Articles Reviews Descent Part Deux Review
 

Descent Part Deux Review Descent Part Deux Review Hot

Descent Part Deux Review

That new plastic smell, now in an economy size. 

So there is this game called Descent: Journeys into the (something or other. I get bored after reading Descent.) Odds are you've heard of it as it slammed itself onto many tables as a massive box full of plastic bits and tiles, came with a tweaked version of the Doom dice system and was almost a really nice minis system.

...except that the scenarios REALLY, REALLY sucked. Map out a pretty good sized dungeon with very boring-looking tiles, some key "puzzles" straight out of early Resident Evil, monster respawns every 30 seconds, and a 4 hour playing time at the bare minimum, but merrily waltzing into 12-15 hour slogs.

You know, Descent really pretty much sucks.

It got better. The occasional punchy focused quests, a moderately functional campaign system in Road to Legend and a pretty great Sea of Blood campaign helped it along. It is still a little tricky to play as the rules and faqs are spread out over a mile or two of paper bits.

Then they announced the inevitable franchise reboot. Hardly inevitable, as games tend not to get franchise reboots, but our superhero-movie-addled minds did not have too many problems grasping the concept.

I've played it, stared at all the bits and rules, and even inhaled ink from the first generation conversion kit (and as a bonus spent some time looking at the powers.)

Descent no longer sucks. But there are a bit or two that make me furrow my brow and go "Really?"

Bits:

I really like this production a lot better. Not as many tiles or giant figures, and a lot fewer cards and tokens, and basically the same MSRP as that Giant-Box-O-Doom. But on the other hand, the game doesn't require you to annex a second dining room table for the excess bits. The maps are all tiny and you have fewer monsters to juggle. Because FFG went the unprecendented (eye roll) step of printing rules on the backs of stat cards, you don't need a space for player aids and glossaries. And the fewer monsters are just a touch weirder---more Fiend Folio than Terrinoth-themed Monster Manual.

The tiles...wow. FFG finally gave up on the boring wall of generic themed tiles with lots of overlay tiles for the game-related terrain. Instead we get Warhammer-Quest like pretty tiles which also include quite a bit of outdoor areas and building interiors. The entire thing feels almost like a D&D 4e battlemap.

Quests and the end of D&D 4e:

The campaign is the big change. You get one. Character advancement is more restrained than Road to Legend. You get extra powers (bought with experience), and can buy weapons over time. It kind of smacks a bit of Prophecy (which pretty much guarantees my adoration.). Each hero doesn't get his own set of upgrades. Instead, he picks one of two class decks (there are 8 total class decks) which define his starting equipment and powers as well as his possible experience-based upgrades. Weapons bought from the shops are available to all. This is all, well, totally Prophecy-like.

Each quest is 1-2 encounters, which are 1 hour short scenarios. The content in these seems a LOT like the D&D Encounters structured play format Wizards introduced a year or two back. Wrapped around this is a simple framework to vary the scenarios. 9 are played each full 20 hour run out of the full list of 20. If there is any flaw here is that there are half as many "first half" scenarios as "second half". Given the penchant to abandon long campaign games 1/2 way through, I do regret this choice.

Particularly wonderful is that the encounters themselves do not add any components to the game, making use of generic components for any special features. This is very unlike ANOTHER recent FFG game where each scenario pretty much comes with its own infrastructure of cards (with attendant errors).

Each encounter actually has some things on the D&D 4e model in that the objectives are more interesting. There is a share of "kill the miniboss", and "get through here", but even those are shot through with little custom rules and tweaks that really make them shine. Frankly, there is more theme, cleverness, and variety in these one-hour wonders than most of Descent's 12-hour grinds. (The bit about D&D4e is reallyu saying something. Wizards actually create some nice custom tweaks in each of the official 4e encounters. The roleplaying elements, and campaign scaling in D&D 4e cause massive problems, but at least they write nifty little encounters. And some of the encounters in Decent 2e are even better than those.)

Da Rules:

Pretty much it is a case of don't screw with what is broken. The big changes are that modifiers in combat are more structured and that defense is now a variable value that comes from a dice throw. As to combat modifiers, they tend to be automatic, helping to trim back the number of ways to tweak your action sequence. Any optional mods come entirely from surges which are applied AFTER the dice are settled.

