Are the heroes too generic?

[Madmartigan 48]

I think this game looks great. I had the first edition, and loved it. I sold it in preparation for adding this third edition to my collection. I intend to get it during the holidays.

 

However, my favorite game is Descent. I have all of the things, and I play Descent almost every week. I love Terrinoth; the only Terrinoth game I have not owned is Rune Wars. Which I am still thinking about.

 

My one slight hangup with this new edition of Runebound is the lack of definition of the heroes' archetypes. Having played so much Descent, maybe my opinion on this is skewed, but to me Master Thorn is a mage, Lord Hawthorne is a warrior, etc. I understand the appeal of being able to customize your character into any type you wish. But the possibility of building Lord Hawthorne into a lightning wielding sorcerer kind of bugs me.

 

If the characters are going to be generalists that can be built into anything you want, then why use already established characters? Why not create some new generic sculpts, call them generic archetype names, and include enough generic minis that players can determine their archetype at the beginning of the game (4 warriors, 4 mages, 4 scouts, etc). I know why. To get use out of already manufactured molds, to tie in more with Descent, etc.

 

I am not saying that I want these more generic sculpts, etc. I just think that a little more specialization in the characters abilities would make them more thematically interesting. This is a very minor hang up, and I also know the solution. Since the characters can be built anyway the player wants, I am perfectly free to always build Lord Hawthorne into a warrior, etc. Which I probably always will.

 

So my question is, are the heroes' stats and abilities in this new edition of Runebound too generic? Or does this bug no one but me?

Edited September 30, 2015 by Madmartigan

[Julia 2,793]

There are more flexible than in Descent (i.e., no one is disallowing Hawthorne from shopping for magic), but they still mantain their nature due to specific characters abilities

[DAMaz 142]

In Descent your warriors can also use magic runes and bows. The things that makes this a suboptimal choice are their skills, that from time to time require specific weapon-types.

 

I imagine this being kind of similar here. Your attributes dictate how many skills you can use of the same type and skills cost resources. So I think you will need more resources to turn your mage character into a fighter than into a powerfull mage. But if you are unlucky with weapons and gear, you can always develop your character to fit these items and you are not dependent on getting the right items, the right skills and so on.

Edited September 30, 2015 by DAMaz

[mulletcheese 669]

I'm not worried about it.

The hero's have stats for mind, body and spirit which limit how many skills of each type they can have. A fighter class hero will have a high body can learn more combat skills than a magey class with a low body score.

To pay for those combat skills a hero has to go on combat missions.

Someone playing Lord Hawthorne may decide to start out learning magic, possibly because of a great magic skill in their opening hand, but will quickly max out on magic skills and will move on to combat skills. He's a combat hero and will play that way for most of the game.

It's too early to call the hero's generic, we've only seen one hero so far.

[Zaltyre 1,666]

I agree- the heroes appear (so far) to be versatile without being generic. If the heroes were not customizable, the game would have significant problems with replayability. There are 15 unique parties of 4 heroes out of a pool of 6. 

[mulletcheese 669]

I think of them as being similar to eldrich horror investigators.

Different base stats, different max stats, all play differently but each can attempt to do anything in the game.

[Madmartigan 48]

I think of them as being similar to eldrich horror investigators.

Different base stats, different max stats, all play differently but each can attempt to do anything in the game.

This is a really good point. I had not thought of that comparison.

 

Love Eldritch Horror btw.

[SolennelBern 164]

I want this game so bad...

[Artaterxes 204]

In the original Descent, characters had no archetypes.

[Anarchosyn 1]

"Are the heroes too generic?"

 

Yes.

 

More female representation is needed too, FFG (and I say this as a man). Its a veritable sausage fest of uninteresting characters in the base set. If I didn't anticipate a fast expansion release schedule to rectify this, I'd have been inclined to pass on the title. 

Edited November 6, 2015 by Anarchosyn

[moppers 55]

Runebound 2 did not have a lack of female characters. I agree that having such in 3 would affect sales at least until an expansion arrived. Unless some other similar game comes out in the interim. Do you know the number of characters of the various genders?

Edited November 6, 2015 by moppers