Front Page

Content

Authors

Game Index

Forums

Site Tools

Submissions

About

KK
Kevin Klemme
March 09, 2020
35170 2
Hot
KK
Kevin Klemme
January 27, 2020
20838 0
Hot
KK
Kevin Klemme
August 12, 2019
7430 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
December 19, 2023
3981 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
December 14, 2023
3507 0
Hot

Mycelia Board Game Review

Board Game Reviews
O
oliverkinne
December 12, 2023
2079 0
O
oliverkinne
December 07, 2023
2587 0

River Wild Board Game Review

Board Game Reviews
O
oliverkinne
December 05, 2023
2257 0
O
oliverkinne
November 30, 2023
2500 0
J
Jackwraith
November 29, 2023
3022 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
November 28, 2023
1973 0
S
Spitfireixa
October 24, 2023
3697 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
October 17, 2023
2626 0
O
oliverkinne
October 10, 2023
2462 0
O
oliverkinne
October 09, 2023
2291 0
O
oliverkinne
October 06, 2023
2510 0

Outback Crossing Review

Board Game Reviews
×
Bugs: Recent Topics Paging, Uploading Images & Preview (11 Dec 2020)

Recent Topics paging, uploading images and preview bugs require a patch which has not yet been released.

× Talk about the latest and greatest AT, and the Classics.

Any chance FFG makes an expansion for DungeonQuest?

More
17 Feb 2012 15:04 #116804 by san il defanso
To my mind, Dungeonquest just seems like a bad choice for an FFG reprint. If they hadn't changed anything, I doubt the game would have been that much more successful for them, because it's just not that kind of game. It's a lot like Tales of the Arabian Nights, which a good example of a reprint that did everything right and still didn't become a huge hit. Those numbers weren't bad for Z-Man, but I can't imagine it would cut the mustard at FFG. The shift in setting and combat also turned off the people who needed to be behind this game the most to make it succeed. Not to say those were bad moves (still haven't played it yet), but that's how I see it.

And although I don't have a problem with moving the game to Terrinoth, it probably set up a lot of expectations for what kind of game it was. All of the other Terrinoth games are fairly involved, long titles. Dungeonquest sticks out like a sore thumb, and I wonder if the new combat was an attempt to try to make the game a little more in-tune with the world it's supposed to inhabit.

If the game is successful enough to stay in print, I wonder if it will ever get a "second edition" which is just plain ol' Dungeonquest. They've done this a couple of times recently with other lesser titles.
The following user(s) said Thank You: dragonstout

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 15:56 #116814 by VonTush
I think an expansion, if it added in the "right" things, could make me go out and buy both the base game and expansion. FFG to me didn't improve the game...They just took a lateral shift with it for me so I felt no need to get the new version.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 16:26 - 17 Feb 2012 16:28 #116817 by Egg Shen

San Il Defanso wrote: To my mind, Dungeonquest just seems like a bad choice for an FFG reprint. If they hadn't changed anything, I doubt the game would have been that much more successful for them, because it's just not that kind of game. It's a lot like Tales of the Arabian Nights, which a good example of a reprint that did everything right and still didn't become a huge hit. Those numbers weren't bad for Z-Man, but I can't imagine it would cut the mustard at FFG. The shift in setting and combat also turned off the people who needed to be behind this game the most to make it succeed. Not to say those were bad moves (still haven't played it yet), but that's how I see it.


That's a pretty solid point. I think a better comparison might actually be Talisman though. You have to believe that the success of that game factored into their thoughts of acquiring and publishing DungeonQuest.

So why does Talisman, a very random, chaotic and archaic design do well for them and DQ does not? They both have a similar "pedigree", but one is clearly selling better than the other. Talisman 4th Edition was basically a reprint of earlier editions with minor rule tweaks and optional new rules (like fate). It was also helped by being lauded by many vocal Ameritrash lovers. Talisman also kept its own setting. In fact it used the same characters as well as adventure cards (with minor tweaks). So like Tales of the Arabian Nights the new Talisman kept things pretty much the same but unlike TotAN it was able to be a successful new edition for FFG. I think the style of game that TotAN is (a paragraph storybook game) had more to do with it not becoming a runaway hit rather than the quality of the reprint.