This helps the game along with overly analytic players who might otherwise try to stare at the dice and flip them around to work out the odds. You move, roll your dice and add the modifiers, then see if you want to spend stress and burn items to push the results. It removes the serious and overly analytical heavy thinking.

There are also bits of streamlining here and there, and some ideas culled from 4e. Town Portals are gone, and the death and respawn replaced with a "knocked out" status and option to first aid a downed player. Treasure is now both gold and a useful effect, so you aren't giving up the gold to use the item (less agony).

Overlord Threat is now just cards--he no longer needs to track points. The cards themselves are pretty similar.

Spawns:

This was one of the worst aspects of the original game. Spawning extra monsters was the cheapest cards, and the Overlord could help pile on tons of monsters this way. The 2e solution is just to start all of the monsters on the board and allow one monster to spawn per turn at the end of the turn. (The actual rules varies per encounter, but this is the most common one by far.)

It keeps the monster spawn rate more manageable, and the smaller encounter sizes and monster pools seriously keep the Gauntlet-looking impenetrable wall-o-plastic thing that typifies Decent 1st quests.

But..."Really?". Any Descent player knows that the white (basic) monsters are best at soaking hits from heroes, distracting them and slowing them down. The heavy hitters are the red (master) guys. So the heroes kind of want to target the masters. But if you respawn one monster around, guess what you are respawning.

...on the other hand, it now provides a little more incentive to wipe out the white guys because they won't be coming back. But it also means that if you combine a few attacks to take out that kind of nasty red bugger, he reappears right back at the entrance at the end of the turn. Guaranteed. It is all just so disheartening.

"Really, FFG. You couldn't have done SOMETHING more interesting? Anything? Some little tweak to mix that up a bit?"

Old " Friends":

I use friends loosely because the conversion kit comes with cards for all of the plastics in everything else Descent ever. That includes the promotional figures as well as the guys who splashed Terrinoth all over our beloved Dungeonquest. So that means you can use the old plastic bits, and suddenly have a pretty good variety of monsters and heroes.

These new bits can even integrate into the existing quests. Many of the encounters allow for the Overlord to choose open groups of monsters as long as they contain certain icons matching the quest. Heroes drop straight in, and map to the 8 class decks. Sadly, the kit doesn't include any extra class decks (which would have been awesome). Instead, you get the cards, and it comes down to merely nice.

There are some new monster powers hiding on the backs of the monster cards. (Monster powers are no longer in the rules per se. Instead, flip the card and see the entire rules in a kind of terse format that says we will need a FAQ at some point.)

Summary:

Totally digging it, and this is the game I most want to play at the moment. It is really the game I wanted from the original Descent, and slams itself so hard into the diminished RPG-as-minis-game which D&D 4e really turned out to be that I see no value in the other. I'm also thinking that this puts a serious crimp in my desire to play Ravenshadralizzt, as the length drill nicely into that time slot, but with a more gamery ruleset.

So yeah, it is great And it will take a full campaign to work it out, but I might be willing to crown a new champion of Dungeon Crawls. It just might be THAT good.

 

Powered by JReviews
Comments (41)
  • avatarSuperflyTNT

    Wow.
    Shit.

    [sarcasm]I'm now SO glad that I painted my entire DD Adventure System stuff [/sarcasm]

    The good news is that I've got most of my Runebound stuff painted too.

  • avatarColumbob  - re:
    SuperflyTNT wrote:
    Wow.
    The good news is that I've got most of my Runebound stuff painted too.

    All those heroes from Runebound (sans Mists) are in the conversion kit.

    To be fair, there's a lot less plastic in D2 than in all three D&D boxes together.

  • avatarVonTush

    Dv2.0 has nailed it for me and my group. What I like is they didn't set out to reinvent the wheel, but just looked to make it rounder and provide a smoother ride. It has the FFG "twist" being the dice system, but otherwise it plays much like you'd expect a fantasy adventure game to play. One might even say intuitive.

  • avatarSka_baron

    Thank you, Frank. Your reviews are among my favorite both in game choice and style. Please write more as your time allows!

    So glad to hear D2 is looking good. I sold off my 1st edition in anticipation (rather have the money than fiddle with the conversion kit) and am thinking this one will make a perfect Christmas gift to ask for.

    Only downside I see is now my All Day Gameathons will have to be split between either this or TI3. A good problem to have.

  • avatarEgg Shen

    I had recently convinced myself that I was moving away from these more meaty games (I already have a ton of them), but there might be room for one more! I'm not going to run out and buy it right this second, but it's nice to know that it doesn't suck.

