Jump to content

me1034

Members
  • Content Count

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About me1034

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 08/27/1970

Profile Information

  • Location
    Las Vegas, NV
  1. The text states simply, "Reroll all dice". Does this mean all dice in the pool and also the dice that have been used? In effect, starting the round again? Or is it meant to reroll only dice still in each player's pool?
  2. So, ummm.. Wow... Am I the only one who thinks this game is really, really hard? To the point where I feel like there's a definite pay wall to finish the first scenario? I'm definitely no spring chicken when it comes to these games. I have the real LotR LCG and have battled through it's tough scenarios. But this seems much harder. I bought the Shire pack to start and then I bought the Prince of Mirkwood and Steadfast companion packs in game with valor points. I've played with the slightly better cards in those packs and tried several strategies. Just seems overly difficult and I don't feel like buying the full gambit to find out if it gets more fun. Anyone else having the same experience?
  3. Lacking evidence to the contrary, assume intentional. I can see the logic, though. A multiplayer game has many more cards involved, so the decking limits would be easy to circumvent. Making it "or" stops a player with an empty deck from lingering and forces players with empty hands to draw something in order to keep the game moving. This makes sense. Though the same cards and dice available in opponents' decks designed to cull cards would still be there in multiplayer. But yes,considering the extra players, it definitely would keep the game moving!
  4. As an aside, unless the tutorial was from FFG, why would you take their word over the rulebook? I didn't take anyone's word. I was actually erring towards the rulebook. But there have been mistakes in rulebooks before. Especially at launch. Add to that the different "Or" operator for multiplayer and I wasn't sure if I missed and errata. It was definitely worth clarification, for me at least. BTW, the official FFG video doesn't specify this win condition. That's the first place I looked.
  5. Thanks folks. This was my take too. Just didn't know if I was missing something. I have yet to play with a 30 card deck. I was only able to get the starters. The boosters were sold out. So yes, decking has played a major role so far. Do you think the multi-player rules are a mistake or intentional?
  6. I've had quite a bit of success with a 4th variant that I made up. It's similar to the published variants in some ways and unique to this variant in other key areas. The player does a standard 2D6 check against strength or agility. Whichever is most favorable for the respective character. - If the player wins the check, they deal 1 damage. - If they lose the check, they receive 1 damage. - Doubles do 2 damage, similar to the above rules. - Snake eyes is actually a good thing! It's a critical hit and deals 3 damage to the monster. This way a particularly lucky and heroic swing can smash a skeleton in one blow! 'Tis the stuff of legends! - There is no 3 point strike for the monster to the player In this variant, you can use determination tokens to assist in a combat check. This actually evens the playing field for weaker heroes (in strength and agility) like Lindel and Brother Gherrin because their special abilities help generate determination tokens. It also makes the player decide whether they save them for combat checks or other more critical card checks. Sometimes combat isn't the most sinister bane in the dungeon! ...like trying to escape a hall of webs with only 3 days left and 3 tiles to go! We also play where you draw a treasure card after defeating a monster. My group really likes this version because it plays to each character's strengths and makes combat unique for each player instead of the same odds for each. Yes, The odds in general are stacked a bit more in the hero's favor. But thematically, I feel that it fits more to a typical hero. The heroes should be stronger than the monster. Especially if it's always one on one (as opposed to party combat). But still difficult and threatening when they are low on health. It also makes combat something to look forward to instead of dreading. Lastly... this game is hard enough! The heroes should have some heroic ability. Give it a try and drop me a line to tell me what you think.
  7. Page 14 states that "If a player has no cards in their hand AND deck at the end of the round..." (after upkeep), they lose the game. Yet I've watched several online tutorials state that the game is over if there are no cards in their hand OR deck at the end of the round. Which is It? Also, interestingly, page 20 states the OR operator when describing the same losing condition but for multi-player rules. Was that intentional?
  8. Organization, dude , organization. Its the only thing you need . I am curious to see what they will bring on. Opens more and more possibilities for both games in the future. They have a fantastic tool in hands. I have to agree with Mr. Cheese. Digging for tiles is a pain. But if MoM had as many expansions, it would be the same story. I have all of the expansions and plugged them all into the app. After 2 games, I took all but the core set and my absolute favorite mini expansions without the tiles out. It's plenty of fun with just the core game and a few extras. But yes, it will be very cool to see what they do with the mini games and some new ideas. @kraisto, I agree. Both are great apps. I'll be honest though, I see a time eventually where they sell a version that you can play entirely digitally. The concept and execution are too good not to. Yes, people will cry sacrilege to physical games. But they could offer digital codes inside the physical package to download digital expansions to your digital game that complement your physical game. It's going to happen. It happened with DVD and Blu-ray rays and even comics. At the end of the day, digital versions of physical games are getting very, elegant and very entertaining. They are not shovelware. Look at Pathfinder ACG. Aside from a few bugs in the beginning, it is a phenomenal app and even improves on the presentation of the physical game. And people are buying the digital content all over again (myself included). Look at the Descent app. The execution and delivery too are phenomenal. You know they are just a few mechanics short of a full blown stand-alone game. With implementation of some download code purchase verification, we could be playing physical and digital versions of these incredibly entertaining games whenever and wherever we want.
  9. Alas... my reading comprehension skills are not what they used to be. Sister Mary Susan would smack my knuckles with a ruler... if the old battle axe were still around. Reading the preview again, I see that you guys are right... gonna have to pony up another $100. Gotta get the conversion kit too to bring some content over. On the bright side, the concept and execution of Descent's companion app was genius. Imagine a game built from the bottom up to work in perfect synergy with such an app? Can't wait!!
  10. The initial press release infers that you don't need the conversion kit to use the MoM app with 1st edition. But what exactly are you missing out on without the conversion kit? Would love to see some specifics
  11. The initial press release infers that you don't need the conversion kit to use the MoM app with 1st edition. But what exactly are you missing out on without the conversion kit? Would love to see some specifics.
  12. Ok. Good to know! I can see initiating combat with a unit that just has tactics damage then. The light side could load up tactical damage on Vader to keep him out of play, for example. But what about initiating combat with a unit that just does unit damage? I guess you might want to destroy a certain enemy unit. But the enemy will have to want to dance and declare that unit as a defender to have a shot at taking it out. If they don't want to defend, then there really is no resolution to the fight. Except if the attacker has a fate card they really want to use. OR... in that scenario, if the defender chooses not to defend, is one point of blast damage still placed on the declared objective because it was an uncontested victory - whether the sole attacking unit has blast damage or not?
  13. Hi there gang! Question: During the conflict phase, Is the active player able to engage an enemy objective if he or she has no ready units that have the blast damage icon? Are they able to initiate a battle if they only have a ready unit that does unit or tactics damage? THX!
  14. I believe I know the answers to these but want to make sure: 1. This card stays in play in your play area. Its not a one use and discard 2. In order to focus it for use, it costs 1 resource each time? 3. How can the opponent remove it from play? What are some examples of cards to combat this enhancement? Thanks folks!!
×
×
  • Create New...