$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 81.37

5,442 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
34.3% of Goal | 27 Days Left

Support:

Jo Bartok
Germany
Zwingenberg
Hessen
flag msg tools
Meow
badge
Moooh
mbmbmbmbmb
Hello dungeon-crawlers!

this is not intended to be a thread full of bashes or discussion. I can't stop you, but my intention is simply to gather your opinions regarding game-play, mechanics, immersion etc.

Please try to find something for both sides. E.g. not only name things you dislike but also you like, nor only name things like like but none that you dislike. Think hard !

You can name more but should try to name at least 3 each, on the good and bad side!

Here is a template, thanks for participating!:

The 3 best things about Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition) in terms of game-play, mechanics and immersion are:


1.


2.


3.



The 3 worst things about Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition) in terms of gameplay, mechanics and immersion are:


1.


2.


3.




 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastian H.
Germany
Weilburg
Hessen
flag msg tools
Evil Overlord
badge
Evil Overlord
mbmbmbmbmb
ionas wrote:
this is not intended to be a thread full of bashes or discussion. I can't stop you, but my intention is simply to gather your opinions regarding game-play, mechanics, immersion etc.


Please don´t take this the wrong way, but considering your lengthy history of permanent bashing of Descent 2nd Edition, I´m not very sure If I can take anything you say about the game at face value. At least color me surprised.

Nonetheless I´ll try to contribute to the topic of this discussion. These are my totally subjective likes and dislikes about the game in no particular order. One perhaps important thing about my background: I never played the 1st edition of Descent.



What I like about Descent 2nd Edition:

Fantasy setting (theme): While some might say that the realms of terrinoth is a pretty generic setting, I personally like prefer classic fantasy settings for rpgs in general. It also isn´t so bland to have "good" and "evil" races, which is a huge plus in my opinion.

Campaign play (gameplay): Simply the best feature of the game for me is the campaign mode. To play a game over multiple sessions which all unfluence the finale is great, and this is what makes this game feel rpgish. It´s not so much about the ending, but about the journey.

Hero progression in campaign play (RPG elements): Playing the heroes is one of the most rewarding experiences. Your character receives gold and experience to acquire new skills and better eqiupment over time. There are a lot of RPG elements in the game.

Tactical combat (gameplay): Overall I like the Descent combat system. It can be frustrating at times, because of the die rolls, but it´s just the right combination of being simple (die rolls) yet being variable and complex at times(skills and abilities).

Assymetric gameplay (gameplay): Playing the overlord is a rather different experience than playing as the heores, and thats a good thing. I like to option of playing the bad guy.

Diverse quest design (gameplay): Especially in the later expansions, the game offers a great variety in encounter design. There are a lot of different objectives for each side, so that the quests feel different and do not start to repeat themselves.

Road to Legend App support (gameplay): Considering the fast and vast improvements of the app following its (in my view a bit lackluster) release, it is now in a great state and provides quite a lot of content to play the game in solo or coop mode. It also provides a real dungeon crawler experience with hidden maps, and is a good way to play the game with players who don´t like competetive games.



What I dislike about Descent 2nd Edition:

Difficulty to get and keep a campaign running (logistics): For me personally it is hard to find players who enjoy playing competetive games as well as finding regular appointments to keep campaigns running. While this is not a flaw of the game itself, it can be frustrating to struggle with this problem and as a consequence not being able play Descent. But this is also related to me not living in a large city. If you have an active local boardgaming scene, this surely is a small issue.

The first base game campaign "The Shadow rune" (gameplay): This campaign unfortunately is the root of a lot of negative opinions about the game and its balance. This is because FFG still was at the start of a long learning process. In newer expansions the quests are usually better designed, and FFG moved away from the open campaign tree to predetermined quest choices. It was a long process of evolution, but it lead to better balanced campaigns.

Snowballing (gameplay): A common problem of this game is real and perceived snowballing. While the game is balanced to a certain degree, there is also a lot of luck involved (dice rolls, card draws). Sometimes, if either the heroes or the overlord loose multiple quests, it may seem as if there is no chance to come back. While it is true to a certain degree that the winner gets more rewards and thus is likely to win more, it´s also a question of strategy and aforementioned luck. Unfortunately this might lead to players getting sour about the game anyway.

