly a bad thing.

     

    Nobody (including myself) can make any real claim about the legitimity of this decision from a business perspective. However we can try to predict the impact of the publisher's decisions on the market, the existing franchise, future development and the community. Even in the improbable situation where FFG would make such a terrible decision so that it would sink a whole product line to oblivion, they could still make business out of it in some other way and turn it into profit elsewhere. After all we do see competition between games of the same publisher. So yeah, the point I´m trying to make is that we can hardly make any conclusion as for the possibility to lose business in this enterprise; let us say it is highly unlikely.

     

    I´m sure every future addition to the franchise will have its use in both games (that is traditional D2E and Road to Legend). It may be that I wasn't clear about that, but there will definitely be some crossovers between the two. With this said, the lack of overlord and the addition of exploration in Road to Legend are very impactful changes, which is why I don't find unreasonable to claim that future expansions might be difficult to fully adapt to both game modes. My biggest worry is how will they code the overlord parts into the app. Say, the overlord AI holds a Web Trap, would it play it at the rightful occasion? You can certainly code a vast set of circunstances and events into the app, making the Overlord trigger the play of some effect, but it still won't be the same level of intelligence as for having a real overlord. That's the reason why I dislike the dumbed down version of the overlord RtL will present.

    Ceasarsalad101 and DAMaz reacted to this

  24. Posted · Edited by Indalecio

    Competition? There is only Imperial Assault and that fills the sci-fi theme but for fantasy? There are no other game as established as Descent with a strong role of overlord. You're welcome to come up with other names but I know already there is none and it's not even close.

    But sure, start stripping the game off its overlord feature like they're doing with the app and I will suddenly +1 your post. There comes the competition because this time you have plenty of games trying to do the same thing. It's called co op dungeon crawlers and there are literally a couple of good ones launched on Kickstarter every year. Granted none of them have the edge of using an app (yet), but even the appeal of an app does not necessarily make a game better from a mechanical perspective. It may be this app will throw Descent on top of the ladder if they've done their job well, but it will still be challenged on regular basis by the constant stream of new games coming out.

    Do people start to see why I think it's important to preserve the game's unique design instead of making it main stream?

×
×
  • Create New...