Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Luckmann

  1. Song of Mending, same as any other healing, should work on KO'd heroes. I think the assumption is that the Melody Token is on Song of Mending before Rendiel is knocked out. Anything else wouldn't work. And in standing up, he ends his action, heals everyone else in range, and, assuming they're knocked out, they're going to rise up and be fit to fight.
  2. I'm from Sweden, and nothing gets translated here either - thank god. I simply read parts aloud in English, and also most of the rules. Our games jump heavily between Swedish and English. This has never caused any issues with any of my friends, but unfortunately, this also means that I'll probably never be able to play this game with some people, like my parents or my GF:s brother. Not so much because of narration, but because I'd have to explain every single card in detail.
  3. You believe correctly, I have no idea where I got 50 from. I'm not aware of an explicit rule against duplicate equipment, though I'm pretty certain there is against duplicate classes. Luckmann acknowledged the current rule about not trading class equipment, but suggested exploring the consequences IF it were allowed. Huh, I never considered that issue, really. Makes me wonder if there actually is such a restriction. I remember way, way back when, just when I started to play, I was looking specifically for anything restricting two players from taking the same archetype, but I couldn't find anything restricting it (as I now know, there is no such rule) but I don't remember finding anything on restriction of multiple classes. Only thing I could thing for as an argument is limit by supply. The game just assumes that there's only one of each class available. Perfect example of something that hadn't even begin to occur to me. That being said, I can't imagine that this would be much of an issue. Theoretically, with more classes down the road (if any), but if you think about it, with the case of the Lucky Charm, well, the Thief could already potentially get two of those, and who'd want two wooden shields? I'll admit, this is potentially a genuine issue. Not having played with the Champion (I still don't have Lair of the Wyrm) it's not something that would've occurred to me, either.
  4. In a more serious vein, the Overlord Cards is really necessary for there to be any kind of dynamic game going on. I must say that I think that the abilities and skills (such as Elder Mok's Heroic Ability, or the Just Reward and By the Book Skills of the Marshal) that messes with the Overlord Cards in one way or another were a really bad design decision. I assume that the idea was to create a way to interact between the heroes and the overlord in a more direct way, rather than through proxies, but ultimately, I think it largely detracts from the game; that element of uncertainty, not knowing what cards the Overlord has or when he's going to play them, the subtle psychological interactions between the heroes and the Overlord (and between the heroes as they interact in opposition to the Overlord) is really at the core of the game. We've all had moments of "Should we do that or not? What if he has Pit Trap?" and "OF COURSE HE HAS TRIPWIRE, LOOK AT HIS FACE!", and without Overlord Cards, without them being secret and without them being random, that would never happen. I might as well play chess. Maybe that's why so many people find the Lieutenant Cards so uninspiring and unnecessary - they're small decks, you can only pick from that one deck, they've got a rather clear progression, they're all always in play, and once revealed, the heroes know exactly what you have anyway. Overlord Cards, though? Even with just Basic or Basic II, the heroes will never know what the Overlord has, and the Overlord will (almost) never know what he'll get. The long hours I've waited for Tripwire to come around, I swear...
  5. There's a rule against players trading their starting gear. They can sell each piece of starting gear for 50 gold, but they can't give it to another hero. This is something that's always annoyed me for largely irrational reasons, because I can see why such a rule exist. If nothing else, it allows the starting gear to practically be considered an intrinsic part of the class, and helps designing around a concept without regard for potential repercussions that would arise from trading said items. But as a thought-experiment, let's consider the repercussions of allowing the trading of starting gear, such as a Lindel Bard trading his Lute to a Steelhorns Berserker. Anything that immediately comes to mind? One of the few "issues" I can think of would involve a Lindel Monk being traded the Sage's Tome from a Prophet, resulting in the stacking of Lindel's Attributes (all 3's) Hero Ability (Two grey dies instead of black+grey for Attribute Tests), the Monk's Inner Balance (+1 to all Attributes), and the ability of Sage's Tome (subtract 1 from the attribute test). But not only can Lindel already do this if he chose to be a Monk-Prophet, but it would also necessitate the group having two healers; and with +1 Awareness, Lindel as a Prophet himself would be even better. Another one that could potentially be considered an issue (that I can think of) would be situations such as the Horn of Courage, of the Champion. It allows you to choose another hero within 3 spaces of you and give them a valor token. But this is a free action anyway, exhausting the card, so I can't imagine that it'd be a genuine issue that some other hero can give another hero a valor token, whether they're the champion or not. I can't think of that many genuine, major issues. Anything that comes to mind?