Some unnecessary complex rules (gameplay): Some of the rules in this game are just a mess. For example out of my head I can think about at least 4 different ways of movement, the action, non-action and interruption mechanics as well as lots of instances of ambiguous wording, which leads to rule debates (which is especially bad in a competetive game). There is certainly some unnecessary complexity to remove if this game gets a third edition at a later point in time.

Game setup time (logistics): Unfortunately Descent is not a game which you pull out to play spontaneous. You usually have to do some planning in advance, and ideally setup the game before the players arrive, to keep the playtime at a managable level.



There are definitely more points I like and dislike about the game, but I think these should qualify as most of my personal best and worst points.

If I forgot anything of importance I will update this post
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kyle Pede
Canada
Abbotsford
British Columbia
flag msg tools
mbmbmb

The 3 best things about Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition) in terms of game-play, mechanics and immersion are:


1. Theme: I love being able to read lore for each monster and hero.


2. Simple math for combat.


3. Variety in everything. Heroes, classes, monsters, and the works.



The 3 worst things about Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition) in terms of gameplay, mechanics and immersion are:


1. Movement


2. My play group says Frenzy and Dash ruin some maps.


3. Arachyuras always get one-shotted I guess I mean to say some monsters can never go toe to toe with heroes, in which case they become barricades, so why not always use kobolds?




1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bucho Bucho
msg tools
mb

1. It's an excellent dungeon crawl...well dungeon crawlish.


2. Robust, there are a lot of campaigns, hero, class and monster choices.



The 3 worst things about Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition) in terms of gameplay, mechanics and immersion are:


1. Price, Descent costs significantly more than for example the D&D adventure system games.


2. Modular monster groups. There's something weird about a group of kobolds being equivalent to a group of dragons and leads to some weird mini design choices like the kobold stack.


3. Lieutenant tokens and having to buy single lieutenant miniatures separately for too much money.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jo Bartok
Germany
Zwingenberg
Hessen
flag msg tools
Meow
badge
Moooh
mbmbmbmbmb
DelphiDie wrote:
ionas wrote:
this is not intended to be a thread full of bashes or discussion. I can't stop you, but my intention is simply to gather your opinions regarding game-play, mechanics, immersion etc.


Please don´t take this the wrong way, but considering your lengthy history of permanent bashing of Descent 2nd Edition, I´m not very sure If I can take anything you say about the game at face value. At least color me surprised.

Nonetheless I´ll try to contribute to the topic of this discussion. These are my totally subjective likes and dislikes about the game in no particular order. One perhaps important thing about my background: I never played the 1st edition of Descent.


Thank you!. I am just looking at what people love about dungeon crawlers and what they don't love about them. That doesn't have to fit my taste but I am curious what people are looking for.

Edit:
DelphiDie wrote:

In newer expansions the quests are usually better designed, and FFG moved away from the open campaign tree to predetermined quest choices. It was a long process of evolution, but it lead to better balanced campaigns.

Could you elaborate, what made it better? I don't remember there being an open campaign tree (maybe I just forgot), so what was it like (bad?) and what got improved precisely? What do you mean by "predetermined quest choices"?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jo Bartok
Germany
Zwingenberg
Hessen
flag msg tools
Meow
badge
Moooh
mbmbmbmbmb
InfinityBlack14 wrote:

[b]

The 3 worst things about Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition) in terms of gameplay, mechanics and immersion are:


1. Movement



What's bad about "movement" and how could it be better?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Garbett
United States
Nashville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
Will Provide Statistics for Data
mbmbmbmbmb
The 3 best things about Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition) in terms of game-play, mechanics and immersion are:

1. Simple Fantasy campaign. It's D&D lite, cause when you're getting older it's hard to have a weekend to just sit around with friends and play D&D. You can get a quick game in, without much forethought or planning.

