Jump to content

DanFelder

Members
  • Content Count

    117
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DanFelder

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 08/05/1991

Profile Information

  • Location
    Corvallis, OR
  1. Foul Play's teams are all awesome in terms of gameplay. Each brings something different and interesting to the game. Some power levels might overshadow the teams that were already being overshadowed in the core set, but it gives the better teams more competition instead of adding more guys for them to beat up. That's a good thing. It'd be nice if they could give the previous weaker teams a boost too, but that's really hard to do without changing their deck (not within the capabilities of an expansion). The debilitating Stadiums and Penalties are not for everyone. Neither is the referee. The point of an expansion is to provide many players with new options. Most of us can enjoy the three new cool teams and come away happy. However, there are also several new rules options for your playgroup to change up your experience. If you don't think these options will be fun, that's fine - you don't have to use them. If you enjoy them, awesome.
  2. I understand why it's ruled that way, and for most playthroughs it won't matter much, but I'd prefer the ability to skip more spaces - provided that the ending scenario is an actual challenge (unlike the instant win of Mystery From Beyond). The issue with skipping more than 4 spaces that way is that a character could theoretically build up a bazillion influence, which some characters are very good at, and just skip right to the end and win. They do need to close those loopholes for the sake of future and current scenarios where such would be exploitable - but for ones that aren't exploitable (the way Mystery From Beyond is), I'd say the false ruling is a good one.
  3. I like the concept, but it has some gameplay issues in its current form. You've got a big, ambitious concept - you just need to focus on your design. You seem to be very interested in the flavor of the Necron race, but I don't see it much in this scenario. Instead you've got a doom track that rather simply ticks onward and occasionally does a random bad thing to the players. It's very standard. There's nothing wrong with standard if you're going for a streamlined co-op experience - but it doesn't really capture the concept you're talking about. Simultaneously, the rules for the confrontation are rather complex and the confrontation itself is, as you've flagged, going to be a problem for players arriving at different times. Complexity can be endured, especially for homebrew scenarios, for the sake of great concepts but the way it works also is leading to poor gameplay as you've highlighted. You should focus on one goal or another. Do you want to craft a simple, smooth and elegant co-op scenario? If so, make sure the rules are simple and intuitive as possible and focus on making the gameplay feel great. Or would you rather bring this big concept of going against the Necrons to life? If so, focus on what the necrons should make the players feel and figure out how to bring that feeling to life. In that case, you can make the mechanics complex if need be, it's a homebrew scenario that you can take your time explaining. Currently, the scenario doesn't deliver on its theme in the quest to keep gameplay rather simple - but the gameplay isn't simple or satisfying enough to stand on its own. I believe that you've likely had a LOT of fun playing this scenario, but I have a hunch that's because co-op scenarios in Relic are *awesome* and go a long way to minimizing a lot of the frustration that the game otherwise has.
  4. Considering that the Webway Portal doesn't require paying any cost OR landing directly on it, it's quite a bit easier to get out of the middle tier than it is to get into it.
  5. That ruling is good game design. It creates a tension of risk vs. reward instead of making it obvious when to enter the inner tier (i.e. the moment you can survive it and win otherwise). Also, it allows players a chance to catch up to players that entered the inner tier ahead of them. It also adds relevance to the resources at all stages in the game, even once you have enough to pay the cost once - you can still get more of that resource to pay the cost multiple times. Additionally, if one player has that many resources the game has likely gone on longer already OR that player has gotten so far ahead that it's better to end the game quickly. I understand that it feels important to progress through the inner tier, but the gameplay of this ruling is superior in both accelerated pace in games that need it the most and expanded tactics in other situations.
  6. Thanks to both of you. And yes, I'm just missing the shaper cards. I've got the neutrals.
  7. Hi, I'm a longtime MTG player and I'm game design student. I've heard great things about Netrunner and just got in via a friend's old base set (he lost the deck of shaper cards but it's otherwise intact). I'm eager to start exploring the game and finding out about various formats on a reasonable budget. I'd love to get recommendations on how to have fun with the game and what the fundamental concepts I should keep in mind are.
  8. I'd say DarkLoic is correct. Note that the dump off ability says, "If this player WOULD become the ball carrier". Dump Off is basically a replacement effect. Instead of the player with dump off becoming the ball carrier, you can move it to a different friendly player at the matchup instead. And if you try to move it to one of your other dump-off guys, you again have the *option* of moving it to another player at the match. It's basically two very polite people looking at a ball on the ground and saying, "You can have it good fellow," "Oh no, I insist that you take it" "Oh I just couldn't good sir! Please, you have it." "Oh no, no, no, it's your turn - please - pick up." "Well I don't want to!" "Well I don't want to either!" The flavor of dump-off is probably what's confusing you. The idea of the flavor is that the guy catches the ball and then hands it off to another player. This would mean, flavor-wise, that he becomes the ball carrier at one point. However, rules-wise he never *actually* becomes the ball carrier. If he would, he can let someone else snap up the ball instead. That's why it isn't an infinite combo.
×
×
  • Create New...