Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
nathrotep

Incorporating the treasure cards back in(?)

116 posts in this topic

Wrapped; that wouldn't work because the stats are all different. I take it you are being sarcastic(?) Either that, or you have no idea what you are talking about. None of it matters because, as we all now know, they were just holding back the treasure cards for the expansion releases. The announcement they made today shows that there will be treasure cards after all. (see below) I'm still going to wait until they pump out a few more expansions; too little, too late to catch my interest until there are more cards. For all those of you who never played the first edition and stubbornly refused to even consider playing, I say-HA! I win this debate. The first edition is superior to the second until they put out more cards. Enough said.

 

 

"Fortunately for the heroes, they’ll have plenty of powerful new equipment available at the shop. For example, warriors who often find themselves unable to chase down fleeing foes may want to hide a handbow up their sleeves. This handy trinket can make ranged attack without need to re-equip since it doesn’t technically take one of your hero’s hands to carry it.

For those who’d just as soon avoid a fight, Flash Powder makes for a quick, if dramatic, escape. Throw some at the feet of a nearby foe, and the blinding reaction will leave it stunned long enough for you to make a hasty retreat. Add the Merciful Boots (an Act II Shop card) to the equation, and you’ll have a mobile medic that’s an asset to any team.

These are just a few of the new Shop cards coming, but even with an array of powerful weapons and other items, will the heroes have what it takes to stand before the overlord’s new minions? Look for Lair of the Wyrm on store shelves in just a few more weeks!"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nathrotep said:

 

Wrapped; that wouldn't work because the stats are all different. I take it you are being sarcastic(?) Either that, or you have no idea what you are talking about. None of it matters because, as we all now know, they were just holding back the treasure cards for the expansion releases. The announcement they made today shows that there will be treasure cards after all. (see below) I'm still going to wait until they pump out a few more expansions; too little, too late to catch my interest until there are more cards. For all those of you who never played the first edition and stubbornly refused to even consider playing, I say-HA! I win this debate. The first edition is superior to the second until they put out more cards. Enough said.

 

Oh, please stop. Get over yourself, you don't win anything, this isn't a contest. Your opinion that the first edition is better is fine, but that's all it is, your opinion, not a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Macnme said:

Saying that, in DE2 it seems that everytime the heroes are doing a search, they're finding the Treasure Chest card - and then luckily drawing the exact best piece of equipment they need from the store cards…. it has really hindered me as the overlord, as the heroes are getting WAY more value out of the searches than you would expect them too.

You are aware that drawn search cards are not reshuffled into the draw deck until the end of the quest, right?  Not the end of the encounter, mind you, the end of the quest.  Adam Sadler has even responded to fan-submitted questions about what happens if the search deck runs out by saying "No more searching until the next quest."  The heroes should only be getting one peice of gear from searching per quest, no matter how lucky they are.

Sausageman said:

That is a fair and appropriate question.  And my answer would be, well, not really.

Which I think is part of the problem, as D1 was very much a dungeon crawler.  People have upgraded to D2 expecting a more finely tuned game, and actually ended up with an extremely different game to boot.

I'm curious what your definition of a dungeon crawl is.  Not to insult you or challenge your answer, of course, but just out of genuine curiosity for where you get that impression.  D2E strikes me as being plenty crawly, but perhaps I qualify a dungeon crawl somewhat differently than you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My impressions of what people mean by dungeon crawl (what we used to call Monty Haul in my RPG days):

  • You don't know what's around the next corner or behind the door until you pass it. 
    [strategy = bad; tactics = okay; roll playing = good]  :P
  1. Kill monsters [& get XP]
  2. Seach & get phat lewts (or lutes once they add a Bard class).
  3. Rinse & repeat
  • The one with the most toys wins.
     
  • Lore is to keep the women & children distracted.

I'm [mostly] kidding -- I enjoy a good Dungeon crawl -- but the term is used as a perjorative in many circles.  I picked D2E because I was looking for more than a DC.  It seemed to fit between Drizzt & Mage Knight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nathrotep said:

Wrapped; that wouldn't work because the stats are all different. I take it you are being sarcastic(?) Either that, or you have no idea what you are talking about. None of it matters because, as we all now know, they were just holding back the treasure cards for the expansion releases. The announcement they made today shows that there will be treasure cards after all. (see below) I'm still going to wait until they pump out a few more expansions; too little, too late to catch my interest until there are more cards. For all those of you who never played the first edition and stubbornly refused to even consider playing, I say-HA! I win this debate. The first edition is superior to the second until they put out more cards. Enough said.

