Johan Larsson
Sweden
Lomma
Skåne
flag msg tools
There has been some discussion of late in my gaming group regarding a new house rule, to whit that the losing side in a quest chooses the next one rather than the winner.

These are my own thoughts.

Possible Merits: Allowing the losing side to choose might give that side an edge in the next quest, given thorough knowledge before choosing. That might prevent snowballing of a winner chosing more winning quests and advantages continously.

Possible Flaws: Campaigns seem to be somewhat structured after the "winner chooses" principle. LoR that we're playing for example requires choice and victory in "tipping the scales".

Might motivate losing some quests on purpose to choose just the right one at the right time, creating play counter to the spirit of the game (I.e. trying to win).

I'd love to hear more thoughts about this houserule and its concrete effects in the game. what do you guys think?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We played our whole Shadow Rune campaign with this rule, and it was fine.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Darren Nakamura
United States
Columbus
Mississippi
flag msg tools
http://www.destructoid.com/author.phtml?a=1364
badge
Darren@destructoid.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The one thing you want to make sure is that you don't apply the rule to the transition between the Introduction/first Act I quest. For Shadow Rune, it would mean each side would try to lose the Introduction (because there is no other reward). For Labyrinth of Ruin, it's a little different because the winning side gets the Sun Stone, but the heroes also want to be able to choose which Ally they end up with, and taking that ability from them if they were to win would be pretty bad.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robin Reeve
Switzerland
St-Légier
Vaud
flag msg tools
badge
Looking for a game session in Switzerland? Send me a pm!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would have posted your question in the Variants folder.

Some other players have proposed that type of house rule.

I would say that it would make sense especially if the players have some experience about which quest favours which side.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dexter345 wrote:
The one thing you want to make sure is that you don't apply the rule to the transition between the Introduction/first Act I quest. For Shadow Rune, it would mean each side would try to lose the Introduction (because there is no other reward). For Labyrinth of Ruin, it's a little different because the winning side gets the Sun Stone, but the heroes also want to be able to choose which Ally they end up with, and taking that ability from them if they were to win would be pretty bad.


Yes, I should have clarified that the Intro was the only exception we made to this, for this exact reason.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Zachary Mott
United States
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Avatar
This is definitely the best way to play a campaign. I wouldn't worry too much about the Overlord throwing all three quests in act two of Labyrinth of Ruin just to deny the heroes a chance to play Tipping the Scales, because losing has its own penalties, namely, the winning team gets a bunch of quest rewards.

As for waiving the rule for the Introduction, it's not necessary at all for The Shadow Rune, and it makes enough sense in Labyrinth of Ruin, but I know in my gaming group, it'd actually be an interesting handicap for the heroes if the Overlord got to choose their ally for them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Tulsa
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
To be completely honest, I've always played that the heroes choose (with the exception of the Interlude).

I am always Overlord, so no, I'm not stacking in my favor.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M M
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You could also try variants on this variant.

* No side can choose more than 2 consecutive quests. It would still preserve the, "I want to win" factor but guarantees each side picks at least 1 quest in each Act.

* Whoever won the fewest # of quests in Act I chooses the first quest in Act II. Similar, but a bit more watered-down.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Janis Goldmanis
Latvia
flag msg tools
mbmb
My gaming group adopted following for Shadow Rune:

Intro - Winner chooses next
Act I scenarious - Loser chooses next
Interlude - Winner chooses next
Act II - Loser chooses next.

Shadow Rune Act II quests are quite unbalanced, playing only loser picks next quest - I as Overlord would be encouraged to lose interlude, so that I could pick 1st and 3rd quests of Act II, and get Final, that's favored to me.
 
 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.