  • avatarSuperflyTNT

    Yeah, it's been a while since I ordered anything..I guess I have to get this and the conversion kit.

  • avatarldsdbomber

    thanks for the review Frank, Ive never played Descent but these kinds of experiences I have in mind for when my son is of age (and with half an eye on filling in all those hours lost in my youth when I could only read the D&D books but had no friends to play it with, sob)

    I guess what I dont get about this, and the D&D games and these others is whats the real point of them compared to say, just playing D&D, or at least a role playing type game using as simple or complex a ruleset as you like. There are easier d6 based rulesets than this, and more complex ones, it seems you still need a GM type figure but whereas some might think its nice to have pre set quests, to me, that seems a bit... I dont know, poor? I get the attraction of minis and the components, if anything all these new lines of games (including D&D command) i totally get why you might buy for the map tiles, minis and cards but to be honest, I am really struggling to see the appeal of this compared to me sitting behind a screen and making up an entire world and campaign as and when needed with my boy, occasionally throwing some minis onto a grid and using whatever skirmish rules but not having to worry about rules because you know, just make it up, roll a d20 and get on with it. Having said that, whenever Ive read the forums at wizards I despair a little because it seems to be full of anally retentive retards who seem to be obsessed with gaming the rulesets and having this weird idea that they can use rulebooks to batter the DM with, whereas in my head, Im more like, the DM is there to make a fun experience for the players and you know, if you act like a twat, and he kills you, who is to blame. I dont know if this was something that changed in D&D (rules lawyering and obsessive gaming of stats and rules) or what, but I rambled a bit there

    the point is, as cool (in a way) these things seem at first glance, and perhaps time saving in one regard, I dont quite get yet how they can compare to just a pencil and paper, and a bag of minis adventure, and yeah, I get theyre not meant to be compared directly, I just mean (looking at Vasels video) why would I want to flip over some quest guide and arse around on some A4 map with 15 locations in it and half assed quests when you could make something more wonderful up yourself thats also shaped by how the players move the action along

    Im not really a genre reference here, so I could be talking giant baboon ass, so take it with a pinch of salt

  • avatarVonTush

    To me the difference is the structured competition between the two sides. As you describe the DM in a RPG is more a facilitator of the story. With Descent, yes there is flavor, theme and story, but it still boils down to mechanics, working them and trying to best your opponent. Sure the quest might describe some tokens as lanterns that need to be lit, but during the game they revert back to tokens that I need to be next to and pass a roll against to light as quickly as possible.

  • avatarmoofrank  - Descent versus RPG

    A classic D&D RPG is a very different beast indeed.

    This line of games (Heroquest, Warhammer Quest, Mutant Chronicles, Descent, D&D 4e....) are all really tactical miniatures games with some form of character upgrade system. The focus is very much a boardgame without and of the RPG personal investment in characters. This is more, "I want to kill things and take their stuff", instead of "I want to become a character in this other world for awhile."

    And while an RPG can be used to emulate "kill and take their stuff", it can go off in many directions and includes traps and puzzles and things.

    Really, there is story and flow in Descent 2e as well as plot points and recurring villains, but it is all imminently forgettable (unless you fail to kill a miniboss and have to fight him again later).

    Or in videogame terms, this is Diablo versus Skyrim. (In fact, I bet if you got Kevin drunk enough, he might tell you that Descent was originally planned to be Diablo the boardgame, but the license never worked out. I wish I could get that rumor confirmed.)

  • avatarSpace Ghost

    Well, if we are going to crown a new King, what is the current ranking?

  • avatarEgg Shen

    I think games like Descent, HeroQuest, Ravenloft and Mansions of Madness are targeted directly at guys like me. I would play D&D (any form of it), however not a single soul I know would.

    Plenty of people have no problem playing boardgames though. So these boardgames that are skewed towards the lighter RPG crowd are a real treat. I can get an RPGish experience, with cool components for a relatively low price point. Plus the learning curve for these boardgames is much less than D&D.

    I also think that a big appeal is that these are 'games' and that there is usually a winner and a loser. Most people can get behind that idea. Just playing to experience a story isn't something my friends would really want to do. I bought WotC's recent edition of Gamma World, because I thought I could get some of my friends into that...not a chance lol. However, if they released a Gamma World boardgame then they would probably play it. Go figure.