 

 

 

I find this has to be a very immature person that wrote this. This reminds me of a gaming friend that I play with. He's a loot hog and we've lost many co-op fantasy games because getting loot is more important then winning the mission/scenerio to him.

I have played Decent 1st Edition and own it and I don't find it a superior game. 2nd edition has better character advancement in some ways with the class system it incorporated. D1E did allow you to buy more dice and draw random skills but the class system in D2E is better overall and adds more flavor.

The map tiles are better in D2E overall. The art work is better and doesn't look at all the same. Plus the outdoors tiles is nice too which D1E didn't have.

I don't find the shop cards any better or worse then the treasure cards from D1E base set.

I do like the shorter play time and your not forced to slot out 4+ hours just to play a mission./scenerio.

The first expansion is adding more shop cards, more classes, secret rooms, and side quests, what is there not to like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My sarcastic response was in reply to the other gentleman's sarcastic comments. But thanks for making my point for me; the second edition will now get better as they add the treasure cards they were holding back. Shorter play time was not my issue; it was the boringness of the dungeons and lack of treasure. Even our OL was bored. And I'm not a loot hog; as you are well aware, having played it yourself, in the first edition you almost have to get the treasure to win. Also, the dungeons in the second edition are ridiculously easy to get through. Until the upcoming expansion, there were no treasure cards. The second edition is like an extremely dumbed down version of the first, like they were shooting for a much younger audience. In the first edition, the dungeons were longer, better written, more challenging, and a lot more fun to play. Saying that I'm wrong, and that's just my 'opinion' is all well and good, but it's like someone saying; "Hey, I never played chess before, and probably never will; too many rules, way too long. I just don't get it. But tic-tac-toe! Now there's a game I've played and it's the best thing since sliced bread! I'll just enjoy it for what it is and never even have to try to figure out chess. If anyone tries to tell me that chess is a better game, I'll just scoff at them and tell them that it's just their opinion…." Descent second edition is like tic-tac-toe compared to the first edition. If people like it the way it is, I guess that's fine for them. But they're still missing out on a far superior game. However, none of that matters anymore because they have announced the new treasure cards. In 3 or 4 expansions, I may even try it again to see if it has grown enough to enjoy playing it. Meanwhile, I'll continue to play the many other fine games that FFG offers, like Arkham Horror, Talisman, etc. Until then, you guys have fun playing your 'tic-tac-toe'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talisman is the easiest game to play so if D2E is Tic-Tac-Toe then Talisman is Candyland. Talisman requires no skill to play and win, it's all about being the luckiest. I can't believe you think there is actual meat and potatoes to that game. Sure there is treasure cards in the deck but you may never see them. It's very likely to draw nothing but creatures, events, and strangers the entire game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, so Talisman is not a good example of a game that requires a lot of skill. You got me there. I just lumped it in there as one of the other games by FFG that we like to play. We had more fun with that than Descent second edition, so it got included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy a variety of games depending on the people I am playing with, the situation (time & space), and even my mood at the time.  I don't play much chess these days (although I could probaby dig up at least 6 sets around the house), but I have played the occasional game of Tic-Tac-Toe with young kids recently.  I've even tried to play Go, although I'm not very good -- it's a bit too abstract for my tastes.  I like the chrome, although not as much as some.

I am very much enjoying Descent 2E right now.  I can understand why FFG kept the brand, although this is more of a reboot than a sequel.  I prefer games that focus on skills rather than items.  I'd rather go into combat with a Navy Seal armed with a butter knife than a civilian with an assault rifle.  I would enjoy playing D1E in the right circumstances, but finding the time & players these days … 

