Dungeonquest - New Combat Rules

mads b. wrote:

But actually the comparison with Descent has made me rethink DungeonQuest combat a bit. These are super badass heroes and monsters after all, so maybe cirkling an enemy, firing the occasional arrow/musket/fireball before charging is plausible within context. Or maybe I'm just overthinking things.

In Descent, if your hero is a magic user and you give him a sword or an axe to use, you can watch your team go down in short order. It's a bit of an optimization game and if you don't use the correct weapons, you will lose.

Also, I've never seen a troll attack with a ranged/magic weapon. Same with skeletons using magic, etcetera. I'm just repeating myself now.

Combat in MEQ worked because each character had a special combat deck. Every attack they did made sense, in the context of their characters. If they hadn't cheaped out with this common combat deck thing for DQ, we wouldn't have all this thematic dissonance.

Montana Jackson was a badass mofo. Nobody messed with him.

kookoobah fails another year of Terrinoth school.

In Descent, if your hero is a magic user and you give him a sword or an axe to use, you can watch your team go down in short order. It's a bit of an optimization game and if you don't use the correct weapons, you will lose.

Bollocks. There is NO penalty in any of the games for wizards. Show me the mechanic that penalizes a fighter from using a rune or a wizard for using a sword.

You may not get any power dice bonus - but these dice are BONUSES and in dungeonquest are represented by the Power Card you draw. The Power Cards are consistant with the charcters and monsters as presented in the other games.

Also, I've never seen a troll attack with a ranged/magic weapon.

A troll can't hurl rocks?

Same with skeletons using magic, etcetera. I'm just repeating myself now.

There are tons of magic wielding skeletons in runebound. You seriously want me to run through my decks and prove it to you?

Also I recall you last time claiming 'Golems don't wield magic!' - except for the small fact that one of the Golem's power cards shows him wielding magic. So much for your theory.

Combat in MEQ worked because each character had a special combat deck. Every attack they did made sense, in the context of their characters. If they hadn't cheaped out with this common combat deck thing for DQ, we wouldn't have all this thematic dissonance.

Monsters in MEQ did not have their own combat deck, and led to similar situations. Check what an Ooliphant can apparently do based on the card titles.

Mr Skeletor wrote:

Dr. Mabuse wrote:

Mr Skeletor wrote:

Umm why, it's still true. We find the new combat quicker than the old, and that doesn't change because I read some bullshit on the internet.

That bullshit is straight from FFG.

And?
You believe everything companies tell you?

Yes, and also what little baby Jesus says too. [His gaze drifts for a moment.]

Mr Skeletor wrote:

Option 1: New dice based.
This is easily the best combat variant I have seen for this game. Of all the different combat systems, this one is the one which seems to intergrate the best with the main gameplay and not stick out. It's using mechanics already present in the game. My only concern with it is some character/monster match ups would be near impossible to win. If I ever play DQ solo again (doubt it - dungeonquest is a terrible solo game) I'd use these rules.

You aren't worried your poor little Dungeonquest character might die (relatively) instantly due to a bad card draw are you? This is why this combat is the best one.

I don't mind offering a handjob to FFG for doing this. Just when you think they may have reached that bloated company point where they can't respond quickly to problems simply due to the size of the company, they go and do something like this. I love them for it. Seriously, I doubt many other companies would do this. They made a bit of a misstep, and have gracefully made optional amends, giving us what we wanted.

It reminds me when they released the optional rules for balanced TI3 boards on the internet. They didn't need to do it, but what a difference it made to those who wanted it. I will definitely buy this game now.

/puts down tainted Kool-Aid.

Mr. Bistro wrote:

/puts down tainted Kool-Aid.

No it's actually just plain old tainted milk according to your avatar. (Actually I always envisage your avatar as someone impressed with their sperm sample).

I'm going to try to resurrect this thing for a moment, hopefully without beating FFG up about the card combat. (or any of the other shit we regularly beat them up about.)

Are there any opinions about the dice combat scheme from people who've played it? I saw a passing mention in the "played" thread about a game in Northwest Canuckistan using it.

It seems to me that dice combat is a death sentence for Brother Gherrin if he's fighting anything but a sorceror, since his other stats are miserable and he can't use his power. I would never go into the catacombs with him, because one sneak-attack from a troll and he's done.

The "evade-with-cards-then-fight-with-dice" also seems a bit odd. I wonder if having an "evade" test against a different attribute than you use to fight that creature might be a good solution.

We'll probably keep using card combat as written, but I like to tinker with things. And I like dice...

Not Sure --

I am almost done with a modified dice system that reflects the same results you would get from doing the card combat that originally came with the game....I actually wrote a couple of programs to give me the actual distribution results for different characters versus different monsters. I am almost done, hopefully will be able to post it this weekend. Fast and simple while maintaining the % of survival that is built into the game.

Sounds cool Space Ghost, keep us posted.