Mike Stevens
United States
Nebraska
flag msg tools
I protect the sheep in our society from the wolves.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Poll
What is your favorite way to play Lords of Waterdeep and the Scoundrels of Skullport expansion?
Lords of Waterdeep Base Game Only with No Expansion
Lords of Waterdeep with Skullport Expansion Only
Lords of Waterdeep with Undermountain Expansion Only
Lords of Waterdeep Long Game with Both Skullport and Undermountain
      123 answers
Poll created by Omahavice


We just got the Scoundrels of Skullport expansion and have got to play a few games with it. So far everyone we have played it with really enjoys the new boards and the new mechanic of Corruption. What are your thoughts on it and what is your favorite way to use the expansion?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rauli Kettunen
Finland
Oulu
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Never tried with just one module, never will.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robbie O.
United States
Northwest Indiana
flag msg tools
There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man.
badge
It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dam the Man wrote:
Never tried with just one module, never will.


Same here.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Toltz
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
Your cat likes me more
badge
In brightest day / In blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power--Green Lantern's light!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've only played it once with the expansion, and that was using both modules. I didn't think the undermountain stuff added much to the game, and combined with the annoyance of having to shuffle and take out stuff when using both modules in the future I'll just be using the scoundrels module.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wil
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
Read more comics!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Great poll! I've only played them independently so far so I didn't vote but I did look at the results so far and Wow! Now I know what to try out this weekend. Thanks!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donny Behne
United States
Fate
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
www.punchboardmedia.com/geaux-gaming/
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I prefer both. Undermountain by itself isn't truly amazing like Skullport is. But when you play both of them together the Undermountain quests become a big gamble. You can complete them VERY quickly but you have to risk taking corruption to do so. It gives you a lot more avenues of attack. I went through and made a preset intrigue, quest and building deck. No need to reshuffle and remove ever again.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gamer D

Monroeville
Pennsylvania
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Both all the way forever with me. I like how the high value quests in Undermountain make using the risky corruption spaces in Skullport more tempting. It's like the Hall of the Voice whispering in your ear "yessss, come to Skullport, complete your 40 point quest, just blacken your soul a little...." devil
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Stevens
United States
Nebraska
flag msg tools
I protect the sheep in our society from the wolves.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kelann08 wrote:
I prefer both. Undermountain by itself isn't truly amazing like Skullport is. But when you play both of them together the Undermountain quests become a big gamble. You can complete them VERY quickly but you have to risk taking corruption to do so. It gives you a lot more avenues of attack. I went through and made a preset intrigue, quest and building deck. No need to reshuffle and remove ever again.


Great idea
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gamer D

Monroeville
Pennsylvania
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Omahavice wrote:
kelann08 wrote:
I prefer both. Undermountain by itself isn't truly amazing like Skullport is. But when you play both of them together the Undermountain quests become a big gamble. You can complete them VERY quickly but you have to risk taking corruption to do so. It gives you a lot more avenues of attack. I went through and made a preset intrigue, quest and building deck. No need to reshuffle and remove ever again.


Great idea


I thought about doing that but I like the extra variety re-randomizing the decks gives so I'm willing to spend the extra 5-10 minutes redoing the card and building decks between sessions. Yeah it's slightly annoying but the trade off is worth it to me.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul W
United States
Eugene
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Personally, my favorite way to play is the long version with just one expansion. I like that only using one at a time brings out more of the flavor is each mini-expansion, and playing the long game helps make the board more crowded, which I think is a good thing for almost any worker placement game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donny Behne
United States
Fate
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
www.punchboardmedia.com/geaux-gaming/
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dugman wrote:
Omahavice wrote:
kelann08 wrote:
I prefer both. Undermountain by itself isn't truly amazing like Skullport is. But when you play both of them together the Undermountain quests become a big gamble. You can complete them VERY quickly but you have to risk taking corruption to do so. It gives you a lot more avenues of attack. I went through and made a preset intrigue, quest and building deck. No need to reshuffle and remove ever again.


Great idea


I thought about doing that but I like the extra variety re-randomizing the decks gives so I'm willing to spend the extra 5-10 minutes redoing the card and building decks between sessions. Yeah it's slightly annoying but the trade off is worth it to me.


I did that for a while too. For me, though, there were a number of quests and buildings I didn't want to remove or ones that were rarely used. In particular, there are buildings in the base game that were simply weaker versions of board printed buildings in an expansion. I opted to make a preset deck of each because I wanted to streamline. You also run a distinct risk of throwing off the balance of quests and intrigue cards. You could end up removing a lot of quests of the warfare type screwing any players who's lords make use of it. Likewise, you may end up removing a lot of the mandatory quest cards throwing that balance off.