True believers know they are right; it's not a matter for opinion.  Resistance is futile.  Any counter-argument will be met with "Nope, I'm right; you're wrong!"  Not much point debating with the nope rat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Triu. Well spoken. I am passionate about how much better my playing experience was with the first edition. My whole game group agrees with me. When people who have never tried it tell me that the new one is better, I know that they are wrong. This is based on having played both games with my group, with players who have played a lot of different games. People can try and tell me that the new one is better until they are blue in the face and it won't change my mind. My group is about having a rewarding experience with fun, compelling, and challenging games. As you say, it's hard to find the time to get everyone together to play, and when we do, we want to have a great time. The second edition frustrated everyone in my group. We did not have a great time. The main problems we had were the over simplification and the loss of the treasure cards. If you compare the first dungeon in the first edition to the first dungeon in the second edition you will see what I'm talking about. It's not about being a 'loot hog'. It's not about 'game length'. It's about having fun. If you enjoy the new one, then good for you. It's not completely unsalvageable, and the new treasure cards will help with that. I'm excited to see that it may grow back into something that would be worth playing again. But people shouldn't try and tell me that the old one isn't better, because there they would be wrong. And that is a proven fact based on hours of play time with both editions. I don't see how anyone can argue with that. If that makes me a 'nope rat', that's fine; but I'm still right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Nathrotep I am 100% sure you are in the vast minority with your opinion that you are positing as "proven fact". I've talked to dozens of people in person and read countless opinions online stating that Descent 2E is a vast improvement over 1E. In fact yours is the first and only opinion I've encountered that states otherwise.

2. I've read through this entire thread and you seemingly contradict yourself quite a few times. Namely in one part you say that Descent 1E is more a challenging tactical game than 2E but then you say that it's practically impossible to win in 1E without getting the treasure chests and they are random. Then you later say that nothing is forcing players to get these treasure chests. Then you later say again that it is practically impossible to win in 1E without getting the treasure chests.

3. How tactical and challenging could a game be if all you're trying to do is outgear your encounters or on the flip-side avoid undergearing your encounters? 2E also gives you choices as to skills to take with xp. I don't know how you can argue that a game that takes much longer to play in which your goal is to simply outgear your enemies is better in any way to a game that plays smoothly and intuitively much shorter as to be bearable and you are given diverse and interesting objectives each encounter where gear may help but you are not going to steamroll if you outgear and you won't get destroyed if you undergear because of the game consisting of several factors like skills and movement being much more important than purely outgearing and killing monsters.

4. I for one really like the fact that you get most if not all of your equipment from the shops. It's a really nice breath of fresh air compared to every **** game (including video games) where all shops have complete trash you would never buy. Also if you think about it this is effectively the same thing as finding treasure except you are given more choices and choices are better in my opinion. This is because the items you find are converted to gold and you get to choose at the shops what you want to buy. If all of the equipment the heroes got were 100% random I would hate the game.

5. Everything you have said in this thread as convinced me beyond any doubt that 2E is worlds above 1E. I am surprised that you have people you know that are turning down playing 2E to play 1E. None of my friends would ever prefer 1E to 2E.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, Nathrotep. But you are NOT right. You and your group may like 1E better,and that's fine, but it's not a fact that it's better. I don't know why you can't grasp the concept that others may prefer the second edition, just like you and your friends amy like the first edition better. Theyt are not wrong for liking 2E, just like you are not wrong for preferring 1E. To say that one edition is better than the other and that's a fact, is simply not true. You and your gaming group are not the ulttimate authority on what games are good or bad, except for what games are good or bad for you personally,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Khalbrogo; that's because you so obviously have never played the first edition. You can't have an opinion on something you've never played. Besides, this game was never meant to be played without the treasure cards; they're just putting them in a little at a time to make more money. As far as my gaming group not being the ultimate authority, that is completely irrelevant. It's a fact that they are releasing the cards. It's a fact that they belong in the game. It's a fact that they will make the game better. What are you all going to do? Take out the new treasure cards an not use them because you prefer to play with just your stats? Seriously?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nathrotep said:

 

Khalbrogo; that's because you so obviously have never played the first edition. You can't have an opinion on something you've never played. Besides, this game was never meant to be played without the treasure cards; they're just putting them in a little at a time to make more money. As far as my gaming group not being the ultimate authority, that is completely irrelevant. It's a fact that they are releasing the cards. It's a fact that they belong in the game. It's a fact that they will make the game better. What are you all going to do? Take out the new treasure cards an not use them because you prefer to play with just your stats? Seriously?

 



Are you serious? I haven't tried eating **** before I don't need to try it to realize I won't like it. Also your counterargument has absolutely nothing even remotely touching the dozens of people I have spoken to in person that all believe 2E is worlds above 1E and basically 99% of the internet.

Also I have no problem with them releasing new cards that's the point of expansions. However you claiming that they intentionally left out cards that would otherwise balance the game or should be in the game in the first place is a huge assumption and I don't see how you cannot differentiate that from fact. I think you need to go back to school and learn what a fact is.