  • avatarldsdbomber

    ah OK, well that makes a bit more sense. Do you think Descent has the best balance of rules complexity to game interest then? Claustrophobia is a lot simpler isnt it, but I remember playing soemthing d6 based, maybe the RPG version (though played as a skirmish game) of Advanced Fighting Fantasy or something.

    You mentioned those D&D games but how would anyone describe the plusses and minusses (in relation to each other of Descent vs D&D the board games, vs D&D the new command games vs D&D whatever edition it was that turned into more like minis skirmishing vs Heroquest vs Claustrophobia etc.

    I guess Id be most interested in Descent vs D&D Ashardenloftadrizzt vs these new D&D command things (and honestly its getting a bit confusing with all these ranges that on the surface to a non expert all look pretty similar)

  • avatardragonstout

    After our Descent: Road to Legend campaign, I really wanted to try a D&D 4E, as a next step. Holy mother of god, the amount of work that requires on the DM's part in comparison...and the amount of "being not-terrible at DMing" and improv practice, and the restraint required to not punish stupid mistakes too harshly...after a couple sessions of that, no THANK you. Board games for me, and I don't even see how people can *say* "why not just play an RPG session instead?" Maybe you have to have started RPing when you were a teenager or something and be totally ueber-comfortable with how drastically different it is from any other experience.

  • avatarSevej

    2.0 is really great. I'm really enjoying it. The skills, map and campaign... fucking awesome. Even with the absence of ZoC, the tactic is definitely there, especially because I'm controlling all four heroes. It's really fun to juggle their actions. Opening and closing doors have never been so fun. Heroes' skills are pretty powerful and I love the customization.

  • avatarDelobius

    That's what I've always said about the "why not just play D&D" canard - it ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport. Running a D&D game (even a canned scenario/adventure/encounter) is an order of magnitude more complicated than playing Descent, which should be self-evident considering the comparative sizes of the rulebooks involved. This is true even if one was to craft his own Descent campaign, because the scope is so much more limited. I'm not saying it's better or worse, but to compare the two has always seemed false.

    As for Descent vs. Ravenloft/Ashardalon/Drizzt: totally different animals. Those games are co-op, use D20, have limited character advancement (well, compared to Descent - neither are particularly deep), and a rudimentary campaign structure. The D&D dungeon crawl games suck (Matt Loter can call me an idiot all day long) due to the lack of artwork, bland tiles, boring flip-tile-take-damage mechanics, and the co-op aspect.

  • avatarmoofrank  - Hard to run D&D?

    Yah. It is a pain, not a lot of guidance, but a lot of the wall of books is redundant, advice, and covering niche cases that don't come up often.

    So don't do that.

    Pick up the new D&D 4e Redbox, or the (excellent) Pathfinder Beginner's Box. Both of these are very close analogs to Descent in terms of complexity to play and run, and the included adventures are very much dungeon crawls.

    The BIG difference in jumping to one of these very light RPGs is that the DM is not supposed to be antagonistic, although both games are structured tightly enough that it might not kill the game. This is how they allow for information to be hidden from the players to reinforce the "great unknown" exploration aspects of the game.

    Really, the charm of an RPG is the unknown and the unexpected. Descent doesn't have that.

  • avatarEgg Shen  - re: Hard to run D&D?
    moofrank wrote:


    Really, the charm of an RPG is the unknown and the unexpected. Descent doesn't have that.

    I think that is why I have always preferred HeroQuest to all other Dungeoncrawls. Sure the ruleset is overly simple, but I like that the heroes get a brief blurb of intro text...and then have to explore the dungeon. They have no clue what they will find. It's fun and when you're playing as Zargon you're just waiting for them to wander into a dangerous area. Or down a hallway with some traps. It's much less tactical as the GM, but I find it to be a bit more fun. Plus if if I'm playing as Zargon I always narrate what the heroes see the first time they enter the room. The players always like stuff like that lol. "After the Barbarian kicks in the door he finds 4 goblins sitting around a large wooden table. They're stuffing their faces with food and washing it down with wine spritzers (clearly this a more dainty group of goblins than usual). Suddenly they all turn and become aware of your party. They stand up in unison and prepare for a fight....The dwarf notices that hidden in the corner, behind the goblins, there is a dusty old treasure chest just waiting to be cracked open."

    The furniture in that game is another great example of a 'technically useless' component that adds a great deal to the game. People love exploring not knowing if they will find a weapon rack or a throne room.