  6. There is no rule that limits the number of familiars you can have. You could already play Challara as a Necromancer, after all. So yes, you can play Challara as a Battlemage Beastmaster. In fact, it's something I really want to try if I ever get to play as a hero. It's a bit sad that so most (all?) Beastmaster and Necromancer skills apply so specifically to their respective familiar (such as "Wolf" or "Reanimate") rather than a more generic "a familiar" or similar - at least in some cases. But either way, putting two melee offensive familiars on the field is potentially very powerful. Lifedrain scepter and/or Teleportation Rune would probably be good weapons to go for for the setup; the first because keeping Brightblaze alive is a priority, since the Overlord will try to focus-fire him down and you can only resurrect him once per encounter, and the second because teleporting with a familiar would be golden for disruption or defensive mobility. There's probably better Act 2 items, but I only ever consider Act 1 when theorycrafting, because at least you're guaranteed to have access to all Act 1 items at some point, while pinning hopes and dreams on a good Act 2 item is a lost cause. The negative aspect of Challara as a Battlemage Beastmaster is that she'll either not benefit massively from the Battlemage skills (Planar Weapon even makes Runes Melee - note that there's no "may" in this) or she'll have to go the full-rune melee route, which just doesn't work very well with the idea of being a sorta-mage with two tank-ish familiars, in my opinion. You also won't get Predator, so you'll be missing out on that juicy +4 Health for you and your wolf, which hurts the idea of a melee Challara even more.
  7. I am convinced that the sole purpose of Overlord Cards is to make heroes shout out "Noooo! It's not fair!". I live for those moments. Especially if it involves forcing them into lava somehow and then throw a web trap on them. I've only done it once, but the look of the hero when he realized that he's immobilized in lava, forcing him to not only end his turn there, but to play out the entirety of his turn knowing he was going to die. Good times.
  8. As has been said, there's nothing preventing traps in special terrain. You can play a Pit Trap in a Pit Space, if you want to. Hell, you can play a Pit Trap in Lava if you want to. In the thread, Morthai cites the most relevant section just when the argument starts (from I can tell). The only special terrain that does not count as an empty space is if it's an Obstacle, since they block movement and line of sight. Water, Lava, Pits, etc; none of it blocks movement or line of sight.
  9. Careful with your wishes. Because they could just name it "Descent 3rd edition" and remove support of Ol completely. I know, and it's something I dread. They already ruined Mansions of Madness, before I even had a chance to get all the expansions, even after I asked them if they were going to go into reprint and they said yes. But either way, I can just say that trying to do both things in a single system is going to be an ongoing disaster in terms of compromise. The best solution would be if they launched a completely stand-alone game for Road to Legend, with a Descent 2nd Ed. conversion kit, after which each game will be considered completely separate.
  10. What is needed is a separate game entirely, rather than a split focus.
  11. Come back when you inevitably have questions, and good luck!
  12. There it is. That being said, I think there's an argument to be made that that refers to a monster group in itself, meaning that two different monster groups of the same kind could still be used. As in, I have two monster groups consisting of Goblin Archers, and even if I deploy one, the other one remains unused, and can thus be used. I do not think that is the intent, however.
