Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Kyarn

  1. We also understood it in the same way Zaltyre did : each magistrate with a monster adjacent can move 2 space. There is nothing spelling "only one" or "one" magistrate.


    That being said, we played it with a shadow walker in our team and got the key on our 2nd turn thanks to : Soul Bound on a shadow dragon + Dark Servant.


    This was one of the easiest quest we did in all our campaigns, and really annoying for our OL since he didn't have a chance to win at all.


    But I suppose that without this combo, it would have been really hard...

  2. I don't think he is a poor hero but I do think that he is a poor scout.


    His Hero Ability requires him to stay adjacent to another hero which is not how you usually want to play the scout.


    As you said : he's not a poor hero, only a poor scout.


    Which mean he's useless as a Treasure Hunter, Stalker, Bounty Hunter and even Thief (dunno why guys keep wanting to play him as a thief, his ability is clearly not suited for it).


    But he makes an AWESOME Wildlander ! Put him near any "Tank" (like a Knight, a Marshall or whatever) and he will be unstoppable. He can do a pretty decent Shadow Walker as beiing said before.


    His main interest is in team oriented gameplay. Put him near Ravaella with a Rune Plate and Laugh....Hello black-black-grey defense dices in Act 1 (even more if you put him an armor too).


    As far as I saw, he can be incredible if well played, and a pain in the ass for the OL. They're many many weaker heroes than him.

  3. Honestly, the French translation is good and don't have any real huge mistake (except one with the lava).


    And for the rule's question, even the english rulebook isn't enough to provide you all the answer anyway so you will have to look at the differents FAQ, and Q&A from the editor.


    I've got some game in english, but to me for a game as complicated as Descent, I would recommend you to buy it in the language most of your players will understand the most.


    They will appreciate it more, especially the story parts. Otherwise you will have to read it in english for them, or translate them when you're reading it. 


    Which is really less enjoyable for the players.


    As for me, I only have Forgotten souls and Nature's Ire in english because they don't exist yet in French :P

  4. Guys,


    What do you think the average maximum amount of threat tokens an overlord can acquire in one quest is?

    He can collect at least 8 from killing each hero in both encounters of the quest, but a lot of plot cards add extra ones ways to gain them.


    As far as I know you can only obtain a threat token by killing a hero once per quest, and not per encounter.


    Look : https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/ffg_content/descent-second-ed/news/lieutenants/DJ09-rules-web.pdf


    " Each time a hero is defeated during an encounter, instead of drawing one Overlord card, the overlord may choose to gain one threat token.

    The overlord can only gain threat tokens in this way once per hero per quest. "


    So only 4 threat tokens that way bro', sorry :P

  5. As usual there are some stipulations, even powerhouse teams can be brought low in terms of winning quests by managing them rather then killing them.

    In your example trenlore is slowwwwwwwww and stamina intensive and really really should be a knight for me, leoric is playing a sub par class until he gets his death bomb. Augur is presumably rushing for cacophony , admittedly Mok is great, even with the slightly nerfed H&M version. Focus fire on Leoic first even with rune plate he isnt THAT tanky and then squish in order of choice until Trenlore is last man standing.

    My larger point is that if the heroes have gone full tank then for the most part ignore damage and concentrate on stalling and slowing them. Web trap should be effective and pinning leoric and mok unless they have substantial boosts.

    You are, of course, entitled to your opinion especially when you have a wealth of 1st hand experience as you say. If your group finds 4 players to still heavily favor the heores then we can only bow to personal experience and an excellent hero approach.


    You didn't look very well for the skill I pointed.


    In my example, this group can recover stamina in a blink of an eye ! Trenloe and Augur nearly always move with stamina (not to mention trenloe as a charge). Trenloe as a knight is the best solo combination (we already did it), but that's not the point of this group, and it wouldn't be as good as it is with valor token on everyone. For Augur, once he has understudy, he's already op with this team (sure Cacophony + aria of war tend to make him even greater :D).


    Now, let's say you focus on leoric : -1 damage with leoric base skill, + 1 defense with valor token + 1 defense with aria of war. Without any dice rolled, he already has like 3 defense. And could have even more with some late skills of the champion, or with forewarning of the prophet. And I don't even speak about the fact that Leoric could buy Dark Pact.

    Now let's say he dies anyway : the bard can resurrect him without action with his base bard's skill. Or he could use Augur heroic ability to ressurect him even from a long distance. So you didn't achieve really anything against the heroes.



    The point of this team is that they're not "only" tanky, they can do a lot of damage because every attack they make have nearly always  base +2 damage (Valor + aria of ward). And with the stamina regen, they can almost all always run with only stamina and keep their action to attack only.