    The one big thing I don't like about Descent 2.0 is how everything is known from the get go. From what I've read it seems the monsters are all placed on the board and there is very little in terms of adventuring. Mostly just maneuvering and combat. I could be wrong on that since I've never actually played 2.0.

  • avatarJeff White

    Egg Shen is right in regards to why Heroquest works so well. Exploring the unknown. For this reason I thought Ravenloft was only 'ok', but great with kids. However, after printing off the fan made room encounter cards, the game has launched to the top.

    http://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/66050/castle-ravenloft-named-tile-event-card- deck

    Every time you step into a named room you draw a card from the appropriate room stack. I would also suggest to draw a monster tile to see how many monsters are on the newly flipped un-named tiles (sometimes none). Mixes the game up from 'flip a tile, draw a monster' and definitely adds a bit of that exploration that Heroquest had.

    D2 looks a lot like Dungeon Command to me. Everything is placed and laid out, then just fight.

    Edit: What's the deal with the D&D games anyway? No more new ones? I thought they were pretty good sellers. I suppose with WotC putting the boot to 4e, why release more boardgames using a similar system (so I hear, never played 4e).

  • avatarSevej

    I agree that Descent 2.0 is not a dungeon crawler. It's so much more than that. It's a tactical fantasy adventure game. It can be a proper dungeon crawl easily. The scenario design amazes me. From the common objective/NPC/secret discovery markers, the ability tests... Trying to balance the fight and finishing objective... so excruciatingly fun. So it's not like Dungeon Command at all.

    I really can't wait to see what FFG has in store for this one. The foundation has already been laid.

  • avatarSuperflyTNT

    You guys nailed it better than I could've about why I like these kinds of games: Heroquest, Dungeons and Dragons Adventure System, D&D Fantasy Adventure Boardgame....all have that "exploration of the unknown". I guess that's why I have a hard on for Source of the Nile after all the talk.

    That's what I dig about the DDAS games (Ravenloft)...there's no DM, and everyone is the "adventuring party" so everyone at the table has no idea what's going to happen next. With the Ravenloft campaign I made, I tried to capture the narrative aspects of AD&D while keeping the simplicity and playability of the DDAS system. I think it worked exceptionally well, I just wish I had the time and creative juices left to create a really good, 10-scenario campaign as I've been threatening. It's amazing how being sick can just suck the fucking juice right out of you.

    This seems like it's a winner in all respects except that "unknown" factor, which is a bad thing. I like the character advancement, which I think it the hallmark of a game that will engage the players; cause them to have investment in the game. I also like that they nuked the shitty parts of D1, the parts I hated, such as the infinite respawn which made killing weaker monsters truly worthless.

    I keep looking back and thinking that the real fix to my desire is a $300 box set with DwarvenForge-level set pieces, the Advanced Heroquest or DDFABG rule set, and some bitchin' minis. That's what we REALLY need. Something so epic that it won't be just another throw-away game, easily forgotten.

  • avatarJeff White  - re:
    SuperflyTNT wrote:
    I keep looking back and thinking that the real fix to my desire is a $300 box set with DwarvenForge-level set pieces, the Advanced Heroquest or DDFABG rule set, and some bitchin' minis.

    So, are you thinking the DDFABGs are better than the Ravenloft line or just prefer that ruleset if the game requires a gm?

  • avatarmikecl

    I've got Descent and all its expansions including RTL packed in a friggin suitcase, but haven't played it in some time because it just got to be a horrendous slog although RTL with its shorter scenarios and connected plots did take some of the pain out of it.

    Thanks for the really well put together write up Frank. I cut my gaming teeth on dungeon crawls and if this is as definitive as you suggest, I'm going to have to get it. (I really wasn't interested until I read your review).

    Let the research begin!

  • avatarSuperflyTNT  - re: re:
    Jeff White wrote:
    SuperflyTNT wrote:
    I keep looking back and thinking that the real fix to my desire is a $300 box set with DwarvenForge-level set pieces, the Advanced Heroquest or DDFABG rule set, and some bitchin' minis.


    So, are you thinking the DDFABGs are better than the Ravenloft line or just prefer that ruleset if the game requires a gm?