So that leads me to believe that in the event of highly hyped reprint like DungeonQuest, gamers want the option of playing the old game. Look at the recently published Wiz War. They have made tweaks and changes to the gameplay, but have kept all the old rules just in case people wanted the classic experience. They also did not muck with the setting.

I think the setting change in DungeonQuest coupled with the mandatory rule changes did not sit well with purists. People wanted to see snotlings, Chaos Warriors and things like that. Just like how Talisman kept things the same only while only doing an overhaul to the artwork. The lack of including the original rules in the base game was a huge miscalculation on FFG's part.

So you had the DQ lovers hating on the new version coupled with the most BGG user shitting all over it. I think from the get go the game was just lambasted with negative buzz. It was probably never able to recover from that. Which is really a shame because the reprint is pretty damn enjoyable once you get past its flaws. FFG should have handled it differently and that is why I think an expansion could fix alot of the damage they did to themselves. It has been almost two years since DQ was released so I'm not really holding my breath that they will expand it.
Last edit: 17 Feb 2012 16:28 by Egg Shen.
The following user(s) said Thank You: dragonstout

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 16:39 - 17 Feb 2012 16:45 #116821 by Mr. White

VonTush wrote: I think an expansion, if it added in the "right" things, could make me go out and buy both the base game and expansion. FFG to me didn't improve the game...They just took a lateral shift with it for me so I felt no need to get the new version.


This is where I am. One $25 expansion away from snapping up the DQ base and expansion.

Regarding Talisman, I wonder where its sales are at atm. I recall the latest expansion (Dragon) getting lukewarm reviews (apparently made the game real fiddly), but I know it was selling for like $12 on Amazon. That plus the amount of BGG users commenting on the Talisman expansions drops considerably each time. The Dragon expansion only has 32 comments, whereas the base game has over 1000. For an expansion that mixes up the play as much as it supposedly does...that's not a good sign.

So, will the other two corner boards come out? Did the little/big/little/big, etc expansion approach tap out the fanbase? Personally, I'm only in for the mini expansions (don't like the extra spaces the corner boards add, reduces pvp) but I'd like to see Talisman at least complete the cycle rather than fade away.
Last edit: 17 Feb 2012 16:45 by Mr. White.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 16:57 - 17 Feb 2012 16:58 #116825 by san il defanso
Maybe part of Tales of the Arabian Nights' problem was that it was never THAT big a hit to begin with. It's always had its fans, but not to the same extent as old GW games.

To my mind, Talisman was always marketed more towards fans of the original, and to non-gamers in general. When I go to the store, the people playing Talisman are the same people who play Munchkin. That's not a statement of quality, but it does indicate the type of consumer who will buy Talisman. To be successful, Dungeonquest should have been pitched at the same crowd.

But setting it in Terrinoth showed that they were probably gearing it more towards fans of that IP, rather than people who don't really care about Terrinoth in the first place. That's all well and good, but Terrinoth fans aren't the type of people who love goofy games like Dungeonquest. Then with the new combat, fans of the original are now against your reprint. So it's neither fish nor fowl.

I agree, a Dungeonquest expansion that basically makes it more like the original would be great. I'd gladly pay for that.
Last edit: 17 Feb 2012 16:58 by san il defanso.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 17:21 #116827 by VonTush
Personally, I think the key to making a successful reprint has all to do with the respect paid to the original source material. Look at some of the highly successful reprints: Survive, Talisman and TotAN. The fan bases for these games, I'd be comfortable in saying, feel that the current releases are a definitive edition with stuff consolidated and cleaned up while expanding and overall improving the game while still maintaining the game's original feel and spirit.

There were two things that happened prior to the DQ release which I think caused the downfall of the release. First was the push-back from some people regarding the FFG design paradigm. Some people were losing interest in games that lost playability in favor or clever or innovative, yet convoluted or gamey mechanics.

The second part was DQ following on the heels of Horus Heresy. There was a game that didn't respect the source material. The original game was used just in name and theme alone. A kitchen-sink type approach of everything "clever" and "innovative" over the past few years of game design felt forced into the game.