    The only thing which can work well agaisnt them is, as you said, trap and spell like web trap. But this spell work on any group anyway, so I don't see why it would be more powerfull against them. Especially when bard could buy rehearsal or the team could buy the anti condition's belt.



    I just wanna clear a thing : my group and I nearly always prefer to play a 4 heroes game because we prefer doing the best heroes team combinations and fight with the more monsters. As an OL I feel the same.

    That being said, it nearly always end the same way : victory of the heroes cause in the campaign's end the OL can't stop the heroes anymore unless they do huge mistakes or unless there is a huge luck gap. And honestly our OL is really, really good (and I think I'm not bad as well :P). Where in 3 heroes game, we always had more close campaign's end.

    Aow, and I forgot : we never, ever, ever play the treasure hunter who tend to completly destroy the game by favoring way too much the heroes. So it's not the problem.


    Anyway, I'm thankful for all of thoses who answered and gave their point of view. It cleared some interrogation I had at least, even if I'm not totally convinced :P

  6. Yeah but that's a houserule. 


    If you let them choose like the original rule say, the more heroes they have, the stronger they are. As far as I saw since my beginning in this game.


    (Obviously with a random pick, you're more than right)


    And I didn't even speak about multi target spells which can annihile many monsters in one or two attack, transforming the boost of monter's number in nothing... :P



    A good OL can deal with playing with less monsters. But to me he can't deal with overpowered combo that are available for the heroes, at least not easily.

  7. First thing first : I'm not going easy on my heroes, and neither did the OL I faced (I play as much hero as OL).


    They are many many ways to make medium/littlle monsters far more dangerous (or at least as much) as large monsters with lieutnant packs and OL cards.



    That being said, I know I'm in minority with my point of view, but that's exactly why I posted : I never ever found any answer that was satisfying to me about this topic.



    Now let's speak about the difference in number and others thing : as you pointed, at 4 heroes, there will be many monsters added.


    But to me, the one more hero is the one who make any good hero team into an unbelievable one.


    Example : 


    Let's say you play a 3 heroes game with a classical group :


    Trenloe - Champion 


    Leoric - Necromancer (or any other mage class)


    Mok - Prophet


    They have good interaction, defense boost(champion, prophet, Leoric, Trenloe), attack boost (champion), not so bad heal (prophet, Mok).


    Now add a new hero....



    --> Let's say another healer for example : Augur - Bard


    And here you have an insane group combo :


    Trenloe - Champion : Glory for battle, Motivating Charge, Stoic Resolve, For the Cause  (A Living Legend can work too)


    Leoric - Necromancer : whatever spell, but Army of death with one valor token is still cool. Like I said, any other mage class work here.


    Mok - Prophet : Battle Vision, Forewarning, All-Seing, Focused Insight


    Augur - Bard : Understudy, Aria of War, Cacophony,  and Rehearsal or Concentration as you prefer.



    Now what do you have ? From a classic group you have an unbeatable one :


    The bard Can have Understudy and Aria of War always active because of Cacophony active each turn. Boosting every defense, attack, heal and stamina regen.


    Mok can heal a ridiculous amount of hp each turn with his base skill, All seing and Focused insight, all boosted by the bard Undestudy. And each time he can heal or regen himself with mok skill.


    Trenloe the champion boost defense a lot and stamina regen, also boosted by bard unbderstudy. And leoric nerf the damage of monsters.


    All of that, with Augur skill healing each time an attack do no damage (boosted by understudy).



    This kind of combo is nearly impossible to break with an OL, even a good one (not impossible, but uber hard). But you can't afford to do the same in a 3 player game because 2 healer who nerf too much your team damage. Where here even the healer do a good amount of damage with Aria of Ward and valor token. 

    You could easily change some class/heroes and keep the same combo btw.


    And that's not even the most powerfull combo ! So here is my point : yeah the OL have many more monsters, but in the other hand, heroes can do combo they couldn't do with only 3 heroes most of the time (or they are weaker version...). 


    That's why every group I play with or against find the 4 heroes game far more favoring the heroes than the 3 heroes game. 


    What's the problem according to me is that the OL "only" obtain more monsters, but none of his other spells or lieutnant pack cards are up. Where every hero and class can be up a lot only by adding one more hero becuase every hero and every class interact with all the others (assuming you use a little bit of brain :D). That's why I'm looking for any other explanation than "more monsters" to explain the general point of view shared here.

  8. Any2card : Yeah my previous comment was a little hard, I apologies.


    But if you look closely, I asked on purpose in my original post what argument, EXCEPT the only one Kage13 pointed me, make you think that. And he only pointed me this one. 


    You can understand that I was a little pissed (even if this don't excuse the way I spoke, again my apologies).



    That being said, the only argument you point is that you've got many, many hours of game and it worked like that for you.....so what ?