    The Dungeons and Dragons Fantasy Adventure Board Game (Hasbro, 1992) is better than Heroquest. It's better than Ravenloft (and sons) but requres a DM, which means that I get stuck being the DM, which means I don't want to play as often. Ravenloft (and co.) allows me to play along. If Wizards would've taken the mechanics (dice system and character levelling) from those games and integrated them into the Ravenloft games, I don't think anyone here would be talking about Descent v2 because it would, in my mind, be the most fantastic dungeon crawl ever devised.

  • avatardragonstout  - re: Hard to run D&D?
    moofrank wrote:
    Pick up the new D&D 4e Redbox, or the (excellent) Pathfinder Beginner's Box. Both of these are very close analogs to Descent in terms of complexity to play and run, and the included adventures are very much dungeon crawls.


    I think you, as an experienced GM in multiple games, way underestimate how hard it is for a group that's never done any roleplaying ever to just up and start. It's not even really about the rules, it's about the mindset necessary. I can see how it could be *awesome*, but you either have to have years of experience doing that kind of thing or reprogram your brain.

  • avatarJeff White

    Pete, have you tried the Ravenloft campaign rules? They go up to level 5.

    http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/641789/the-complete-castle-ravenloft-campaign- experience

  • avatarSuperflyTNT  - re:
    Jeff White wrote:
    Pete, have you tried the Ravenloft campaign rules? They go up to level 5.

    http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/641789/the-complete-castle-ravenloft-campaign- experience

    Yeah, I like what dude did, but I don't want some random internet dude's version of the right game, I want the fucktards at the game companies to start putting the shit in the box and thinking about the "best product" from the get-go. If the double-sided cards come in the box, level 2 is the max. That's retarded. It sounds like Descent has the right path with the decks and "levelling" system.

    It just irritates me to no end that Wizards, the guys who bought the company that INVENTED D&D can continually make products that show a lack of foresight. I mean, how hard would it be to create an expansion similar to the Descent conversion with nothing but some new items, character tiles that go up to level 5, and a smart and easily integrated campaign system, complete with one or two 10-game campaigns? That's worth 30$ to many people. Dungeon Command is nice that it allows you to slowly get your figs painted, but really, it doesn't go far enough because it's supposed to be a standalone game.

  • avatarJeff White

    I agree. WotC should make a few more of these boardgames. I'd be cool if they continued the setting route (Dark Sun, DragonLance, etc) but would be even better if they made these boardgames based on classic modules. Isle of Dread with outdoor tiles, Tomb of Horrors, Lost City, Keep on the Borderlands, etc. These would all be more compatible with the existing line and each other than setting games.

    Or maybe $25-30 expansions that included new heroes and expansions that included new monsters. Hell, they have all the minis for these. Still would love an expansion that had the kids from the cartoon...

    This is all wishful thinking though, and I have no idea why they don't expand the line besides my earlier guess of them now switching systems for D&D and not wanting to support boardgames that some see as 'intro' games to the rpg. Well, I do have another guess and that would be that each release in this series is selling less than the previous, but of that I have no idea.

    All that said, I wouldn't totally discredit rules that fans have made. All of these dungeoncrawls (not just the D&D ones) have fallen short of the mark, and all of them have fan made material to fill the gaps. You trumpet the praise your own adventure garnered. Hell, I say if the rules are good, play'em. Doesn't matter to me if I bought them in the store or downloaded some dude's rule-set.

  • avatarEgg Shen

    Does anyone know why Hasbro/WotC never released the D&D: Fantasy Adventure Boardgame in the States? Is there something preventing it from being released here? The word is that is a super, fantastic, awesome game...

    With WotC taking more stabs at boardgames these days (pretty successfully I might add) why wouldn't they go back and release this game? Just give it some new 4th Edition Artwork and don't change any of the rules.

  • avatarmoofrank  - D&D Fantasy

    Here's a second for the D&D Fantasy game. It is superb.

    Curiously, one of my other almost-favorites is Dragon Strike. The game system itself is just too simple, and has a couple of terrible aspects. (All hits do 1 damage). The adventures included, however, are GREAT.

  • avatardragonstout

    I don't understand what Wizards' plan is with the D&D games at all. They seem pretty confused. It blows my mind that they made it so hard to combine the three games, but I guess if I view them less as "standalone games" and more as "scenario/adventure packs" then it makes sense to have all these hard-to-integrate standalones rather than expansions. Sure, they're great kits for other players to make stuff up for, but they really dropped the ball on the rules that came in the box. It's telling that each iteration, despite only being a few months apart from each other, fixed clear problems in the previous iteration; that reeks of rushed production (but at least it shows that they listen!). I really WISH the D&D games were the best dungeon crawls, because D&D is D&D and I want my son to know D&D; but it looks like we'll be stuck with Terrinoth.