2. Quality of tiles and miniatures is quite good for the price point.

3. Supported by a large community of folks.



The 3 worst things about Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition) in terms of gameplay, mechanics and immersion are:


1. It always has the same monsters and they just progress upward with your progress. I like the idea that some monsters are Act I and some are Act II (and why not an Act III expansion?). Just changing cards out and fighting the same critters just seems wrong. Like a Shadow Dragon, in Act I, really? Or all of a sudden Goblin Archers can pack a wallop, what?

2. When playing with the App, it sometimes makes stupid decisions than an OL would never make.

3. Storing all the expansions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastian H.
Germany
Weilburg
Hessen
flag msg tools
Evil Overlord
badge
Evil Overlord
mbmbmbmbmb
ionas wrote:
Thank you!. I am just looking at what people love about dungeon crawlers and what they don't love about them. That doesn't have to fit my taste but I am curious what people are looking for.


Fair enough

ionas wrote:
Could you elaborate, what made it better? I don't remember there being an open campaign tree (maybe I just forgot), so what was it like (bad?) and what got improved precisely? What do you mean by "predetermined quest choices"?


Of course. I just need to clarify a few basics, before explaining this point.

A full size Descent campaign usually consists of 9 quests played in succession. For the sake of this argument I will ignore mini campaign (that´s a different kind of experience) and rumor quests (which can be included to prolong a campaign but have their own problems).

Now, the 9 quests played follow this pattern: Introduction quest, 3 Act I quests, interlude quest, 3 Act II quests, Finale.

As of today, there are 5 of these full campaigns. The first campaign, which was included in the base game box (and has now been replaced), was "The Shadow Rune".

In "The Shadow Rune" you have an open campaign tree, which means, that during the 3 act I and the 3 act II quests you can choose 3 of 5 available quests to play, abd you can choose them in any order.

Now this alone wouldn´t be a problem, if the overlord and the heroes would progress at the same speed, but this is not the case by design. In short: The reason for the difference in relative power is, that the heroes gain XP and better equipment, while the overlord only gains XP. I will put a longer (and probably boring) explanation in spoiler tags.

Spoiler (click to reveal)
To explain this a bit more in detail: the overlord becomes weaker (relatively to the heroes) over the course of an act. This is due to 2 factors: Hero XP is usually a lot more powerful than overlord XP. While heroes get new permanent abilities, which are mostly limited by stamina (an easy to recover resource), the number of activations per turn (exhaust or action cost) or by special class resource tokens, the overlord can only expand his card deck. This is weaker (especially at the start of the game), because the overlord might not even get access to his new card, if he happens to not draw it from his (at least 15 card) deck during a quest. To make matters worse for the overlord, the heroes gain equipment, which increases their damage, survivability, defense and so on. The forces of the overlord on the other hand stay exactly the same during act I, and only get a boost at the beginning of act II. This in itself is not a problem, but it becomes on with an open campaign tree.


Knowing that, we can now discern why an open campaign becomes a problem. Let´s say one of the available quests in act I is quest X. You can play this quest X as the first, second or third quest in this act (or none, but lets disregard this option). If the quest is played as the first quest, the heroes and the overlord have relatively little XP, and the heroes have mostly basic equipment. If you play this as the third quest, the XP values of the heroes and the overlord may warry noticeably (depending on how both sides did before), and the heroes will have some items available.

Since you don´t know at which point in the campaign a given quest is played (as is the case in an open campaign), you can´t really take these differences into account for the quest design. Which means that the balance will inevitably be a problem in some of these cases. You can´t really decide on the optimal ammount of monsters, reinforcements, mechanics etc. to make this quest challenging but managable for both sides at all times. This often leads to the perception, that some quests are horribly imbalanced (which, to make matters worse, some of "The Shadow Rune" campaign quests are even before considering this).

Over time FFG experimented a bit with this formula.

The second campaign "Labyrinth of ruin" had pre determined quests in act I, which simply means you can choose 1 of 2 possible followup quests, after you played an act I quest. Act II was once again open though, which means that the same problems applied in this case.

The third campaign "Shadows of Nerekhall" strangely had on open act I once again, but it included a mechanism to upgrade one of the most often used monster group in this campaign during the acts. Act II, on contrast, had the pre determined quests once again.