Its all well and good if you're content with the randomness but the reasons above made it too random for me. For me, its a lot more fun when you have a balanced setup. The reduced time to setup and tear down is just a perk.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Netherlands
Enschede
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We've only ever played with one of the modules added. I don't see much reason to ever go back to just the base game. As for both at once, I want to try, but think it would be better with more players (we've mostly played 2 or 3p so far) - any comment on whether just adding everything works with just 2?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Stevens
United States
Nebraska
flag msg tools
I protect the sheep in our society from the wolves.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Polgara wrote:
We've only ever played with one of the modules added. I don't see much reason to ever go back to just the base game. As for both at once, I want to try, but think it would be better with more players (we've mostly played 2 or 3p so far) - any comment on whether just adding everything works with just 2?


I played a 2-player game with everything added in and it played fine. With the extra Agent in play we had pretty high scores and although there were times when we each had around 6 or 7 Corruption each by time the game ended we had been able to get rid of most of it and we each ended up with 2 Corruption. I really liked the new Quests, Intrigues, Buildings, and Lords. I had the Lord that allows you to pick one type of quest and you score 6 points for each type of those you have completed. We had pretty high scores as I finished with 232 and my friend had 187. Both of us really liked the game with both expansions added in.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gamer D

Monroeville
Pennsylvania
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
kelann08 wrote:
...
I did that for a while too. For me, though, there were a number of quests and buildings I didn't want to remove or ones that were rarely used. In particular, there are buildings in the base game that were simply weaker versions of board printed buildings in an expansion. I opted to make a preset deck of each because I wanted to streamline. You also run a distinct risk of throwing off the balance of quests and intrigue cards. You could end up removing a lot of quests of the warfare type screwing any players who's lords make use of it. Likewise, you may end up removing a lot of the mandatory quest cards throwing that balance off. ....


Actually the risk of significant imbalance in the quests is pretty low. That's because all the Lords which are looking for the five types of quests have two of them, so in order for them to be at a serious disadvantage both of their types need to be significantly lower in number than normal. But if one type is low that raises the expected number of the other type in the deck, mitigating the risk. For example, if a Lord is Warfare/Arcane, and you have fewer than normal Warfare quests in the deck, then the number of Arcane quests will on average be slightly higher, so on average that Lord would have more Arcane quests to choose from. Yes it can happen that in a particular randomization a particular Lord that's in play has a disadvantage but the probability seems minimal that it's significant enough to worry about.

Also I don't think it's worth worrying about the "mandatory quest" balance since those cards pretty much affect everybody evenly. If there are a few more or less of them in the Intrigue deck it really won't affect anybody in particular more than anyone else.

Anyway play how you like, I'm just saying the imbalances you're worrying about are well within the margin of other random noise in the game in my opinion.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Netherlands
Enschede
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Omahavice wrote:
Polgara wrote:
We've only ever played with one of the modules added. I don't see much reason to ever go back to just the base game. As for both at once, I want to try, but think it would be better with more players (we've mostly played 2 or 3p so far) - any comment on whether just adding everything works with just 2?


I played a 2-player game with everything added in and it played fine. With the extra Agent in play we had pretty high scores and although there were times when we each had around 6 or 7 Corruption each by time the game ended we had been able to get rid of most of it and we each ended up with 2 Corruption. I really liked the new Quests, Intrigues, Buildings, and Lords. I had the Lord that allows you to pick one type of quest and you score 6 points for each type of those you have completed. We had pretty high scores as I finished with 232 and my friend had 187. Both of us really liked the game with both expansions added in.


Thanks! I'll definitely try to play LoW with both expansions next time we get it to the table. I think we already went over 200 once or twice with just one of the expansions (no long game either), so it'll be interesting to see if we get these really high scores as well. I think it can be interesting to see what happens if the big undermountain quests become that much easier because of skullport, but at the cost of corruption....

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gamer D

Monroeville
Pennsylvania
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Polgara wrote:
Omahavice wrote:
Polgara wrote:
We've only ever played with one of the modules added. I don't see much reason to ever go back to just the base game. As for both at once, I want to try, but think it would be better with more players (we've mostly played 2 or 3p so far) - any comment on whether just adding everything works with just 2?


I played a 2-player game with everything added in and it played fine. With the extra Agent in play we had pretty high scores and although there were times when we each had around 6 or 7 Corruption each by time the game ended we had been able to get rid of most of it and we each ended up with 2 Corruption. I really liked the new Quests, Intrigues, Buildings, and Lords. I had the Lord that allows you to pick one type of quest and you score 6 points for each type of those you have completed. We had pretty high scores as I finished with 232 and my friend had 187. Both of us really liked the game with both expansions added in.


Thanks! I'll definitely try to play LoW with both expansions next time we get it to the table. I think we already went over 200 once or twice with just one of the expansions (no long game either), so it'll be interesting to see if we get these really high scores as well. I think it can be interesting to see what happens if the big undermountain quests become that much easier because of skullport, but at the cost of corruption....



