$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 106.03

6,618 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
41.7% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
12 Posts

The Others» Forums » Rules

Subject: Dark Past card converting hero into the monster 5/5 rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Krzysztof Olszewski
Poland
flag msg tools
mbmb
During today's game we had a situation with Dark Past card that changed one of the heroes into the monster. It happened when there were only 3 heroes in game (no heroes in reserve).

My question is:
Is losing the hero due to his conversion into monster should make FAITH team to try to take next player from the reserve (what was impossible) or they could continue to play having only to heroes under control?

Have you had such a situation?

Kris

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank La Terra
Australia
flag msg tools
olsszak wrote:
During today's game we had a situation with Dark Past card that changed one of the heroes into the monster. It happened when there were only 3 heroes in game (no heroes in reserve).

My question is:
Is losing the hero due to his conversion into monster should make FAITH team to try to take next player from the reserve (what was impossible) or they could continue to play having only to heroes under control?

Have you had such a situation?

Kris



From the heroes POV it's a dead hero so spawn a new one (or lose if there are none left).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Krzysztof Olszewski
Poland
flag msg tools
mbmb
Ok, so just to recap. Losing hero may be due to the death or just losing the control over the hero and it always trigger the hero replacement from the reserve. No hero in reserve, the Sins player wins as it is stated in rules?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christoph Weber
Germany
flag msg tools
mbmb
I agree that's the logical conclusion. What would you have done if it hadn't been the last hero? Most likely you'd taken one from reserve so that the player that lost his hero to sin could go on playing, wouldn't you?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
fightcitymayor
United States
Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Proprietor and Chairman Emeritus of The Naughty Palace
mb
This is a good question.

And it gives me a chance to opine about one thing I am lukewarm on: The loss condition of the heroes in The Others is a little "gamey." Story-wise, it seems odd that the heroes would immediately lose just because the pool of replacement heroes was empty. ("Well, we tried to call Rocco on the cellphone, but he didn't pick up, so we all just decided to go home. Screw this hero stuff!") Especially because there are still heroes on the board who are still involved and ready to be played. This comes into even more stark relief in the situation the OP describes: the 7th level Dark Past card that converts a hero into a monster should, in pure gaming terms, be the catalyst for more fun (or more dread!) and, in pure gaming terms, shouldn't end up being an automatic loss condition. IMHO, you should never have a card that is able to instantly declare: "Game Over!" I think that's shoddy design.

I still enjoy the game, but the loss condition of the heroes hasn't really sat well with me so far.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Harrow
msg tools
mbmbmb
fightcitymayor wrote:
I still enjoy the game, but the loss condition of the heroes hasn't really sat well with me so far.


Well, there are two things that likely play into it. First, it may be there to avoid player elimination. Generally, when your Hero dies, you just get a new one. If you can't get a new one, you become a spectator.

Another thing I think is that it may just be something that came out of play-testing as a way to "save time" while also addressing the first point.

In the event that a Hero dies and there is no replacement for him, then you are down to 2 or 3 Heroes. They can keep trying, but with fewer and fewer Heroes, the Sin player has an even easier time taking out the ones remaining (and they can no longer benefit from their numbers to protect themselves).

So, I suspect that in play-testing, they may have discerned that the Heroes generally always lost the game once their numbers fell below the usual number of active Heroes, but that it took a few more rounds to get there -- Long enough to be painful to the new spectators, yet without enough possibility to win to warrant "wasting" the time slogging all the way to the end.

I agree that it would feel cool to have the last remaining Hero pull out a win via that last final objective after his team mates have died, but it probably didn't happen enough to make it worth "extending" the game that long.

Either way, I would suggest that you play it out to the end and see how you feel about it yourself! Sure, the rules are written that the Heroes lose, but if your group is up for it, try playing it until the last Hero dies and let us know how you felt about playing it that way!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Krzysztof Olszewski
Poland
flag msg tools
mbmb
fightcitymayor wrote:
This is a good question.

And it gives me a chance to opine about one thing I am lukewarm on: The loss condition of the heroes in The Others is a little "gamey." Story-wise, it seems odd that the heroes would immediately lose just because the pool of replacement heroes was empty. ("Well, we tried to call Rocco on the cellphone, but he didn't pick up, so we all just decided to go home. Screw this hero stuff!") Especially because there are still heroes on the board who are still involved and ready to be played. This comes into even more stark relief in the situation the OP describes: the 7th level Dark Past card that converts a hero into a monster should, in pure gaming terms, be the catalyst for more fun (or more dread!) and, in pure gaming terms, shouldn't end up being an automatic loss condition. IMHO, you should never have a card that is able to instantly declare: "Game Over!" I think that's shoddy design.

I still enjoy the game, but the loss condition of the heroes hasn't really sat well with me so far.


How many games you played? Maybe during the tests when they played dozens of games it appeared to be the best solution ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
fightcitymayor
United States
Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Proprietor and Chairman Emeritus of The Naughty Palace
mb
XeyneGaming wrote:
So, I suspect that in play-testing, they may have discerned that the Heroes generally always lost the game once their numbers fell below the usual number of active Heroes, but that it took a few more rounds to get there -- Long enough to be painful to the new spectators, yet without enough possibility to win to warrant "wasting" the time slogging all the way to the end.
I don't disagree there, I think you're likely quite right. That is why I used the term "gamey" to describe this. If I'm playing a Euro where we're counting victory points, or amassing agrarian commodities, then I would be more okay with the game telling me: Yeah dude, let's call it a day and end this. But for me, when The Others is so story-driven, and character-driven, and minis-driven, then telling the players they've lost when there are still heroes on the board just feels unsatisfying. And the 7th Dark Past card just magnifies that by teasing big things, only to immediately serve instead as a "game over, kthxbye" event.

So while it might serve the game design to end it when the reserve heroes run out, it seems to run counter to the story design. Of course now you've got me wanting to "play out the run," so to speak, the next time the game tells me it's over.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Harrow
msg tools
mbmbmb
fightcitymayor wrote:
So while it might serve the game design to end it when the reserve heroes run out, it seems to run counter to the story design. Of course now you've got me wanting to "play out the run," so to speak, the next time the game tells me it's over.

I definitely agree that it doesn't necessarily fit with the flavor or story. Karl and Leah wouldn't just run away because all of their comrades have fallen... The world is at stake!

Please play it out and let us know how it goes for your group. I'd love to know how to feels to play that way and whether or not dramatic turn-arounds are possible within the "extra turns".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Glickman
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
designer
I'm quite certain the reason for the rule is to help balance between 3 and 4 hero games without any extra rules. It's actually quite genius!

I imagine that there's some degree of morale implicit in the rules that we don't see. None of the heroes are exactly Heroes, they're on humanity's side but they're also mostly far closer to antihero than hero status.

When too few remain, they run. Screw Haven.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sammy
Australia
flag msg tools
mb
@ Paul Glickman - That is bleak....I like it!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lee Garvin
United States
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
The way I'd play it is to continue playing: the hero is still in play, and therefore not "Dead". Have the player who was playing the hero join the Sins player, and let them split up the reaction tokens among them, letting them both make decisions, controlling any of the monsters, including the ex-hero. Let the heroes continue against their corrupted friend. Heel turns are always the most awesome episodes of any TV show (Agents of SHIELD, for instance).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.