The fourth campaign "Heirs of Blood" did completely away with the open concept, and has pre determined follow up quests from start to finish. Personally I found this campaign to be much better balanced (both in design itself and design for powerlevel).

The fifth campaign, which is created by combining the campaigns from "Mists of Bilehall" and "The Chains that Rust", also follows this exact same structure.

The big advantage of a campaign model with predetermined quests is, that FFG can anticipate what the relative power level of the heroes and the overlord is at each of these quests. Since they know, that the overlord will be a bit behind at (for example) the third act I quest, they can give him an additional monster group, additional reinforcements or they might include new mechanics.

In essence FFG traded a bit of quest variety and replay value (the advantage of the open system), for the ability to design quests around certain power levels. And this, in my opinion, is for the better, as it makes the game more balanced and interesting.

Sorry for this lengthy explanation, but it´s not exactly something that can be explained without some background.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastian H.
Germany
Weilburg
Hessen
flag msg tools
Evil Overlord
badge
Evil Overlord
mbmbmbmbmb
ionas wrote:
What's bad about "movement" and how could it be better?


The whole problem with movement is, that there are multiple different systems of movement at work, that aren´t exactly intuitive. And since this is a competitive game, it often matters which exact method of movement was used, because it may of may not allow the usage of certain skills.

Lets start with the basics:

Every Hero or monster can take an action to receive movement points up to their speed value. These movement points are in a virtual pool, which is important, because you can interrupt these actions to do other things.

What complicates the matter, is that heroes can also gain movement points by spending stamina. Theoretical these points are in the same pool as the above points, but some cards trigger on certain types of movement (namely points used from a movement action versus just entering a space however it is done).

Then there are also some items and abilities that grant movement points. These are almost the same as stamina movement, but there is a difference.

Also, there are abilities, that allow to move x spaces. These ignore movement restrictions of some of the terrain spaces, that usually require multiple movement points.

To round it up, there are some abilities, that remove a figure and place it up to X spaces from it´s origin.

Now besides these different types of movement and triggers, there is also the "immobilized" condition. This condition prohibits the use of movement actions as well as stamina movement, which is pretty straight forward. Unfortunately though, moving X spaces, removing and placing a figure as well as using movement points from items and abilities is fine. Explaining this to a new player is a time consuming task, because it´s simply not intuitive.

Then there are also special movement rules for large monsters, which while logical, have unintuitive implications about terrain effects, interrupts etc.

To sum it up: It´s a mess. It´s the opposite of easy to explain. You need to know a lot of the game mechanics to fully understand movement. In consequence, there are many nuances, which will overburden new players, and might even suggest to them, that the overlord is cheating when moving large monsters.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Johannes Benedikt
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The 3 best things about Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition) in terms of game-play, mechanics and immersion are:


1. Tactical, objective based gameplay, which leads to meaningfull quest variety: This game is in most quests not about killing all the monsters as fast as possible, but you try to achieve specific objectives while having to deal with monsters that hinder you or try to go after objectives themselves. This allows for meaningfull quest variety (the different quests are not just another backdrop to a slaughterfest) and puts the specific locations that the map represents at the center of gameplay. Because of this, each quest is highly unique and often completely unique situations occur that make most of the quests good unique memories.


2. The modular nature of the game adds to strategic depth: Since you can combine different heroes with classes and different heroclasses with each other for very different synergies, getting more content for Descent, doesn't feel just like expanding the width and quantity of the game, but feels like expanding the depth of the game: The more different heroes and classes you have, the more you can come up with different strategies and tactics or make heroes/classes work that were kind of useless before. This is imo even more true for the monsters and OL classes. The strategic game for the OL just opens up when you have quite a few extra monsters and classes, building specific strategies with specific combinations of monster-groups and OL cards.


3. Campaign play, player progression, skill creativity: Seeing your characters grow, tweaking and enhancing their abilities in highly specific fields and forging your party's strategy as you see fit is just a great expirience. The depth in choosing how to progress, the sheer content you add to your character by progression and the specific difference in what your heroes can do at the start and at the end of the campaign is very enjoyable. Your heroes don't grow by just getting more hit points, stronger attacks, more defense, but by learning different manouvers that transforms their gameplay into something entirly different than what you had at the start (which is the same for the OL deck).