Yeah, over 200 is definitely doable. Last time we played it was a three player game and two of us were well over 200 points at the end. I won with I think around 250 or 260 points (I was the Mad Lord of the Undermountain who gets four points per Undermountain quests and building. I ended up finishing seven Undermountain quests, had three Undermountain buildings and had completed two 40 point quests. Good times. )
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Netherlands
Enschede
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dugman wrote:
Polgara wrote:
Omahavice wrote:
Polgara wrote:
We've only ever played with one of the modules added. I don't see much reason to ever go back to just the base game. As for both at once, I want to try, but think it would be better with more players (we've mostly played 2 or 3p so far) - any comment on whether just adding everything works with just 2?


I played a 2-player game with everything added in and it played fine. With the extra Agent in play we had pretty high scores and although there were times when we each had around 6 or 7 Corruption each by time the game ended we had been able to get rid of most of it and we each ended up with 2 Corruption. I really liked the new Quests, Intrigues, Buildings, and Lords. I had the Lord that allows you to pick one type of quest and you score 6 points for each type of those you have completed. We had pretty high scores as I finished with 232 and my friend had 187. Both of us really liked the game with both expansions added in.


Thanks! I'll definitely try to play LoW with both expansions next time we get it to the table. I think we already went over 200 once or twice with just one of the expansions (no long game either), so it'll be interesting to see if we get these really high scores as well. I think it can be interesting to see what happens if the big undermountain quests become that much easier because of skullport, but at the cost of corruption....



Yeah, over 200 is definitely doable. Last time we played it was a three player game and two of us were well over 200 points at the end. I won with I think around 250 or 260 points (I was the Mad Lord of the Undermountain who gets four points per Undermountain quests and building. I ended up finishing seven Undermountain quests, had three Undermountain buildings and had completed two 40 point quests. Good times. )


Sounds like a great game!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mauricio Bustamante
Uruguay
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
since i got the expansions, there is no other way of playing this.
Epic game, both expansions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Netherlands
Enschede
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We finally played with both parts mixed in (just me and DH), and it was loads of fun. My husband got close to 300 points, he had the 6 points for one type of quest lord, and got 66 points out of it (I lost by about 50 points I think).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donny Behne
United States
Fate
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
www.punchboardmedia.com/geaux-gaming/
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I taught this game, with both expansions, to a non-gamer yesterday and it only reaffirmed that this game is superior with both expansions. Even teaching to new players. The game play itself doesn't change with both expansions. Its still "place a dude, take what's listed". Its the strategy that gets trickier.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Carter
United States
Marion
Iowa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've played the game with both expansions and I didn't think it made the base game better. It just made for a longer setup time and a longer playtime. I'll probably play a couple more games with the expansions and then get rid of my copy. I prefer the elegance of the base game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Burk
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
You must defeat Sheng Long to stand a chance!
badge
Rakes, my arch enemy.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I found the same thing too, about the setup and teardown time. So, we fudged it. We permanently removed equal amounts of the types of quests (2 piety plot quests, 3 piety normal quests, 2 warfare plot quests, etc etc) and then got rid of the duplicate cards in the intrigue deck, and finally took out some buildings nobody likes/builds. Houseruled the setup to be sure, but this way its back to lightning fast again. If you are going to get rid of it, I'd suggest something similar before you let go of it for good.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Carter
United States
Marion
Iowa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Deadsider wrote:
I found the same thing too, about the setup and teardown time. So, we fudged it. We permanently removed equal amounts of the types of quests (2 piety plot quests, 3 piety normal quests, 2 warfare plot quests, etc etc) and then got rid of the duplicate cards in the intrigue deck, and finally took out some buildings nobody likes/builds. Houseruled the setup to be sure, but this way its back to lightning fast again. If you are going to get rid of it, I'd suggest something similar before you let go of it for good.


If I were to do that, then I'd have to play with the same setup all the time. I would like to just play with the base game with two players and only use the expansions for the 4-5 range where I think the base game is lacking. Adding Skullport and Undermountain with two players felt like it presented too many options and limited the amount of blocking.

The big killer is the longer playtime with both expansions included. Lords of Waterdeep is a great one hour game. It is not, however, a great 1 1/2 hour game. I have better games for that.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Drazen
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
The big killer is the longer playtime with both expansions included. Lords of Waterdeep is a great one hour game. It is not, however, a great 1 1/2 hour game. I have better games for that.


Thumbed, because this succinctly expresses how I feel about the Waterdeep expansion (although all of my expansion plays seem to hit 2 hours).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donny Behne
United States
Fate
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
www.punchboardmedia.com/geaux-gaming/
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mlcarter815 wrote:


The big killer is the longer playtime with both expansions included. Lords of Waterdeep is a great one hour game. It is not, however, a great 1 1/2 hour game. I have better games for that.


Agree to disagree. Its a great game no matter what. If you push 2+ hours it can be frustrating but that's an issue with the players, not to game.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.