Also you basically didn't address any of my arguments in my orginal post so I will have to assume you have no argument and I am right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the OP really this stupid? Or just a troll? Can't decide.

A question nathrotep. Are your gaming group imaginary? It's the only explanation I can come up with for anyone choosing 1ed over 2ed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now be fair fellas. If Nathrotep likes the first edition better than the second, well, that's his opinion and he's entitled to it. But, what he can't say is that 1E IS better and that's a fact, (or that he's right and that he wins) and on the other hand, neither can any of you say the same thing of the second edition. You may like it better, but that, again, that doesn't mean it IS better.We each like what we like, and no-one can tell us we're wrong for liking it. (or not liking it, whatever)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BatHead said:

Now be fair fellas. If Nathrotep likes the first edition better than the second, well, that's his opinion and he's entitled to it. But, what he can't say is that 1E IS better and that's a fact, (or that he's right and that he wins) and on the other hand, neither can any of you say the same thing of the second edition. You may like it better, but that, again, that doesn't mean it IS better.We each like what we like, and no-one can tell us we're wrong for liking it. (or not liking it, whatever)



Yep that's what's rubbing me the wrong way and what I'm counterarguing. On the other hand I am also pointing out the flaws in his subjective arguments as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I own first edition…since 2005 when I saw it on a gamestore shelf.    I have always liked it.    I bought every expansion and loved the idea of RTL and bought both it and sea of blood when it came out.    

 

I Love 2nd edition more.  It's a more polished streamlined and in my opinion competetive game.    I want more adventures…longer adventures..more classes and more options in eaxch class….perhaps Prestige classes or multi class rules?    The conversion kit and all 1st edition plastic is a must have.

 

 

Now I have this to say about the treasure deck from 1st edition.   It was a tiered loot system….everything in the silver deck was just a levelled version of something in the copper deck.      same thing for the gold deck…no surprises..maybe a few items in each deck that where uniquish but for the most part it was the same stuff with more powerful surge abilities and maybe an added effect.    

 

the way it is handled now is just more streamlined….you have your weapons and most of the development is in the charactars and tyhe class deck as oposed to collecting loot..cause swapping weapons everytime you open a chest is less tactically rewarding in my opinion.

 

 

Now I am not saying that it did not have its place and I am not implying that 2nd edition will not benefit from additional weapons and items in the shop decks…it most certainly will.  however I think that we will not see the here is a slightly better version of a weapon you already have type of nonsense.    why do that when you can just make the charactar better with a weapon he already possessess?

 

Just my thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really enjoy 2nd edition.  I hated 1st edition as the OL was too powerfull.  If given a choice between a game of Descent 1E and Dungeon and Dragons.  It would be no brainer on how to spend the 4-5 hours. 

