Jump to content

Jubez187

Members
  • Content Count

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jubez187

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Completely start over. You already end any campaign overpowered enough, there'd be no point in starting a new act 1 with 2k gold and 7-9 XP.
  2. When I play with Lore Keeper I just exhaust All-Knowing. I truly believe if the game was seriously still in development, that's what the card should have said. I mean, the fact they say "unexhaust" instead of "refresh" just shows the disconnect with the other 99% of the game. I'm currently running a Nerekhall RtL Campaign with Valadir on Avenger/Bard. I chose this combo for a few reasons. Feat + Smite is almost a guaranteed +5/Pierce 2. Bard is the best for hybridization because for 0 XP you can get a heal and 2 ways to recover fatigue. I plan on going all XP in the Avenger tree, but right now I only have Vengeful Smite and Holy Champion. This class is good, but not any more OP than things you could've done before LL. I also have a Knight and Leoric of the Book. My characters don't really take a lot of damage to get Vengeful Smite that stacked. And it still requires you to be in 3 spaces. You also don't get anything on your attacks or your damage taken. So, good and fun, but not that strong. I'm using Elementalist too. I know that he's much stronger in traditional D2e than RtL, but it's definitely a top tier RtL Mage class with Runemaster. My issue isn't too much with the 4 elemental skills, but I feel the auxiliary skills are too strong. Recovering 2 fatigue every time you exhaust 2 elemental cards, re-rolling misses, refreshing a elemental card..those skills pushed it into the next tier.
  3. I think the rule is fine, but the problem is that shop decks are so stacked in favor of weapons. I've been able to flip over 7 shop cards and gotten 7 weapons. Even though I'm able to keep 4, I can only keep 1. I don't think you should be able to take more than 1 weapon, but you should be able to "re roll" to some extent.
  4. I also want to note that the LoTR game was pure garbage in every sense. It had 0 redeeming qualities besides, maybe, "very non intrusive app." Enemies had no personality, map had no personality. And everything was done with a recycled Runebound 3 side-mechanic which wasn't even that well received. First game my group ever sold. When we lost a mission because we failed a check to eat soup and it gave Aragorn schizophrenia, that's when we knew the game was a flop.
  5. I just went through my EoD quest log, and as you said it doesn't say to use an action or be adjacent to either the secret room's entrance, or the wards. The shimmer may say "a hero my search" but it should read "a hero may perform a search action." My suspicion is that it was intended for action and adjacency. Sometimes developers get sloppy with what they think is "obvious." This is just the quest log though, and not an actual play through. So I can't tell what the text looks like while playing, but I agree it should say "an adjacent hero as an action can dispell this ward." EDIT: I checked the rulebook and CRRG for Objective Token rules. There are baseline Objective Token rules, but they mostly involved picking up and dropping (not interacting). I'd say for anything involving obj tokens, non-adjacency/action spent needs to be explicitly stated as opposed to making sure that adjacency and action expenditure is stated. In other words, if nothing is specified, default to adjacency and action. Although, it is a massive oversight.
  6. I did the 2nd mission in the Nerkehall campaign (the one for Kaplan). I was asked to gather tile 70, but I don't have MoB or have it turned on. It never had me use the tile, but did ask me to gather it.
  7. I don't find that wording to be all too great. Very vague and inconsistent with the game language. For example "take damage" is usually written as "would suffer (hearts)" or "If an attack deals at least 1 (heart)." You do bring up a good point though, because the damage could be taken from sources outside of attacks so I may use something like this for damage outside of attacks. Yeah, this would probably be too much. Orientation has never been in D2e (which maybe it should have been) and I'm not going to write it in for 1 quest haha. Also, this is going to be AI-based and that just leaves a lot to the player on how to orient the figure (unless I do a lot more writing in the AI rules). I think Zaltyre has the right of it. The "does not suffer damage as normal" is a crucial line to use here. Also, there would obviously be effects tied to each body party, but I'm only using base game for this campaign so I don't feel comfortable adding abilities like "stealthy" to the the wings seeing as it does not appear in the base game. The wings would probably give the Dragon a free retreat action at the end of the round, or maybe a 2nd activation altogether. Now I have to decide if breaking the parts is optional, or required to kill the dragon. I also have to design the quest that's before this one, I'm getting a little ahead of myself 😋