    I may not have as much hours of game as you, but honestly I can say I have nearly 400-450+ hours of game, with 5 differents group of people (around 16-20person).

    And all theses people think like me that the 4 heroes game is favoring more the heroes than the 3 heroes game. Despite some of them often playing without me and with other people too.


    That's why I'm always surprised when I see those who say like you : again I'm not saying I'm right. But the only argument I've seen is irrelevant to me, that's why I asked if there is more than that (like somethng I wouldn't have think about).


    So far, the only argument I saw are theses :


    - In 3 heroes game the OL only obtains a master minion instead of a minor for large monster group when he obtains one more monster in 4 heroes game, for one more hero each time.

    -->Like I said before, this argument is really really restrictive and don't count many many strategic sides of the game.


    - Guys who have play a lot know it works that way. 

    --> This tend to make me smile : usually it's an argument for thoses who don't have one. I'm pretty sure that's not the way you wanted to sound and that I've got this answer because of my "bad-mouthing" before. But again, this is not a real argument.


    - NEW : The developpers think that way too.

    --> First time I see that argument. Seems a little bit more relevant. I say a little bit because I don't think they are absolute in terms of testing when we know/can see they don't always test a lot the stuff they sell (some things are pretty imbalanced in this game, despite a general "balance" which make the game still pretty good and fun to play). So....where did they say that ? I never saw them saying thaht the 3 players game was favoring the heroes and the 4 heroes game the most balanced. Have you got any link maybe ? Would be great.


    Don't misunderstand me : I REALLY want to know what I missed to explain it to my players, this in order to understand why it worked otherwise for us.


    Why do you think the 3 heroes game favor the hero exactly ? And why the 4 heroes would be more balanced ?



    3 definitely favors the heroes.  I've not had a hope against 3 heroes.


    With 4 heroes the OL is getting at minimum 1 extra figure per hero group. 


    Dragons is a perfect example.  At 2 heroes you get 1 minion dragon, at 3 heroes you get, 1 master dragon.  Still just 1 dragon, albeit an upgraded one.  But still only 1 attack.

    But now at 4 heroes the OL gets 2 dragons.  That is a big jump.  I'm doubling my attacks with just dragons.


    How can that possibly go from being balanced at 3 to being favored towards the heroes at 4?


    Lets just say for simplicity I as the OL can take 3 open groups and I pick Dragons, Giants, and Golems. 


    Adding 1 hero adds;

    1 dragon

    1 giant

    1 golem


    You are telling me that your heroes would find it pretty evenly matched with 3, but then dominate with 4?  That math doesn't even add up.

    especially with the bigger monsters the OL is doubling his actions.  Even if 3 players were balanced, then they would get destroyed with 4.  At least if I were the OL  :P


    I know this is a bit simplistic and baring any special rules with these same groups


    2 heroes = 4 attacks

    Monsters = 3 attacks


    3 Heroes = 6 attacks

    Monsters = 3 attacks


    4 heroes = 8 attacks

    Monsters = 6 attacks


    Basically this is why 2 heroes is very difficult.  You are taking on about the same amount of monsters as 3 heroes and they usually roll the same attack and defense dice.



    Man, your logic is mostly ****** up...I have to say it...


    1) You take only large monster group as an example  : like I said, this argument doesn't work with medium and small monster group. They only obtain one minor monster. So With one more hero, the OL would get one goblin, rat, spider, etc.... Unless you only use large monster group it's irrelevant. And assuming there is always some small/medium monster in (nearly ?) all encounters..

    And I don't even speak about OL who prefer using medium/large monster group...


    2) You don't even count the master ability : taking your example, you simply ignore the fire breath of the master dragon. Which is FAR more powerful than one more attack. I've seen many fire breath go rampage and kill 3-4 heroes. Same idea : you don't count the boost of hp/defense/damage which can be obtain.


    3) You don't even speak about the synergy between heroes, class, skills....The more heroes you get, the more powerful combo you have.


    I could say many many more things about all the problems your argument doesn't speak about, but my english is a little poor, and just theses are enough (at least to me...) to prove that this argument isn't "the" answer.



    So where everyone can say that 2 heroes is the hardest way to play. I can't agree with you on the 3 and 4 heroes game with only one argument, and a poor one : only counting the difference of action about a game like descent which has soooooooo many strategic sides....really ?


    Don't take it bad, but clearly even assuming you may be right, you didn't prove anything right with this comment.



    So, I'm asking again  : why do you guys think that the 3 heroes game is favoring the heroes and the 4 heroes game the most balanced ? (everyone who would think that way can answer)


    (And please this time, don't answer with the only argument I just pointed being irrelevant in my original post...)