I would also list the cross-referencing-free combat system, asymmetry and the integration of theme into gameplay-elements to the list, as well as the very fun to paint very unique miniatures and the quite colorfull artwork.



The 3 worst things about Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition) in terms of gameplay, mechanics and immersion are:


1. The campaigns got better and better for each subsequent campaign expansion: This means that the first campaign(s) especially pales in comparison to everything else released, that all not only come with special game mechanics (ally system in LoR, Changeling-"leveling" and secret information in SoN, tainted card-system in MoB&CtR; I don't own HoB, so I don't know about it's special mechanism), but have also seriously increased the mission and map design. LoR sadly features the old "single way" kind of mission design, whereas the missions open up in SoN to truly interconnected locations. So imo the first two campaigns really pale in comparison to what came after.


2. Very variable quest length: This got better when they introduced round-limits with LoR, before that some quests could last nearly forever, but even with the limitation we ran into quests that just took twice as long as others and we still don't know how to estimate the game-length accuratly


3. Storage, set-up time: Since this game gets so much better with every content you add to the game, you will end up with a huge collection quite easily. You then have to come up with good storage solutions and systems to minimize the search for components. Even then, setup can take ~20min, make it much longer if you start a new campaign (hero-selcetion) or if there are tough decisions in character development to be made.

and yes of course, the official FAQ for this 4 year old game is very badly structured.

Then there is the app, which I found to be not a good point on this list, since it's entirly optional. However, I really find it (from what I've seen so far) a bit dissapointing that it seems that the whole objevtive based nature of the game was switched to an all out slaughterfest every quest. Imo this really clashes with all the hero and class balance, making a few of them the obvious choices and the game subsequently strategically less complex and interesting.


Other things I don't like such as the many rule questions that arise are partly due to the highly variable nature of the quests and as such a direct result of what I really like about the game.

Movement is very essential in the 1vsmany mode and really hard to explain, but once everyone gets it, I find it a good system, because there is often a way around or a counter to specific movement-restricting plays.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bucho Bucho
msg tools
mb
I'm really surprised that no one has brought up line of sight yet.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vayda
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
https://sites.google.com/site/cnjxwing/home
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
Bucho22 wrote:
I'm really surprised that no one has brought up line of sight yet.


To be fair- LOS is my least favorite aspect in any game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jo Bartok
Germany
Zwingenberg
Hessen
flag msg tools
Meow
badge
Moooh
mbmbmbmbmb
virferrorum wrote:
Bucho22 wrote:
I'm really surprised that no one has brought up line of sight yet.


To be fair- LOS is my least favorite aspect in any game.


Which LOS system would you consider the best of those you have encountered yet?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vayda
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
https://sites.google.com/site/cnjxwing/home
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
Favorites:

1) options, options, options. So many monsters, adventures, heroes and classes... it's feels infinite for replay.

2) the basic ruleset. Yes there are some complicated things like the above thread movement discussion. But at the core of the game is a base system that is fast, easy, and flexible.

3) quality. I think the minis and tiles in this game are top notch for board games and really have raised the bar.

4) setting and art. It's familiar and comfortable so you can hit the ground running. No complicated over plot or history, just good versus evil in a very recognizable iconography. The art on the components is stellar and I personally love the overall aesthetic.

5) relic cards! Double sided awesome items cards tied to the quests and plot was a super fun idea. They actually feel special to me.


Least favorites:

1) cost. It can be expensive if you are going to collect the full set.

2) getting cursed at by hero players when I smack them around as the OL. I know this isn't really the game's fault per se- but something about it makes people feel like it's an RPG-lite and not a dungeon skirmisher. There is often upset players when they learn this the hard way.

3) time. There just isn't enough time to play with all the content at a rate that makes the investment feel worth it. I'm not sure it could have been streamlined any more than it is.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vayda
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
https://sites.google.com/site/cnjxwing/home
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
That's a tricky question.