  8. Hello all, I'm nearing the latter half of my custom mini campaign (fully co-op, no 3rd party elements required), and I'm spitballing ideas for the finale. Generically enough, it has to do with fighting a Dragonlord. To spice it up, I want to add a little "monster hunter" esque mechanics where different parts of the dragon can be targeted. I've been very careful (I'd like to think) when making my quest rules so that they are rooted deeply into the rules/mechanics of the game so that there is little interpretation or ambiguity. So here's what I'm thinking: You'll be instructed to place 2 different colored objective tokens next to the Shadow Dragon monster card. One color is X part, one color is Y part (details aren't too important right now.) I feel that attacking the parts outright just interacts oddly with the steps of combat, seeing as the parts aren't on the map. It also leads to questions about Blast and if you could hit multiple parts. So I'm thinking somewhere in Step 5, after the damage is calculated and before the damage is suffered, the attacking hero my choose to have the hearts dealt to the "body part." This also means I don't have to give the body parts their own defense pool, and I don't have to worry about blast too much. Does anyone have a better way to do it? Would that cause issue with other game effects? I could of course just write something basic like "when you attack the shadow dragon you may attack a part instead and use the dragon's defense pool." But like I said, I like to be very clear with my quest instructions.
  9. It seems like Genesys tries to steer you away from battle maps, though (heavy emphasis on Narrative rather than mechanics and battle). I feel like Genesys in the Terrinoth setting with battle maps is just.....Descent 2e more or less (and better story telling probably LOL).
  10. Picked this game up on clearance off Miniature Market. So fun, love all the mechanics. I immediately went and bought the app version too so I could play when my brother isn't around. It's helped my friends get into Terrinoth too (along with Descent). Now when I bust out a "Flesh Ripper" in the Genesys Terrinoth RPG, they will understand better than massacre they could bring
  11. I play solo, or with my buddy. Just started Nerekhall on Hard last night, such a good campaign. Using: Reynhart as Knight Valadir as Avenger/Bard Leoric as Elementalist Avric as Disciple Had a BIG slip up that I didn't remember from our normal run last year, but won it by a hair. First shop was 2 Leather Armors and Iron Shield so my party is super tanky with 2 healers
  12. Not to start GH vs D2e argument, but I'm 100% okay with GH being what it is and Descent being what it is. The "kill em all" aspect of GH works because the card-play is so in-depth, but I enjoy D2e's "don't kill em all! run around and turn statues the right way so you can open a door!" style of gameplay. Although GH edges out in actual combat, D2e wins out in the grand scope of fantasy adventure IMHO.
  13. I mean, it always depends on your time/financial situation. I already had LotW because I wanted Champion and Reynhart and Quellin, but I think that's a super great small expansion. I use the classes and heroes all the time. I also did RAOV for the mini campaign. LoR was like 40 bucks, and still came with some cool stuff like Treasure Hunter, Apothecary and Logan Lashley. Also, these expansions beef up your shop list which is awesome as LoR has some pretty strong gear. Curse condition kinda sucks, but burning is a staple of my RtL experience haha. LotW is also needed for the physical co-op campaign "Dark Elements." Lastly, your "Delves" (if you purchased it) will get a lot of stages and variety too from those 2 expansions. The EoD campaign is good, and a little tougher than the others at time. It's not as strong as Nerekhall in the story department, but much better than Kindred Fire (which does nothing to expand the world of Terrinoth). Also, if you paint..well it's more minis to paint :).
  14. Actually saw the book on sale at an FLGS over the weekend. Picked it up. Worth it just for the 100 pages of story and lore honestly, haha. I've never run an RPG before, but I'm excited to get the Genesys book and diving in.
×
×
  • Create New...