|
The End posted:Holy gently caress. Sever. Nah, don't sever. Just, uh, don't play games with him anymore.
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:52 |
|
|
I saw some people playing Dead of Winter tonight. They all lost, including the Betrayer, because he had 2 medical supplies in hand instead of three. The guy next to him had five med kits lying around in his hand but the betrayer couldn't even try to sweet talk one out of him at any point because trading means you have to immediately use them for some reason. dripping with theme
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:I saw some people playing Dead of Winter tonight. They all lost, including the Betrayer, I know I've had problems with the secret objective thing before but it's never occurred to me that it allows every single player to lose even when the game becomes versus instead of co-op. If the game weren't kinda screwy in other areas, the associated nonsense with the win condition would probably kill the game for me on its own. quote:because trading means you have to immediately use them for some reason. what why SuccinctAndPunchy fucked around with this message at 15:24 on Jan 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:what why That's literally the trading rules. Any item you trade to another player, that player has to immediately use. I guess it's to prevent people colluding (or actually cooperating)?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
It's to probably to prevent people from just announcing what their personal objective is and then minimizing the amount of noise made by the good guys since they don't have to create noise in order to exclusively hunt out specifically what they need.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
It's almost as if the game's entire design is irredeemably broken.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:It's to probably to prevent people from just announcing what their personal objective is and then minimizing the amount of noise made by the good guys since they don't have to create noise in order to exclusively hunt out specifically what they need. But then you could actually play mindgames with that by lying about your personal objective and then getting people to give you what you don't actually need and later utilise it in some way to just cripple their chances if you're a betrayer? In theory, anyway. In practice probably not with the way every other mechanic works but still, it's an idea. if the game were a purely co-op experience I would understand that, but it's not. Game's pretty clearly been balanced as a purely co-op experience and the Betrayer stuff sort of put in after the fact.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Looks like Dead of Winter is one of those games that looks fine on the surface until you actually look at the guts of it. I do like the idea of the Crossroads system where stuff may or may not happen in a way specifically related to what the players are doing, as opposed to "Now it's raining! A guy jumps out at you! Boo!" Hopefully whatever the next one they do will revise the rest.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
Durendal posted:You know those gaming horror stories? I thought they were fake, or at least had the truth stretched somewhat. I was wrong, so very, very wrong. I had no idea you could turtle your way to victory in risk (As they seem to do since they don't expect attack?), I thought the only meaningful choice you could ever make is "Who do I want to attack this turn".
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:11
|
|
The best part was that, beyond my friend, none of other five people at the table have played auctual Risk - they all played with home rule abominations like no army stacking above 12, and being able to reinforce anywhere with any amount.
|
From the account given winning wasn't the objective. It was to piss away the night.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Sloober posted:I had no idea you could turtle your way to victory in risk (As they seem to do since they don't expect attack?), I thought the only meaningful choice you could ever make is "Who do I want to attack this turn". You can't turtle to victory as the win conditions are conquests. The important part of the story is that the players hadn't seen a game end before. These two facts are not unrelated.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:From the account given winning wasn't the objective. It was to piss away the night. It still doesn't make sense, though? There are so many less inane ways to piss away a night. I think the only way I would willingly play Risk at this point is if one of my friends bought Risk Legacy. Like, I think everybody in that room would have had more fun if somebody was just like "let's drink some beers and watch netflix"
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
Durendal posted:I wish I was making this story up, or embellishing it, but it was real, and was just as enjoyable as you would imagine. And I know I am a whiney poo poo for posting this, but it I needed to vent. You ended a game of risk. You've done the Lord's work, son.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
Jedit posted:You can't turtle to victory as the win conditions are conquests. The important part of the story is that the players hadn't seen a game end before. These two facts are not unrelated. My old high school Risk strategy was staying up later than everyone else so when the game ended at 3-4 am I was the victor since my cognitive ability was still intact (or still awake). So glad we moved on to better games.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
Jabor posted:What sort of stuff are you looking for that isn't on the player reference cards? A list of buildings and stuff? That's a good question. I noticed those but wasn't sure how helpful those would be. Although with that said I suppose the turns aren't overly complex. To be honest my copy is still being shipped, so I'm not entirely sure how supportive the reference cards in the box are. I have a copy of the manual but was hoping to condense it for game nights. I always look for guides/aids as a game's shipped just so I'm ready when it arrives. A lot is explained on the cards but I'm worried about the smaller details in Caverna like when to place animals outside, what the dogs can handle, what's required to own animals, etc. Just little reminders. Maybe it's not even an issue and I should just wait for my copy of the game. I actually have a list of Dwellings & Furnishings that explain the cost and ability.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
deadly_pudding posted:It still doesn't make sense, though? There are so many less inane ways to piss away a night. I think the only way I would willingly play Risk at this point is if one of my friends bought Risk Legacy. I played MTG for years before exposure to more board games made me realize how much I hated being hosed over by random chance. It's not hard to imagine people being locked into their traditions and being all "this is what we do, and dammit we enjoy it!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:I played MTG for years before exposure to more board games made me realize how much I hated being hosed over by random chance. It's not hard to imagine people being locked into their traditions and being all "this is what we do, and dammit we enjoy it!" This, but also unbalanced matches. I was always super casual, but I played with a guy who took it seriously, and spent real money on his decks, which were obviously way better than mine. Not surprisingly, he won a lot of the games, not because he was that much better than me, but because his cards were not random crap but good stuff. Asymmetric is good, but only if one person is not totally gimped by it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:Also this look loving awesome: http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/152470/fief-france-1429 Fief sounds great, but I'm prepared for it to be a Xia-level computer game rip-off filled with terrible "thematic" design decisions. silvergoose posted:Nah, don't sever. Just, uh, don't play games with him anymore. But... what else would people do together? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