Xwing's firing arc system is pretty slick and simple- one of my favorites. But that would be very odd in a game like Descent.

I guess some games are on the right track with the simple "draw a straight line from center of your square to the center of their square" but it really depends on how they handle the exceptions after that.

Meaning: what happens when the line is along a wall? What about touching a corner, but not passing through it? What about the line going between two figures? A figure and Corner? Two corners?? Etc etc.

I haven't found a game that makes those exceptions clear, consistent, simple, or easily to teach.

But at least it's not as bad as the games that make you try to get eye level with minis and try to see what they see. Those are the worst.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mouldy Banana
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mb
virferrorum wrote:
I haven't found a game that makes those exceptions clear, consistent, simple, or easily to teach.
Of the games that I have, Galaxy Defenders LOS rules are pretty simple and clear, basically centre of hex to centre of hex.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Proto Persona
United States
N Richland Hills
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
mouldybanana wrote:
virferrorum wrote:
I haven't found a game that makes those exceptions clear, consistent, simple, or easily to teach.
Of the games that I have, Galaxy Defenders LOS rules are pretty simple and clear, basically centre of hex to centre of hex.
Descent 1st ed has center to center LoS. It created fringe issues such as the "conga line cover" problem. Descent 2nd ed uses corner to corner I think in response to the various question brought up by the original.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryce K. Nielsen
United States
Elk Ridge
Utah
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
ionas wrote:
virferrorum wrote:
Bucho22 wrote:
I'm really surprised that no one has brought up line of sight yet.


To be fair- LOS is my least favorite aspect in any game.


Which LOS system would you consider the best of those you have encountered yet?

I think Gears of War: The Board Game had a really smart LOS system that was simple but still detailed enough for the game it was trying to simulate. Being an "area based" game instead of squares helps too. I also like the LOS in Level 7 [Omega Protocol]. It seemed really strange at first, but after just one game, it flowed quite naturally for our group.

-shnar
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jo Bartok
Germany
Zwingenberg
Hessen
flag msg tools
Meow
badge
Moooh
mbmbmbmbmb
virferrorum wrote:
That's a tricky question.

Xwing's firing arc system is pretty slick and simple- one of my favorites. But that would be very odd in a game like Descent.

I guess some games are on the right track with the simple "draw a straight line from center of your square to the center of their square" but it really depends on how they handle the exceptions after that.

Meaning: what happens when the line is along a wall? What about touching a corner, but not passing through it? What about the line going between two figures? A figure and Corner? Two corners?? Etc etc.

I haven't found a game that makes those exceptions clear, consistent, simple, or easily to teach.

But at least it's not as bad as the games that make you try to get eye level with minis and try to see what they see. Those are the worst.


What I meant is hex or grid based LOS . Tile based LOS (think Zombiecide, Claustrophiba) leaves too little tactical decisions IMHO.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jo Bartok
Germany
Zwingenberg
Hessen
flag msg tools
Meow
badge
Moooh
mbmbmbmbmb
shnar wrote:
ionas wrote:
virferrorum wrote:
Bucho22 wrote:
I'm really surprised that no one has brought up line of sight yet.


To be fair- LOS is my least favorite aspect in any game.


Which LOS system would you consider the best of those you have encountered yet?

I think Gears of War: The Board Game had a really smart LOS system that was simple but still detailed enough for the game it was trying to simulate. Being an "area based" game instead of squares helps too. I also like the LOS in Level 7 [Omega Protocol]. It seemed really strange at first, but after just one game, it flowed quite naturally for our group.

-shnar


Off-Topic LOS: As for L7OP, I think the biggest confusion comes from when it is appropriate to use diagonals and when not and thus the difference between distance and LOS, right?

Do I remember right (my L7OP box sadly gets little plays) that you move the shortest pathe(s). If there is a single and there is a block, no LOS, if there are multiple and at least of them has a block = cover bonus?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryce K. Nielsen
United States
Elk Ridge
Utah
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
ionas wrote:
Do I remember right (my L7OP box sadly gets little plays) that you move the shortest pathe(s). If there is a single and there is a block, no LOS, if there are multiple and at least of them has a block = cover bonus?