If you group like 1E.  Good for you.  1E killed our gaming group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an update. I now own 1st edition (bought from a friend for the figures). However, no one wants to play 1st edition considering I own 2nd edition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Okay, so I think I've figured out why almost none of you are seeing what I'm talking about. I think there has been a huge mis-communication. You all are assuming that my group always plays campaign style, while I have been assuming that you all sometimes play solo dungeons. (I know that's a broad statement, so bare with me while I try to explain). My group mostly plays solo dungeons. Why? Because in the first edition they can take anywhere from 4 to 8 hours to complete. If the hero's win at a solo dungeon, they have the OPTION of keeping the same characters, but starting over with basic stats and losing any equipment they have collected. Then, if they want to do another dungeon, they then get a bonus in gold based on how many quests they have completed in a row. They can use this to purchase new equipment, training tokens, random skill cards, and randomly drawn cards from the treasure decks. The OL gets extra power, cards, and threat tokens. If the OL ever wins a game, you have to pick all new characters and start over from scratch. During the game, if you find and activate a 'glyph', you can teleport back to town to heal, sell loot, and purchase things, up to and including training tokens and skill cards, which are more expensive. So, if you wanted to be an idiot jarhead with major skills and just a butter knife, you could sell all your cool equipment and do that. Frankly, I don't see what would be fun about doing it that way, but the option was there. We've never made it past 3 or 4 quests linked in a row when we played it that way, except for when we played the Road to Legends campaign expansion, which is a whole other story. (That took us weeks to complete). The OL is pretty powerful, and increases in strength as they collect threat tokens to use on the fully customizable OL deck. In the second edition, you use your experience points BETWEEN quests and dungeons to purchase skills. This is supposed to be more like a campaign type thing than a stand alone dungeon thing. In the first quest, we had to stop 5 goblins from escaping the map. Really?! That was just goofy compared to what we're used to. In the first dungeon of the first edition, we had to get past or fight 3 hell hounds, 3 skeleton warriors, 8 beast men, a giant spider, 2 giant bats, 2 chimaera's, all their reinforcements, and the main objective of the quest, which was to kill the leader, who was a giant named Narthak. And you can equip treasure cards right when you find them. Do you really want that +2 sword? You bet you did! The OL's main objective was to KILL us. This was a 4 level dungeon, and it was just the tutorial dungeon. In the second edition, you build up your skills AFTER each quest to go on to the next. Well, that's not much fun if you aren't going on to the next quest, is it? No treasure cards to equip along the way sucks, not that you need them in second edition because it's so ridiculously easy to play. Also, the second dungeon in the second edition was even stupider than the first; collect boxes from a field and stop the monsters from getting them? What is this, 'farmville'? That is just completely retarded. So you can see that the second edition would of course seem like it's not as good to me and my group; we're used to fighting hordes of monsters, collecting the treasure, and trying to complete the objective without getting killed! In the second edition, none of us got killed, and the OL quickly got bored once she figured out that all she had to do was completely ignore the hero's, use the big monster to block, and then try to complete the objective with her smaller monsters before we did. To us, that was just lame. These two quests seem to be written for children under 10 years of age when compared to the ones we're used to. In fact, the two versions of this game are like two completely different games. So, we're not normally campaigners; if we wanted to play a D&D type game, we would just play D&D. We're board gamers. We get together and have 5 to 10 hour long gaming sessions, and usually play a different game every time. I guess that this new version just isn't the game for us. And that's too bad, since the first one is one of our favorites. And spare me the rebuttal; I can already hear it coming, "That's stupid! Why doesn't your game group use it's 5 to 10 hours to play a bunch of rounds of this new second edition? The dungeons get better and more challenging, and you can really trick out your hero's abilities, blah, blah, blah…." Well, the answer is because there are not enough treasure and shop cards yet to make this game really interesting for us. I'd rather have a dude with a crazy cool sword and a nice set of armor than just some boring old schmuck with boosted abilities. In about 3 or 4 more expansions, when there are a lot more cards out for it, then maybe we'll try it again, and just skip ahead to the harder dungeons. If you guys like it, more power to ya, but for us, it was just a waste of valuable gaming time. It's probable that some of you still won't 'get' where I'm coming from, since you all seem to love the dumbed down, little kid friendly and more 'streamlined' game play of the new version, but I hope that now you can at least better understand what I've been trying to say all along.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nathrotep said:

 

 