Overall I think some of the changes to DQ like the catacombs and fate tokens were respectful to the original game and did improve the game a bit. On the other hand though, with the ripples still in the pond from the HH release, the setting change and new combat mechanic were magnified as either not being respectful or capturing the original spirit of the game or just being shoehorned in so FFG could leave their mark on the game.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Mr. White

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 18:19 #116839 by Jackwraith
On topic: I don't see an expansion here. It's just not popular enough as the lines that do receive them (Descent, Runebound, Arkham) nor is it as flexible as other systems (Chaos in the Old World, Warrior Knights) that get one. The setting is what it is: a dragon's lair. There's really not much creative room to work with there. Considering the response to this reprint, I'd be anticipating a DQ 2nd Ed. that stays more within the realm of the GW version. But even that is still hoping for its very niche audience to buy a new one rather than seek out the old one on Ebay or BGG. I think it's finished.

On VT's mention: I think Horus Heresy was the worst of the 3 40K boardgames, honestly. There are a couple very obvious routes to victory for either side (this is putting aside the 1st turn bombardment that kills the Emperor and wins the games for Chaos...) Consequently, it lack the variability of Doom of the Eldar and the flexibility of Battle for Armageddon. I think the new version, while still constrained by the story, made the resolution of that story more interesting. It's one that I'm still trying to get on the table more often.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 18:22 - 17 Feb 2012 18:23 #116841 by dragonstout
Now, what makes me a little sad about the "don't fuck with the old game!" mentality, which I am a part of for the most part, is that there are some old games that really do deserve to be fucked with a bit and even rethemed.

Case in point: MUTANT CHRONICLES: SIEGE OF THE CITADEL. Does anyone really give a shit about the Mutant Chronicles setting? But now that there's been the whole anti-Rex backlash, I'd bet FFG would be terrified to put out a rethemed version, which is too bad. Similarly, that game had really great ideas underpinning it, but then some botched execution. I would be THRILLED to buy a better-developed copy of that game that had a bunch of changes to it (not that FFG is the company I'd trust to do it). But there's been so much backlash lately that I fear they'd be scared to do it.

Seriously, someone please do an upgraded & improved reprint of that game.

I'd also be very curious about a redeveloped MAGIC REALM, GUNSLINGER, or UP FRONT; in those cases, though, I'd definitely want the original rules to be playable as well. But if you look at Alan Moon's geeklist on BGG, you'll see he talks about how all those used to be more streamlined before Don Greenwood got ahold of them and just started adding rules. Now, a lot of those changes might have been for the better, but it would be super-cool to have a "original designer's intent" variant. Especially since that "variant" might get those games to the table a lot more often.
Last edit: 17 Feb 2012 18:23 by dragonstout.
The following user(s) said Thank You: san il defanso

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 18:25 #116843 by dragonstout
PS: If anyone wants an old Dungeonquest that's just missing two room tiles (I'll see if I can them via spare parts on BGG), I've got an extra.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 19:54 #116852 by Egg Shen

Jackwraith wrote: On topic: I don't see an expansion here. It's just not popular enough as the lines that do receive them (Descent, Runebound, Arkham) nor is it as flexible as other systems (Chaos in the Old World, Warrior Knights) that get one. The setting is what it is: a dragon's lair. There's really not much creative room to work with there. Considering the response to this reprint, I'd be anticipating a DQ 2nd Ed. that stays more within the realm of the GW version. But even that is still hoping for its very niche audience to buy a new one rather than seek out the old one on Ebay or BGG. I think it's finished.


It probably is finished (due to sales). I don't agree that there isn't room for an expansion though. Could they expand it will a full fledged big box expansion? Maybe not. A small Cosmic Encounter sized expansion? Sure. Again, it would really only need to add a couple of heroes and more shit to encounter to give the base some variety. Then whatever they add to it after that is simply gravy.

I read on TOS from one user that he was fairly sure that FFG was going to produce an expansion (I think he knew the original designer or something). He then revisited his post some 7 seven months later to say that if the expansion hadn't been announced then he was doubtful it was coming at all. He mentioned that FFG might have scrapped the expansion altogether. The only reason I put any stock into what this particular user said was because I remembered he was the first person saying FFG had acquired the rights to reprint DQ.

Finally, I don't see why a mediocre selling game like Tannhauser can get tons of support and DungeonQuest is a one and done affair. I understand if they don't think people are interested, but it seems most here would look into an expansion (or even the base game if they fixed it via the expansion). I just think with such a big license they ought to at least try and resuscitation it. Unless, they are indeed waiting for it to sell out and they then announce a second edition...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 19:55 #116853 by Columbob
Fuck an expansion that adds nothing new but tries to make it more like the original. Who's really interested in that?