  10. What you experienced for 2 heroes mostly matches my experience.  As you noted, the following is generally true:


    Playing 2 heroes - favors the OL

    Playing 3 heroes - favors the Heroes

    Playing 4 heroes - tends to be the best and most balanced approach.


    If you want, and your girlfriend is amenable, play 3 heroes next time, and you will probably see the above completely reversed.


    If, however, you really want the "fairest" most competitive balance, play 4 heroes.


    I will say this ... if you are inexperienced as a gamer in general, and/or you both aren't completely comfortable with the rules and faq (i.e. know them well), having 1 physical player play 4 heroes can be daunting for that person.  There is much to remember about each hero, hero ability, heroic feats, class skills, etc.  It is easy for someone not use to controlling so many heroes to miss opportunities, synergies, forget skills, etc.

    Sorry but I don't agree with you, to me it's more like that :


    Playing 2 heroes - favors the OL

    Playing 3 heroes - tends to be most balanced approach.

    Playing 4 heroes - favors the Heroes


    Why do you think the 3 heroes game favor the hero exactly ? And why the 4 heroes would be more balanced ?


    As far as I could see on this forum, the only argument of the 3 heroes game favoring the heroes was that large monster group kept 1 monster only (minion to master), when heroes obtained +50% action with a third hero.


    The problem is that there is not only large monster group, and this argument doesn't work with every medium or little monster's group. 



    So, to my mind the 4 heroes group are favoring the heroes way more than the 3 : you can have all types of heroes, and moreover you can do the best combinations of class/heros in a same group.


    As an OL I'm more scared of a 4 heroes group than a 3 one...


    Is there something else I wouldn't have see ? What make you think it is the way you said ? I'm really wondering here... :P

  11. Each skill with " --> " in it means that the skill cost an action, not that you have to exhaust the card.


    When you have to exhaust the card, you can see "exhaust" in the description of the skill's use.



    So that means Rage cost you an action and one stamina to make an attack with +1 damage instead of a normal attack.


    But you can do it on every attack you make as long as you have the stamina to do it.



    Honestly, this skill is a little weak for a base class skill, but there is nothing we can do about that :P

  12. What's your exact group composition ? (heroes and classes ?) 


    Are you aware that most of the heal don't cost any action ? (unless a spell have a " --> " , it doesn't cost any action) 

    So you can do it AND your 2 actions are still available.


    Do you guys make a right use of the stamina ? Like moving two spaces in stamina in order to make 2 attack instead of one this turn ?

    Do you guys didn't forget that any hero can recover one stamina on a surge on each of his attack ?

    Are you resurecting your friends instead of letting them stan-up on their own ? That in order not to spend 2 actions but only one of your group.


    Are you aware that once the necromancer's minion is invoqued, it can do one move and one attack each turn without spending anymore action of the necromancer ? (Which make it one of the best starting class, thought it will lose some strenght later :P)


    Bashing some goblins can buy you some time/turn, don't focus only on ettins if you don't have a group suited for high damage actually.

  13. How much players/heroes do you have in your group ? 4vs1 ? 3vs1 ? 2vs1 ?


    The intro quest is clearly easy as f*ck for the heroes and made in order to give a nice beginning to the heroes.


    So in reality, the Overlord isn't really suppose to win. Sure with some luck or a huge difference of skill he can do it, but apart from that, it's really hard for him.



    I have to say that if you lost, clearly this is either cause you guys suck like hell (as much as a bunch of 5 years old kids), either you did miss/misinterpret some rules.


    The second option seems to be most right to me.


    So, do you guys REALLY looked well at the rulebook ? Like : are you aware that monsters can't do 2 attacks/turn ? Even if they have 2 actions, they are limited to only one attack on their 2 actions maximum.


    Is it possible that you missed something else ? Can you tell us every detail of the game in order to let us point you what's the problem here ?

  14. I would say that the heroes win : if two effects appears at the same time, the player who's playing his turn is the one chosing in which order they will be done.


    So, here it's one of the hero turn, he choose to take a token first then give one. But then he wins before he has to give back a token.



    That's just a thought, I'm not sure at all it would works that way.

  15. First, fatigue potions remove ALL your fatigue, not just one. There is no potion who only remove 1 fatigue ;)


    That being said, it gives 50 gold to ALL the team. Not to the one who got it, and not for each player of the team.


    Used or not, at the end of each quest (not encounter, quest !), every search card with an amount of gold is sell for its amount. This amount of gold is put in the whole team pool of gold so they can spend it to buy new items.


    So it doesn't really matters who got it, at the end it benefit for the whole team, but just once (50 gold, no more, for all the players).


    All the golds are shared by the whole team anyway, as much for the buying phase than the selling phase.

  • Create New...