  13. Where does it say that? I remember looking for it, way back, but I never found anything on it, and since then I've just been assuming that if you have two different groups of the same monster, those groups count as separate groups. I've also heard it mentioned several times (not just here) when the question of "multiple copies of <product>" comes up, so I'm not alone in this assumption. Not questioning the claim or being contrarian, I'm genuinely curious. Such a rule would make sense to me, which is why I thought it funny - if not odd - when I couldn't find such a restriction. The idea of multiple groups from <set> is usually just an interesting tidbit or general musing, and it's perfectly understandable (to me) that there wouldn't be an explicit rule against it, since it's likely extremely uncommon and unexpected that people would have multiple sets of the core set, or an expansion. But if there is, I'd like to know where. Edit: On a separate note, I've always found the rule of "limited by the supply" to be annoying precisely for reasons such as this. By that logic, you should absolutely be able to expand upon the supply, but this would most definitely cause issues in some cases, which the supply is never considered to become bigger - but then, why limit it by supply, and not just state a number? Infuriating wording with little to no practical application.
  14. Awesome, then. I think the confusion was whether you were just another app-user in the wrong forum, but I'm glad I didn't misunderstood you, then. Welcome to the forum. There's no hard general consensus, really, but regarding the two big boxes with new full campaigns, Shadow of Nerekhall is generally considered to have the better campaign. I'm not sure what "campaign book" you mean. The Core Box used to come with a campaign called The Shadow Rune, with a separate adventure book being purchasable later, called Heirs of Blood. These days, newer Core Boxes always comes with Heirs of Blood by default, it replacing the original The Shadow Rune. Other than that, each expansion comes with it's own Quest Guide. The two big boxes (Shadow of Nerekhall and Labyrinth of Ruin) each have their own full campaigns, that are entirely separate from eachother and whatever campaign you got in the core box, but the three first small-box expansions (Lair of the Wyrm, The Trollfens, Manor of Ravens) feature quests that are either partly integrated into a bigger campaign (by means of Rumor Cards, a mechanic introduced by the same expansions, and also used by H&M Collections), or can be played as a short, self-contained separate mini-campaign. The latest two small-box expansions deviate from this (as I think I detailed in the thread I linked). Mists of Bilehall is an "Act 1" mini-campaign that cannot be integrated into a bigger campaign, and The Chains that Rust is an "Act 2" mini-campaign that cannot be integrated into a bigger campaign. If you have both, however, you can play it all as a single, full-length campaign, and also use quests (through rumor cards) from any of the other small-box expansions. Only those expansions break an otherwise established format and we all ask ourselves why they didn't just make it a big-box expansion with some heroes to go with the newly introduced hybrid class mechanics. So I'm not sure what you mean by "the campaign book". However, it is impossible to access a campaign without also having the parts for it, so do not worry. If you mean Heirs of Blood, it only uses tiles from the Core Set. So you don't need to worry about that. Huh. I always thought myself that you got (ever so slightly) more "bang for your buck" with the small-box expansions, rather than the big ones. The big-box expansions have more stuff, sure, but they're also more expensive. Maybe it's just me. Either way, I wouldn't recommend getting a big-box expansion until you're really, really sure you like the game. The Core Box is already expensive, and the big-box expansions are most decidingly not cheap. When you get a big-box expansion, you've committed, I feel.
  15. Edit: Nevermind, I misunderstood and read the quote wrong.
  16. Well, it's a small thing, but I'd just die to be able to fill an entire encounter with nothing but goblin archers.
  17. I guess the OP meant only the app because he stated: "I am not interested in head to head play" So most likely he meant "app play" instead of "campaign play" Huh, possible, I guess. I didn't make the connection between head to head and competitive. I don't think I've heard the base campaign game called that before, so I must've skimmed over it without thinking. I just assumed that "one-off adventures" referred to the way you can play single quests instead of a campaign. If OP intended this for the app, this entire thread is in the wrong section. It's starting to get seriously aggravating.
