Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition)» Forums » General

Subject: Interlude and Finale rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Ken Marley
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi all,
I have played through a number of campaigns now, and we are about to play the finale of our most recent campaign, and I have come to the conclusion the finales are not as great as they should be. I have not played the Overlord Revealed, but The Shadow Vault is my favorite quest in the game. So here is my thoughts on these quests:

Interlude - The Shadow Vault

Pluses:
One encounter.
Big map.
The swimming and waterfall are cool ideas.
The Overlord doesn't need to save cards for encounter 2.
A real slugfest.
The game doesn't end to soon.
Baron Z. is tough and cool enemy.
Favorite Quest.

Negative, I guess:
It often takes us two hours to play.


Finale - Gryvorn Unleashed

Pluses:
The heroes are worried because of playing for keeps.
Baron Z is still cool.

Negatives:
Gryvorn can be neutralized by immobilize.
If Gryvorn not immobilized then he can kill a hero in one turn, so if they don't immobilize him they are in big trouble.
The first encounter is fairly short.
The second encounter is on a tiny map.
The second encounter is to short timewise.
"Playing for Keeps" increases tension, but makes for bad gameplay. Normally it is bad OL play to spend 6 or 7 cards to kill 1 hero, but with "playing for keeps" it can be a campaign winning strategy.
Often a boring finish to a great campaign.

Finale - The Man Who Wold be King

Pluses:
The heroes are worried because of playing for keeps.
Baron Z is cool.

Negatives:
The first encounter is fairly short. The heroes can win on the first turn!
The second encounter is on a tiny map.
The second encounter is to short timewise.
"Playing for Keeps" increases tension, but makes for bad gameplay. Normally it is bad OL play to spend 6 or 7 cards to kill 1 hero, but with "playing for keeps" it can be a campaign winning strategy.

I would like new campaigns to have more great single encounter quests like The Shadow Vault. It would be interesting to have a campaign of just single encounter quests, but even if just the finale was it would be much better.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Albritton
United States
Tupelo
Mississippi
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We haven't finished our first campaign yet. We are playing The Overlord Revealed tonight.

Any suggestions for making the Finale more enjoyable or memorable?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel O'Connell
United Kingdom
Sheffield
Yorkshire
flag msg tools
youperguy wrote:

"Playing for Keeps" increases tension, but makes for bad gameplay. Normally it is bad OL play to spend 6 or 7 cards to kill 1 hero, but with "playing for keeps" it can be a campaign winning strategy.


Interesting. I would have put this in Positives. Can you explain why you think this is "bad gameplay"?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Albritton
United States
Tupelo
Mississippi
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Has anyone tried to house rule that Gryvorn treats "immobilize" conditions as "stun"? Would that make it more tense without nerfing it too much?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Marley
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
eatspider wrote:
youperguy wrote:

"Playing for Keeps" increases tension, but makes for bad gameplay. Normally it is bad OL play to spend 6 or 7 cards to kill 1 hero, but with "playing for keeps" it can be a campaign winning strategy.


Interesting. I would have put this in Positives. Can you explain why you think this is "bad gameplay"?


I would have thought this as well, but it doesn't seem to play well, since except for immobilizing Gryvorn there is not much you can do to stop it.

If a hero gets killed on the first turn without making a mistake except not bringing more immobilize to the finale, then shrug. Remember the board for the finale is tiny.

It can be tense, but it usually ends one way or the other in a 2-3 turns, either the heroes stun/immoblize lock the Dragon and kill the Baron, or the Dragon and/or the Baron Kill the hero with immobilize and then mop up the rest of the party.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Marley
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kubigaruma wrote:
Has anyone tried to house rule that Gryvorn treats "immobilize" conditions as "stun"? Would that make it more tense without nerfing it too much?


I think that this would be to big of an advantage to the OL.

Remember that Baron Z can stun/immobilize the heroes right back.

The problem is the size and design of the finale encounter 2. There is little room for tactics.

It is tense, as if the OL can break the immobilize cycle then Gryvorn can probably kill a hero or maybe two a turn.

Personally I would completely redesign the finale. I would rather have an epic finale.

The problem is that the Playing for keeps rule probably precludes an epic long finale.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Albritton
United States
Tupelo
Mississippi
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
youperguy wrote:
The problem is that the Playing for keeps rule probably precludes an epic long finale.


Just thinking out loud here: Would it be more of a tactical (and interesting) battle if the Overlord won only if all heroes were in a state of being knocked out at the end of an overlord turn? (Getting rid of the "Playing for Keeps" rule)

Or do you think all the running around, trying to stand guys up would become tedious?

 
 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.