I've never played the original, and I think FFG's version is fine. Sure it's not about chaos warriors and snotlings, so what? That's just the nostalgia talking, but if you've never played the original, why would you care?

Yes, the card combat was fiddly. Then I tried the "original variant" which was just as long, random and pointless, so we said screw that, went back to the cards.

An expansion that adds more of everything would be welcome, otherwise useless and unsaleable to anyone without that longing for bygone days nostalgia.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 19:58 #116854 by san il defanso

Egg Shen wrote: Finally, I don't see why a mediocre selling game like Tannhauser can get tons of support and DungeonQuest is a one and done affair. I understand if they don't think people are interested, but it seems most here would look into an expansion (or even the base game if they fixed it via the expansion). I just think with such a big license they ought to at least try and resuscitation it. Unless, they are indeed waiting for it to sell out and they then announce a second edition...


I think Tannhauser isn't really their baby. It's been developed and designed by other European comapanies, so it's probably just a distribution deal.

I keep participating in this conversation, but I haven't actually played the game. Hopefully that'll be remedied tomorrow night. My hunch: the combat is probably fine though not ideal.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 20:17 - 17 Feb 2012 20:18 #116856 by VonTush

Columbob wrote: Fuck an expansion that adds nothing new but tries to make it more like the original. Who's really interested in that?

I've never played the original, and I think FFG's version is fine. Sure it's not about chaos warriors and snotlings, so what? That's just the nostalgia talking, but if you've never played the original, why would you care?

Yes, the card combat was fiddly. Then I tried the "original variant" which was just as long, random and pointless, so we said screw that, went back to the cards.

An expansion that adds more of everything would be welcome, otherwise useless and unsaleable to anyone without that longing for bygone days nostalgia.


Here's the rub though...The "Original" combat on the FFG website isn't the original combat system in the complete form. The "Original" system online is just a cobbled together POS that was thrown out there to appease the people that were bitching (which I was/am one of them).

What I would like is an expansion that allows the original combat in its complete form...Not the half assed version released online. As well as more additional stuff like new room types, cards to flip, characters...etc.
Last edit: 17 Feb 2012 20:18 by VonTush.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 20:59 #116864 by Egg Shen

San Il Defanso wrote:

Egg Shen wrote: Finally, I don't see why a mediocre selling game like Tannhauser can get tons of support and DungeonQuest is a one and done affair. I understand if they don't think people are interested, but it seems most here would look into an expansion (or even the base game if they fixed it via the expansion). I just think with such a big license they ought to at least try and resuscitation it. Unless, they are indeed waiting for it to sell out and they then announce a second edition...


I think Tannhauser isn't really their baby. It's been developed and designed by other European comapanies, so it's probably just a distribution deal.

I keep participating in this conversation, but I haven't actually played the game. Hopefully that'll be remedied tomorrow night. My hunch: the combat is probably fine though not ideal.


I thought FFG bought Tannhauser back in 2009? I know they originally just distributed the game, but I thought they went ahead and purchased the property? I could be mistaken on that.

Let us know what your thoughts are on DQ if you get a chance to play it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Feb 2012 21:16 #116866 by dragonstout

VonTush wrote:

Columbob wrote: Fuck an expansion that adds nothing new but tries to make it more like the original. Who's really interested in that?

I've never played the original, and I think FFG's version is fine. Sure it's not about chaos warriors and snotlings, so what? That's just the nostalgia talking, but if you've never played the original, why would you care?

Yes, the card combat was fiddly. Then I tried the "original variant" which was just as long, random and pointless, so we said screw that, went back to the cards.

An expansion that adds more of everything would be welcome, otherwise useless and unsaleable to anyone without that longing for bygone days nostalgia.


Here's the rub though...The "Original" combat on the FFG website isn't the original combat system in the complete form. The "Original" system online is just a cobbled together POS that was thrown out there to appease the people that were bitching (which I was/am one of them).

What I would like is an expansion that allows the original combat in its complete form...Not the half assed version released online. As well as more additional stuff like new room types, cards to flip, characters...etc.


WTF? The only difference between the "original" combat and actual original combat is the names of the actions. In what way is it not "the complete form"?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: Gary Sax
Time to create page: 0.157 seconds