  • avatarSuperflyTNT

    Frank: Dragonstrike? LMAO
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDF9mAHSWZg&feature=fvwrel
    MUST SEE

    Andy: Trouble integrating? Uh...how? I've never really had any trouble taking characters from one set and playing with them (I almost exclusively play the chick ranger and the dragonborn fighters, with all sets) and I use the terrain from Ashy in the blank tiles in Ravenloft on the regular.

    Really, Ravenloft is the lone flyer re: the fact that items don't have pricing, but a sharpie can fix that shit.

    I still say that for a DM'ed light D&D, the DDFABG (Parker Bros.) is pretty much the best one you can get. And I'm firmly convinced that they fucked up big time not taking the mechanics out of that game and using the DDAS model of tile laying and encounters/random monsters together to make what would be the best in class.

    In fact, now that I'm thinking about it, I'm fucked off more than a little bit about it. It would've been so simple to use the trap die to disarm traps, adding sword dice and whatnot would've been epic.

    What really fucks me off is that the whole concept of the game seems to have been to get you comfortable with the idea of D20 system games so you could transition to DDM, just to find that DDM's discontinued and now the king of D&D skirmishers is going to be a diceless game that's more like the bastard son of Magic and Summoner Wars or something.

  • avatartin0men

    I've been going back and forth on D2. I own D1 plus all the non-campaign expansions (no interest from my group in long campaigns). And I also have the full run of CastleAshDrizzt. And Pete sold me on the concept of DDFABG a year or so ago; I went way too deep hunting down a copy + expansions and getting it shipped out of EU.(*yeouch!*). So I'm pretty well saturated for coverage on the whole DungeonCrawl experience (and that's not counting Talisman+[several expansions], Prophecy+DragonRealm and DungeonQuest).

    But I love the damn things! And I've got a 9yo that grants an excuse to pick up and keep this stuff, just to be sure that I 'Raise'm right!' on the gaming front. :)

    So back to D2: I was initially more than a bit annoyed that rather than 'fixing' Descent, they decided to sell folks a new & expensive replacement. (and there's a lot less in the new box for roughly the same price the old ran).

    But then I read discussions about the mechanics, and play, and thought "Cool! it's sounding useful!". And I could use my old Descent bits! Yea!

    But then I read that you needed BOTH the $80 D2 box AND the $30 'upgrade' kit to use your D1 stuff. And I was ticked off and wrote it off again.

    Now I read this piece and the generally positive comments, and I'm back in the middle again. :S

    I will say I wouldn't have been sad at all to see D2 take a slagging here, so that I could take my dough and go buy other games that aren't attempting to sell me replacements for what I already own....

    But on the upside, Amazon has D2 discounted to $57 and D2ECK discounted to $23.80, with free shipping. Nets to $81.20 or just a few bucks more than MSRP on the D2 box by itself.

    But damn, spending $81 to buy an upgrade on what I already have still chaps my ass more than a little...

    It's gonna take some stewing before I push any 'buy' buttons. Maybe I'll dig out and play my DnD Redbox with the kid instead! :)

  • avatarSuperflyTNT

    I just looked at Dv2 and the box set is 51$ on Coolstuffinc.com

  • avatarColumbob  - re:
    tin0men wrote:

    But damn, spending $81 to buy an upgrade on what I already have still chaps my ass more than a little...

    Just look at it this way, you're buying an entirely new game, and for a few more dollars you can combine it with some bits from another one of your existing games. Sure the gameplay is similar to D1, but then again you just pointed out that you already have a plethora of games with the same gameplay. What was so different in Wrath or Drizzt to warrant buying them if you already had Ravenloft? Aren't they just upgrades on what you already had too?

  • avatarJeff White

    Since y'all have brought up the DDFABGs, a few more questions about them.

    1) I understand this game is 5 player only. That is, a GM and 4 characters. So even if a GM and two players are available, the players have to play two characters each. Is this true?

    2) How do the rules compare to HeroQuest? About the same weight or slightly easier/more difficult?

  • avatarSpace Ghost

    1) Yes. There always is supposed to be a GM and 4 characters.

    2) It is slightly more difficult as there are different attack types/dice and more items and whatnot to keep track of. But, I would think that it would be suitable for the same audience as HeroQuest.

