GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters at year's end: 1000!
9,129 Supporters
$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
18 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Runebound (Third Edition)» Forums » General

Subject: My biggest worry: Where is the power scaling? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Enon Sci
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As we know, the color of the gems on the board now equates the style of quest opposed to difficulty. In many respects I applaud this, having nothing but combat encounters is chiefly what killed any love for 2e in my heart. I wanted choice and consequence, multiple paths to a goal, and other staples of what we consider adventure.

However, it slowly began to dawn on me that the system as explained seems to have a flaw: unless something exists to differentiate encounters, your very first might be a dragon, while the very last could be a mole-rat. That would, if nothing else, feel very anti-climactic in play.

So what creates this sense of progression? Where does the difficulty scaling come into 3e?

I am well aware that monsters gain a token at a predetermined portion of play (in just one scenario? both? all?). However, that still doesn't address the concern that:

1. End game mole-rats, even uber mole-rats, just wouldn't feel climatic.

2. Using 2e as a litmus, the power difference between a first turn and last turn character should greatly exceed the single token bump given to monsters.

I'm greatly excited for almost every aspect of 3e, but I'll be saddened if Runebound lost this element. To me, uncovering increasingly more impressive (fearsome) creatures is an invariant element of the adventure experience. Nobody wants to see dragons at the start, and bunnies or rats at the end.

Additionally, though this post focuses on combat, the same question must hold for the non-combat encounter types, lest they lose balance.

Thoughts?

*edit: a corollary concern -- I wonder if Runebound redressed the power creep I referenced above. The central theme of my curiosities related to 3e is in what categories FFG looked to correct problems: obviously combat, but were item bloat and power creep "corrected" as well? Neither posed much of a problem in my play sessions, but I hesitate to assume the worst without some evidence (beyond mere deductive reasoning based on FFG business trends with other licenses).

That said, I have good money that power creep has been reduced in some sense compared to 2e.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Asher
United States
South Lake Tahoe
96150
flag msg tools
badge
WACKY WAVING INFLATABLE ARM FLAILING TUBE MAN!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Having only read people's accounts, FFG's announcement and the few videos released, I'd say the addition of the Timer as standard in the 3e base would eliminate (or at least minimize) item bloat.

In 2e with the awesome midnight-style threat track, or even the doom track, item bloat was reduced for me, with the exception being all the "take this card and later..." rewards from encounter cards.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Enon Sci
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
theashers wrote:
Having only read people's accounts, FFG's announcement and the few videos released, I'd say the addition of the Timer as standard in the 3e base would eliminate (or at least minimize) item bloat.

In 2e with the awesome midnight-style threat track, or even the doom track, item bloat was reduced for me, with the exception being all the "take this card and later..." rewards from encounter cards.


That is actually a very good point. I never played with the Midnight scenario, but did print off a few tracks for solo play that were likely modeled on that aspect of the board. Never thought to use it in a multipler session, however.

For me, the issues with Runebound were:

1. Spatially pointless map (one quadrant was rarely different than another, despite all the evocative names and sense of place in the imagery). Sure, gems and terrain were the core difference, but that was it. Cities felt very hollow also.

2. Combat was dull and overly complicated. It was pretty impossible to follow from across the table by the hour in mark. Most just tuned out.

3. 99% of the quests were combat affairs.

3e looks to be fixing a lot of this.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Drickman
United States
Ukiah
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Anarchosyn wrote:
theashers wrote:
Having only read people's accounts, FFG's announcement and the few videos released, I'd say the addition of the Timer as standard in the 3e base would eliminate (or at least minimize) item bloat.

In 2e with the awesome midnight-style threat track, or even the doom track, item bloat was reduced for me, with the exception being all the "take this card and later..." rewards from encounter cards.


That is actually a very good point. I never played with the Midnight scenario, but did print off a few tracks for solo play that were likely modeled on that aspect of the board. Never thought to use it in a multipler session, however.

For me, the issues with Runebound were:

1. Spatially pointless map (one quadrant was rarely different than another, despite all the evocative names and sense of place in the imagery). Sure, gems and terrain were the core difference, but that was it. Cities felt very hollow also.

2. Combat was dull and overly complicated. It was pretty impossible to follow from across the table by the hour in mark. Most just tuned out.

3. 99% of the quests were combat affairs.

3e looks to be fixing a lot of this.


Cities of adventure variant helps to address #1
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John
United States
Ridley Park
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
DanKD wrote:
Anarchosyn wrote:
theashers wrote:
Having only read people's accounts, FFG's announcement and the few videos released, I'd say the addition of the Timer as standard in the 3e base would eliminate (or at least minimize) item bloat.

In 2e with the awesome midnight-style threat track, or even the doom track, item bloat was reduced for me, with the exception being all the "take this card and later..." rewards from encounter cards.


That is actually a very good point. I never played with the Midnight scenario, but did print off a few tracks for solo play that were likely modeled on that aspect of the board. Never thought to use it in a multipler session, however.

For me, the issues with Runebound were:

1. Spatially pointless map (one quadrant was rarely different than another, despite all the evocative names and sense of place in the imagery). Sure, gems and terrain were the core difference, but that was it. Cities felt very hollow also.

2. Combat was dull and overly complicated. It was pretty impossible to follow from across the table by the hour in mark. Most just tuned out.

3. 99% of the quests were combat affairs.

3e looks to be fixing a lot of this.


Cities of adventure variant helps to address #1


What is that?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Marley
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I saw a video where it was mentioned that monsters get a 6th token in Act 2. We also have seen pictures of tokens for the main villains.

So it seems the scaling is:

Act 1 Monsters : 5 tokens
Act 2 Monsters : 6 tokens
Final Villain : 7 tokens

Also the 5 base tokens seems to have only one surge and one doubling token so at most they can play a two surge ability.

But I would guess the Act 2 sixth token has a surge. This means a lot of the monsters with dangerous 3 surge abilities become more challenging in Act 2.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sean Shaw
United States
North Dakota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Anarchosyn wrote:

1. End game mole-rats, even uber mole-rats, just wouldn't feel climatic.

2. Using 2e as a litmus, the power difference between a first turn and last turn character should greatly exceed the single token bump given to monsters.



Ever played Talisman?

1) It is possible to face off with a Dragon as much as a goblin...but that doesn't detract from the end game...much like you'll still have that big fat boss at the end of the game...

So the second to last guy might be weak, but the scenario that comes with the game has you defeating a Big Bad Guy at the end of the game, or the city gets destroyed.

In that light, I imagine you should be getting some sort of climactic end to the game.

2) Well, I suppose it depends on your view, but monsters do get bumps in power as you progress in the game. That very well can increase complexity of combat (And player AP...to a degree) as well as how much power you expend or how powerful you may feel.

In addition, combat is only one element of the game. There are various other paths you can take which may be easier or harder depending on how you have advanced your character. In that way, you could also feel your ability to achieve goals being more powerful...

Depending on how you define it and what you exactly think in regards to the ability gain.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So from the BGG video of the interview with Anton at GenCon, it looks like there is no power scaling and if a challenge is too much for you you just try to escape from it.
 
 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.