  18. There was a fairly recent thread on largely the same questions, where I commented on what to get. It's not super-helpful, honestly, but it does offer some thoughts. All my comments were made with base campaign play in mind, not one-offs or app-driven gameplay, because I have no interest in either and the OP didn't specify; I consider base campaign play to be the core of the game, and assume that's what we're talking about unless some specific exception is made or a specific mode is mentioned. In a nutshell, my recommendation is to start playing the core set, and get a small-box expansion if you're liking the gameplay, and then after a couple of sessions or maybe after finishing the full first campaign, look at what you want, maybe get a big expansion, maybe some H&M Collections if there's something specific you want or want to do. I tend to think that the small-box expansions are a little bit more for what you spend, but the big-box expansions offer a little bit more full content, with a new full campaign. H&M Collections can really add to things, especially since you get a lot of thematically appropriate monsters, but they're ultimately very much "grab what you think looks cool". The only ones that are a tough sell are indeed the Lieutenant Packs. They're almost entirely cosmetic, giving you a proper figure for a single lieutenant instead of the cardboard token, but especially for The Shadow Rune and The Labyrinth of Ruin, if you want to get all the lieutenant packs for all the lieutenants in the campaign(s), the price is very high. The mechanic they introduce is also lack-luster; it honestly does not add that much to gameplay, and you can only use a single lieutenant deck per campaign, either way - just getting a few lieutenant packs, you've already got more decks than you'll ever realistically use, since a campaign can take weeks or months to finish, depending on how often you play. ...they really should've gone with some other expansion content for the lieutenants, like a few new lieutenant-inspired shop items, or some search cards, maybe a rumor or two. I dunno.
  19. Not really. The only thing I can think of is actually being able to play multiple groups of the same creature, but that's a small (and likely confusing) benefit as a pretty high cost.
  20. Come on, there's a whole section dedicated to the RLT app. The spillage shouldn't reasonably be this high.
  21. I see that my previous points on issues such as this fell on deaf ears. To be perfectly clear, FFG/Asmodee were/are practically forced to tell you no if you ask, or they risk losing the rights, wholly or in part, to their IP:s. If you ask beforehand, you are basically told no, and you can make no claims of ignorance. Asking beforehand is like requesting a cease-and-desist before you even do something.
  22. Wouldn't the easiest way to do it be to create a separate "class" for each potential hybrid? That way, it seems like it'd be tedious (because you'd have to create a whole bunch of potential classes), but not headache-inducing.
  23. Don't apologize for not doing something you do as a free service to the whole community out of your own free will. It's greatly appreciated and I can't wait to use it. I was figuring out how to use it just the other day.
  24. Yeah, I'm pretty convinced that Heirs of Blood is technically superior, especially in a narrative sense (I love that narrative/background aspects seem to get better with each expansion, it's just sad that the small-box expansions are introduced in a manner which largely ignores most of it), but at least I can buy Heirs of Blood separately, meaning I end up with both The Shadow Rune and Heirs of Blood. It'd be cool to see a rebalanced/reimagined/expanded The Shadow Rune campaign, in a format matching Heirs of Blood, but I honestly have a hard time seeing it happening, especially since most (or at least many) people already have the original The Shadow Rune. But I'd probably still get it. Also, I'd actually rather see a campaign book utilizing cross-expansion content, such as, for example, a full-campaign expansion using Mists of Bilehall, The Chains that Rust, and The Trollfens, at the same time. Or Labyrinth of Ruin and Lair of the Wyrm. Or Shadow of Nerekhall and Manor of Ravens. Or all at once, even. I wouldn't even mind if they just re-use the general narrative and quest-lines of pre-existing campaigns, and just expand upon them and change some of the quests. Bonus points if it includes H&M-based alternative setup options. But anyway, thanks for the answer.
  25. There is no separation by a wall. Pg. 3 of the FAQ specifically refers to edge of the map tiles that are diagonally adjacent to eachother, such as two different map tiles where the corners could (somehow, I guess) be misunderstood as to allow diagonal movement between them. I honestly have no idea why this was included in the FAQ, since I cannot imagine that this is actually a common issue. Meanwhile, there's questions that crop up from people almost every week, both general ones and very specific ones. In this case, the FAQ actually makes matters worse since it makes people second-guess what is actually a really clear-cut situation.
  • Create New...