    I may give this + expansions the "Games from the Crypt" treatment....but it might not be old enough.

  • avatarSuperflyTNT

    It's old enough, man. Definitely review it. I should've but I just never got to it. I'm considering rebuying it (for a FOURTH TIME) because I'm a dolt.

  • avatartin0men
    Quote:
    What was so different in Wrath or Drizzt to warrant buying them if you already had Ravenloft?

    Well, the motive to buying Ashadalon & Drizzt, after Ravenloft, was to further expand a game we like and played a lot. To get more of the same. And no one has ever argued that the 'DnD Adv System' big-boxes were anything but amazing value propositions, in terms of content in the box and bang for your buck. The D1->D2 process is a long way from any type of 'gift' to the fans, in terms of value.

    I considered WoA & Drzzzt as expansions on the core CR game, that could also stand alone. Essentially the same reason I bought the 'D1:Tomb of Ice' or 'D1:Well of Darkness' to expand the original Descent.

    Unfortunately, where the comparison falls apart with D2 is that D2 is at core a procedural reimplementation of D1, with replacement components that are largely redundant of a lot of the in-box components from D1. It's substantially rules and game-flow component changes, rather than completely obsoleting most of the plastic & cardboard from the origial (well, beyond the stacks of cards).

    And that's 100% of where this shifts from a 'nominal existing owner upgrade fee', to 'lets soak the existing owners more than the new ones'. FFG has a history in the 'revision' niche: The 'FFG Talisman 4E Upgrade Kit'. If you were a Black Industries Talisman 4E owner, you paid FFG a reasonable fee and got the diffed components to play the revised edition with your existing copy. It's a _very_ fan-friendly approach. You sell the revised to new folks, and keep the old one's as fans, with the expectation you'll get the bulk of your payback & profit on the stream of new expansion buys to come. Everyone's happy. Lots of customer good will gets generated.

    Unfortunately, with D1E->D2E, although they chose to offer an 'upgrade kit', it's no where near the Talisman kit: The expectation is that the existing fans, that have supported D1 for years and bought everything that came down the pipe, are now rewarded by being able to buy an upgrade kit that includes none of the D2E core gameplay upgraded components; just the cards etc to adapt the D1 monsters to splice them into the new revision. To play the revised edition you you need to buy the entire $80+30=$110 msrp bundle (if you're a 'good' fan and shop FLGS), or $82 online if you're one of those distasteful 'frugal' folks.

    They lost me the instant I realized, a page or two into a marathon bgg preview thread, that the 'upgrade kit' I had my money in hand ready to buy, wasn't really an 'upgrade' of D1 at all. It was more of a "D1->D2 monster adapter" kit.

    Anyway, I'm about 99% to buying D2E+'adapter kit'. But like a lot of customer-publisher experiences these days, it's not leaving me a particularly happy camper.

    My reaction is a little like the way AEG rolled out ThunderstoneAdvance without immediately providing any smooth transition & coexistance path for the existing expensive cardbase folks owned. In both cases it implied that I'm more of a cash-source to be milked than a customer to be rewarded for buying everything in the line. *shrug*. It also essentially says, "Don't get too invested, because we're going to invalidate 99% of what you own, to regenerate the cash stream and get you to buy everything all over again".

    But that's status quo for business in our 'disposable consumer society' these days. Why should it be any different in game publishing?

  • avatartin0men

    King of Tokyo put it over the line to a 'buy': MiniatureMarket had all three in stock, just clearing free shipping @ $101. I've wanted KoT for awhile but had been putting it off until I could round out an order with it. This combo lined up just dandy. :D

  • avatarJeff White  - re:
    Space Ghost wrote:
    1) Yes. There always is supposed to be a GM and 4 characters.

    2) It is slightly more difficult as there are different attack types/dice and more items and whatnot to keep track of. But, I would think that it would be suitable for the same audience as HeroQuest.

    I may give this + expansions the "Games from the Crypt" treatment....but it might not be old enough.

    what if you cut the number of monsters per scenario in half? Could you get away with only two characters? I ask because I'd be playing this with wife and son and I don't think either would want to run multiple characters. Another point for ravenloft.

    Can D2 be played with only two characters?

  • avatardragonstout

    This still the "new champion of dungeon-crawls", or are there cracks showing?

Only registered users can write comments!
Text Size

Top