That's about the gist of it. I remember when I first read the rules, I was confused by it, but after playing, it was pretty simple. Instead of judging if this square was in LOS of that square, you just "walked" the paths. It played really fast and lead to almost zero arguments. And, it's one of the few square-based systems whose LOS rules account for cover (and give bonuses accordingly).

-shnar
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aswin Agastya
Indonesia
Bekasi
Jawa Barat
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm being nitpicky here because I'm sort of fine with the usual complaints (LoS).

What's best:
1. Complete base box. 8 heroes, 8 classes, various monsters, gears, complete campaign.
2. Tile artwork. Extremely important to me.
3. Character advancement.

What's worst:
1. Same-monster-encounter. Every encounters/spawn is a single type of monster.
2. Playing as overlord is both boring and needlessly complex. I mean, you have hand of cards, each with different triggers, each with different effects.
3. Complex rules resolution. This is the part when you can't do x because b happen first, and then z. Or the fact that LoS and counting range are two different entities (since one is from corners, while the other is by space!). Now when I play, players do as I say and as I decide. Note that this doesn't happen all the time, but often enough to be annoying!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kyle Pede
Canada
Abbotsford
British Columbia
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
DelphiDie wrote:
ionas wrote:
What's bad about "movement" and how could it be better?


The whole problem with movement is, that there are multiple different systems of movement at work, that aren´t exactly intuitive. And since this is a competitive game, it often matters which exact method of movement was used, because it may of may not allow the usage of certain skills.

Lets start with the basics:

Every Hero or monster can take an action to receive movement points up to their speed value. These movement points are in a virtual pool, which is important, because you can interrupt these actions to do other things.

What complicates the matter, is that heroes can also gain movement points by spending stamina. Theoretical these points are in the same pool as the above points, but some cards trigger on certain types of movement (namely points used from a movement action versus just entering a space however it is done).

Then there are also some items and abilities that grant movement points. These are almost the same as stamina movement, but there is a difference.

Also, there are abilities, that allow to move x spaces. These ignore movement restrictions of some of the terrain spaces, that usually require multiple movement points.

To round it up, there are some abilities, that remove a figure and place it up to X spaces from it´s origin.

Now besides these different types of movement and triggers, there is also the "immobilized" condition. This condition prohibits the use of movement actions as well as stamina movement, which is pretty straight forward. Unfortunately though, moving X spaces, removing and placing a figure as well as using movement points from items and abilities is fine. Explaining this to a new player is a time consuming task, because it´s simply not intuitive.

Then there are also special movement rules for large monsters, which while logical, have unintuitive implications about terrain effects, interrupts etc.

To sum it up: It´s a mess. It´s the opposite of easy to explain. You need to know a lot of the game mechanics to fully understand movement. In consequence, there are many nuances, which will overburden new players, and might even suggest to them, that the overlord is cheating when moving large monsters.


Thanks for answering this for me as I didn't get a notification.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aaron Chasteen
United States
Yorktown
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
BEST:

1. Cool combat system with character progression - Rolling dice triggers abilities on cards and you're getting new cards. Your weapons and class cards can be different for the same hero.

2. Sandbox variety - You can do a one-off mission, full campaigns or coop on the app. Each level has its own objective and strategies. My son frequently likes to build his own map and cover it with baddies. Still works!

3. Great production - Expensive, but worth the quality of design, art and minis.

WORST:

1. Time requirement - In order to experience a grand story or character progression, you have to commit a group to repeated plays, 8 games for the traditional campaign. Getting people to play the same game that often is not realistic for modern life.

2. Generic story - While Descent has cool level design, the actual story is a generic fantasy b-movie. There's no genuine emotions, loss or romance. I've yet to be moved by a story. Descent is mostly "Oh no, go here to save a stranger!" mixed with very good environment descriptions.

3. Rich get richer reward system - This is true to life, but not necessarily fun with board games. The winner is given bigger rewards than the loser. Attacking the weakest character is often the best strategy. Compound this over a campaign and you explain all the "Imbalanced?" threads on BGG.
2 
 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.