• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Zaltyre

  • Rank
  • Birthday

Recent Profile Visitors

1,326 profile views
  1. This is true. Every day that goes by I feel a little more like some old guy shouting at players newer to Descent. "In MY day, we understood how to use fire breath..."
  2. Oh it WAS this very thread. No, I'm good.
  3. This is why I stopped updating my glossary, or at least realized the immense value or Sadgit's CRRG. The unfortunate reality is that while D2e has a MOSTLY consistent language, there are a bunch of abilities where terms are used in atypical ways. Conditions and condition surges are probably the largest offenders here. Ninja'd by Sadgit. Speak of the devil...
  4. Silidus, I'm pretty sure there was a relatively recent ruling regarding multi-space attacks and conditions/surge abilities... if anyone else knows what I'm talking about feel free to post a link. I know that conditions do propogate to affected figures and not just targets in at least some cases: Rules Question: The Skirmisher's "Carve a Path" (and some other abilities like the Giant's "Sweep" are attacks which "affect all spaces..." Do these attacks target any spaces, or are all spaces merely "affected" by the attack? (Does this mean the Giant can't stun with "Sweep," or is the use of "target" in the surge ability nonspecific?) Thanks! Answer: ...we have determined that those attacks remain consistent with the use of “target” versus “affect,” meaning that there is no target in an attack that simply affects figures. We’ve further discussed that any surge for conditions (Surge: Stun, Surge: Poison, etc.) used during such an attack should extend to those affected by an attack and not just the target. So in your example, though a Giant does not have a target when it sweeps, it may still Stun affected figures if it applies Stun to the attack. Thanks for playing! Kara Centell-Dunk
  5. DerDelphi's custom coop was great. It is too bad it received limited interest/feedback (I'm guilty of that). I do believe there would be more community content if the community expressed more interest.
  6. If your heroes are winning all the time, you might want to triple-check that you're playing all the rules right. It certainly can happen that heroes dominate the game, sometimes more often than not given the right party. Are you playing with a plot deck? It sounds like that might address your balance issue a little and also provide another currency for the OL to gain/spend (it's pretty analogous to class cards for the heroes). I would also (as someone who loves being the OL) to not get so discouraged by the fact that the OL doesn't get a lot of "upgrades" during the campaign. This is true, but remember that he also begins the game with a much larger toy box. You've got monster groups for crowding, for blocking, for area damage, for status effects, for ranged damage, for melee damage... half the fun of the OL is selecting and using open groups which play to your strengths and capitalize on hero weaknesses.
  7. You're right, I didn't realize that word would be filtered, either- it has a perfectly colloquial application of "to take away". Anywho, for point 2 I didn't mean so much to contradict myself as to point out that the wording implies one thing, but never explicitly states it. Since the "looking at" is not EXPLICITLY secret, I think the RAW default to "public knowledge. Therefore, either outcome is possible based on whether you use the RAW strictly, or make a guess as to what the writers probably meant. The disconnect between those two concepts causes all the grief for D2e.
  8. The "each time" wording such as you see on contaminated is a clear "once per instance" limiter. It's the sane reason a wildlander can't spend 3 fatigue and "nimble" 3 spaces away when a monster moves into an adjacent space, or that Alric can't keep swapping spaces with Overpower until he fails. Were you to use an infection token to add a damage to a sweep attack, it would increase the damage for all heroes (because a single attack roll is made). If you were to add a shield to defense results, it would only be for that monster (all monsters roll individual defense, and the card would be triggered by the hero targeting a specific monster).
  9. 1 per attack on.... one of them. EDIT: Sadgit wins.
  10. Review in progress... In my opinion, there are a few different things at play in the answer to your question(s). Does it stay flipped, and does the one it is swapped with stay unflipped? In the "All-Knowing" section of the rules, it says, "Each time an objective token is revealed, the OL may discard 1 OL card from his hand to look at one unrevealed token on the map. Then, he may exchange that token with the token that was revealed." I think the key bits of this text are: 1. the absence of "before the token is revealed" (along with "...token that was revealed".) In other words, the token the hero originally reveal is seen by all. 2. " look at..." not "to reveal". This is a little tricky. The language (to me) implies it is secret, but there is the standing rule that all knowledge not said to be secret is public. I'd default to the rules as written, this is public, too. I suspect it is intended that the OL looks at the other token secretly. 3. As to your last point, I would imagine that whichever token ends up in the "second" location (not the original space where a token was revealed) stays hidden. Even though the color of that token will be known, it doesn't seem like the OL would ever want to exchange if what he was doing was helping the heroes reveal more tokens with fewer actions. The exception to this is if he sees the green token, he could ****** it away. Regardless of the correct answer to #3, I'm fairly confident that a LT cannot pick up an unrevealed token, even if the OL has knowledge of what it is. "Green token" means" green face showing" in all cases I can think of right now. Notably, everything I've posted above is my opinion based on my experience with the game.
  11. True. However, the quest vault offers a way to construct a quest that is as epic as you like. And, as Mists and Chains have shown us, with the right mechanic you CAN turn descent into a kill fest. If you want progression/levelling mid quest you'd have to build that in via special rules, but you could easily model it after the delve or the coop kits. (That is, award shop cards/XP based on monster kills or objective completion rather than quest victory).
  12. I can guess at why you feel that way. Mists, on its own, just looks like a small box which has extra focus on the OL. All small boxes before had (in addition to some shop cards, travel cards, tiles, and some new mechanic: 4-6 quests, 2 monsters, a LT, an OL class, 2 heroes, and 2 hero classes. Mists has: 8 quests, 3 monsters, 3 LTs (A1 only), an OL class, no heroes, no classes. Chains on the other hand offers a bit less (on its own): 8 quests, 3 monsters, 3 LTs (A2 only), no OL class, no heroes, 4 hybrid classes. With Mists and Chains together, they are impressive (though still no heroes). Chains really feels like a "sequel" to Mists. Mists, as the "original", feels complete on its own. I happen to really like these expansions for the content they offer and the way the tainted mechanic allows such a different experience. This is 100% speculation, but I wonder if the timing of the Asmodee merger (since Mists and Chains were released before and after said merger) had more to do with the split than a simple cash grab.
  13. Could you be more specific as to what you mean by "lacking scale"? For example, are you looking for a single quest that might take 6 hours to play? Are you looking for a "boss" with 60+ health, or perhaps hordes of lesser monsters? Are you looking for a map that is secret and revealed as you explore it?
  14. First, a group activates. Then, each monster in that group activates. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that even if the marshall were to activate that card "late" it would just benefit the OL. Why would the marshall want to activate just reward later?