Okay, so I think I've figured out why almost none of you are seeing what I'm talking about. I think there has been a huge mis-communication. You all are assuming that my group always plays campaign style, while I have been assuming that you all sometimes play solo dungeons. (I know that's a broad statement, so bare with me while I try to explain). My group mostly plays solo dungeons. Why? Because in the first edition they can take anywhere from 4 to 8 hours to complete. If the hero's win at a solo dungeon, they have the OPTION of keeping the same characters, but starting over with basic stats and losing any equipment they have collected. Then, if they want to do another dungeon, they then get a bonus in gold based on how many quests they have completed in a row. They can use this to purchase new equipment, training tokens, random skill cards, and randomly drawn cards from the treasure decks. The OL gets extra power, cards, and threat tokens. If the OL ever wins a game, you have to pick all new characters and start over from scratch. During the game, if you find and activate a 'glyph', you can teleport back to town to heal, sell loot, and purchase things, up to and including training tokens and skill cards, which are more expensive. So, if you wanted to be an idiot jarhead with major skills and just a butter knife, you could sell all your cool equipment and do that. Frankly, I don't see what would be fun about doing it that way, but the option was there. We've never made it past 3 or 4 quests linked in a row when we played it that way, except for when we played the Road to Legends campaign expansion, which is a whole other story. (That took us weeks to complete). The OL is pretty powerful, and increases in strength as they collect threat tokens to use on the fully customizable OL deck. In the second edition, you use your experience points BETWEEN quests and dungeons to purchase skills. This is supposed to be more like a campaign type thing than a stand alone dungeon thing. In the first quest, we had to stop 5 goblins from escaping the map. Really?! That was just goofy compared to what we're used to. In the first dungeon of the first edition, we had to get past or fight 3 hell hounds, 3 skeleton warriors, 8 beast men, a giant spider, 2 giant bats, 2 chimaera's, all their reinforcements, and the main objective of the quest, which was to kill the leader, who was a giant named Narthak. And you can equip treasure cards right when you find them. Do you really want that +2 sword? You bet you did! The OL's main objective was to KILL us. This was a 4 level dungeon, and it was just the tutorial dungeon. In the second edition, you build up your skills AFTER each quest to go on to the next. Well, that's not much fun if you aren't going on to the next quest, is it? No treasure cards to equip along the way sucks, not that you need them in second edition because it's so ridiculously easy to play. Also, the second dungeon in the second edition was even stupider than the first; collect boxes from a field and stop the monsters from getting them? What is this, 'farmville'? That is just completely retarded. So you can see that the second edition would of course seem like it's not as good to me and my group; we're used to fighting hordes of monsters, collecting the treasure, and trying to complete the objective without getting killed! In the second edition, none of us got killed, and the OL quickly got bored once she figured out that all she had to do was completely ignore the hero's, use the big monster to block, and then try to complete the objective with her smaller monsters before we did. To us, that was just lame. These two quests seem to be written for children under 10 years of age when compared to the ones we're used to. In fact, the two versions of this game are like two completely different games. So, we're not normally campaigners; if we wanted to play a D&D type game, we would just play D&D. We're board gamers. We get together and have 5 to 10 hour long gaming sessions, and usually play a different game every time. I guess that this new version just isn't the game for us. And that's too bad, since the first one is one of our favorites. And spare me the rebuttal; I can already hear it coming, "That's stupid! Why doesn't your game group use it's 5 to 10 hours to play a bunch of rounds of this new second edition? The dungeons get better and more challenging, and you can really trick out your hero's abilities, blah, blah, blah…." Well, the answer is because there are not enough treasure and shop cards yet to make this game really interesting for us. I'd rather have a dude with a crazy cool sword and a nice set of armor than just some boring old schmuck with boosted abilities. In about 3 or 4 more expansions, when there are a lot more cards out for it, then maybe we'll try it again, and just skip ahead to the harder dungeons. If you guys like it, more power to ya, but for us, it was just a waste of valuable gaming time. It's probable that some of you still won't 'get' where I'm coming from, since you all seem to love the dumbed down, little kid friendly and more 'streamlined' game play of the new version, but I hope that now you can at least better understand what I've been trying to say all along.

 

 



1. Learn to make use of paragraphs.

2. No you are the one that just doesn't get it. 2nd edition isn't a dumbed down little kid friendly version of 1st edition. It's a much more tactical game than that and you still haven't argued anyone's sound and valid counterarguments on why you are just flat wrong in claiming so.

3. I have no problem with you liking 1st edition better than 2nd but you seem to go out of your way to impose it on everyone by saying that 2nd edition is objectively inferior and your only argument has been deconstructed time and again. The progression in 2nd edition stems from more choices given to the player whereas in 1st edition it is almost completely random I don't see how that is any better strategically.
 

 

4. Nobody I know in my gaming group including over two dozen people prefer 1st edition to 2nd edition. It isn't just the campaign mode that makes the difference.

5. I don't see the point arguing with you anymore because you don't seem to understand how debate or logic works. You keep repeating the same thing over and over without addressing anyone's counterarguments to your points in all 5 pages of this thread. At this point I am pretty sure you're just trolling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I addressed all your arguments. You don't seem to be able to read. I describe, in detail, what I'm trying to say. There are many more choices, as I have listed above. The main one being that there are an abundance of more cards; skill cards included. Also, I point out that these are two entirely seperate games. There are many reviews that agree with me across the internet. It's pointless for me to continue to argue with a 12 year old; have fun playing your game with all your little friends. I hope that this year Santa is extra good to you. Merry Christmas!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

[ADMIN: Edited for content.]
 
You want me to explain in exact detail how to play Descent first edition and why it is tactically superior and has more choices that descent second edition.
 
[ADMIN: Forum members are welcome to their opinions, but are not welcome to employ hostile, derogatory, or condescending language.]
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0