Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Descent: Journeys in the Dark» Forums » Variants

Subject: Preventing Instant Death rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
David Renaud
Canada
Mission
British Columbia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
My wife and I purchased Descent recently and we've been played three games, plus our first game which was more of a learning experience. The players won the first and third quest, but I, as Over Lord for all the games, won on the fourth quest, the Spoiled Brat. This raised some complaints, as some of the party felt the game ended too abruptly and didn't last long enough compared to set-up time.

Personally, as the Over Lord, it feels that most of the game is balanced in favour of the players, most notably treasure. However, that may simply be because I'm new to the game. Generally speaking, it feels like I only really have one opportunity to bring the party to zero conquest and if I don't take it I won't be getting another chance. This means tha I either have to kill them early when they only have copper treasure or let them walk over me when they have gold.

I'm looking for a variant that will ensure a full dungeon is played without messing with balance too much on either side. I would like a dramatic final boss-fight, win or lose, but by that point the party either has considerable power and conquest or they've lost two hours ago.

Does anyone have any recommendations?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Rozmiarek
United States
Liberty Hill
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The standard variant is allowing negative conquest. Start the game as normal but allow the heroes to go negative if they lose too much conquest. If they end the game with positive conquest, they win the game. Remember to award the final conquest for completing the quest.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Thompson
United States
Homewood
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Don't quit when the party has 0 conquest. Play until the very end. Award the Quest Ending conquest and then determine the winner.

This method allows for the heroes to come back for a win and makes the OL job a little tougher.

If you want competition, you can bid for playing the Overlord. Basically both sides secretly state a number of conquest to give to the players in the beginning (above and beyond that given by the quest). Whoever says the higher number plays the OL and the other(s) play the heroes with the bid amount of conquest.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
richard atkinson
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
it doesnt really seem that david is saying that he needs to increase the overlord difficulty. i have had similar trouble with the difficulty scaling as the games progress. it really seems that the overlord power cards do not provide enough advantage to keep up with the player treasures.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Thompson
United States
Homewood
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Then bid a negative number.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Proto Persona
United States
N Richland Hills
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Descent as a game does not scale very well. The number of heroes in play means a LOT more than what treasures they are getting. By default using just JitD, 3 heroes is about the perfect balance. If you have included the expansions, especially WoD or AoD, then 4 heroes is just right. This is regardless of the number of actual players. Make sure the card stats you use are the number of heroes + 1(the OL).

I do endorse using the negative conquest variant, it makes sure you finish a dungeon but still give the OL a shot at winning. Best part is it doesn't affect the balance of the game one bit.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josiah Leis
United States
Merino
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
I spent 100 GG and all I got was this stupid overtext.....
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you are looking for something that scales better with different numbers of players and the treasures they've acquired, over on Fantasy Flight Games' website there is a Descent forum. If you go there and go to the subforum of "home brews" there's a home brew mod called "The Enduring Evil". I have never played it, but the person who created it claims that it fixes several of the balance issues with the game you talk about. I've downloaded it and looked at it and I think he's probably right, but I never had much problem with the game the way it was so I've never tried it. It's pretty much a re-working of Descent from the ground up, you might want to check it out if you've been having issues.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Renaud
Canada
Mission
British Columbia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thank you very much for the replies. I will look into the Enduring Evil variant, but I lack a printer. I'll see if there are any individual rules that may help.

Since the big problem stems from treasure, what if quantities were static? For example, when opening a Copper Treasure, the players always draw four treasures. When opening a Silver Treasure, the players always draw three treasures. When opening a Gold Treasure, the players always draw two treasures. If it lists "two treasures each," it's eight, six, and four, respectively. I'm thinking of maybe limiting the number of treasures available for purchase per game, but I'm unsure of whether that's going too far.

The idea is to let smaller groups get a foot in the door early on with no change at the end while large groups start out normally, but have less to go around later.

Does that sound like an effective rule, or is it going too far?
 
 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.