echoMateria posted:It has a bunch of expansions to help with running out of story campaigns. But for some reason none are available in English. Every review I heard about it were positive so I wonder why. I noticed that the english version of the web site (not the FFG site) has a couple english downloadable ones. http://legenden-von-andor.de/en/ The German version of the site is much more featured however, even has a "Developer Guide" of some kind. bobvonunheil posted:I quite liked how combat fit into the wider strategy of this game, and it hit us a completely unexpectedly the first time we played it. We were all 'man, these monsters are easy! Let's smash them all down!' and then we realised we needed to get to the tree on the other side of the map in 2 turns without so much as touching another monster if we were to have any chance of winning. Yeah, that's a good way to put it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
For you Americans, just saw Istanbul is on sale http://www.amazon.com/Alderac-Entertainment-Group-5809-Istanbul/dp/B00IVF4UK2/ref=sr_1_4?s=toys-and-games&ie=UTF8&qid=1421683031&sr=1-4 Really good lighter worker placement game with a spatial element, scales well and plays quick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:I have been playing some Legends of Andor lately, and let me tell you I'm quite pleased so far. It's a 2-4 player co-op and I'm going to say nice things about it How does fighting the monsters work in that game? I found that most of these games belong in the DnD school of "Select your action and then roll your dice to see if you lost your turn or not" which I really hate. Also, is combat a lonely affair like in Mage Knight, or can two or more players gang up on the same threat? (yes, I know you can assault a city with others on MG, but you are just splitting the risk)
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
edit: wrong game >_>
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
EBag posted:For you Americans, just saw Istanbul is on sale http://www.amazon.com/Alderac-Entertainment-Group-5809-Istanbul/dp/B00IVF4UK2/ref=sr_1_4?s=toys-and-games&ie=UTF8&qid=1421683031&sr=1-4 Nice, this is my new darling. I sort of want to house rule it to go around the table a full round (in addition) after the end game condition is reached rather than just completing the current round, but that might muck up the balance. Same feeling about The Builders. Any thoughts on "sudden death" end conditions like that? First to X Points ends the game, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
I'm sorry but that Risk story is nearly Facebook funny. "WTF? You're supposed to actually ATTACK??! NO WAY!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Rexides posted:How does fighting the monsters work in that game? I found that most of these games belong in the DnD school of "Select your action and then roll your dice to see if you lost your turn or not" which I really hate. Also, is combat a lonely affair like in Mage Knight, or can two or more players gang up on the same threat? Combat is fairly quick to resolve. It has some limited uncertainty which comes from dice, and heroes & monsters get weaker as they get hurt. It would lack depth if someone wanted a tactical knife-fight in board game form. e: Briefly (if you want to know): 1. Hero (or heroes) roll their dice (# depends on willpower aka hit points), take the highest roll and add their Strength = attack total 2. Monster does same, but if they roll doubles they count both results, add their Strength = attack total 3. Compare totals. Lower result loses willpower equal to the difference. 4. Repeat another round (1 hour of daylight per round) or abandon the fight There isn't a whole lot of calculating and re-calculating (no endless streams of items with +1 against but not if and +2 when used with but not against and etc etc). The balance is such that generally a fresh hero can take a "grunt" (Gors) but needs to buff up or team up for the next level monster (Skrals). There are more monsters beyond that but you probably get the idea. Combat is usually solitary unless you're teaming up on something tougher, or a boss monster. Teaming up on a monster is initiated a lot like in Mage Knight (someone initiates the fight and invites anyone else who is there). All the participants total their rolls and strength together. But if they lose, they each take equal damage (they do not split the damage amongst them, they each take the full amount.) Fights don't take particularly long partly because there is no appreciable "setup" for a fight, and no real upkeep between rounds apart from a little arithmetic and deducting willpower (hit points) which may affect the number of attack dice rolled. There are also no special cards or tons of special items and various +1s to stack, and no sick combos to be made. Items exist but their bonuses and uses are all straightforward -- no "use this card to reroll up to two dice but only if using but doubled against  "
The Eyes Have It fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Jan 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
My group is similar. They only ever played Risk and Monopoly. When, after being asked, I told them why the design is bad they answered "but they are meant to be fun. Nothing else." They loved Mafia till I showed them The Resistance. Even though the entire group loved it, a couple of them were annoyed at the idea of not being able to eliminate the only black individual in our group first every single game. Then the biggest idiot in the group asked me to find a way to put The Resistance inside Dungeons and Dragons 3.5. He is also the guy who enforces marxist economy theory and Game of thrones politics logic every time he DMs while also playing a player character. But now that they likes The Resistance it is going to be easier to get them into other games... except for the part it is a 10-12 person group who absolutely refuses to split up, to the point where they have played 14 person Risk in seven groups of two.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Azran posted:They loved Mafia till I showed them The Resistance. Even though the entire group loved it, a couple of them were annoyed at the idea of not being able to eliminate the only black individual in our group first every single game. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Azran posted:a couple of them were annoyed at the idea of not being able to eliminate the only black individual in our group first every single game. What? Please explain and also do not play Werewolf with them or they'll be lynching him first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
sonatinas posted:What? Please explain and also do not play Werewolf with them or they'll be lynching him first. Mafia = Werewolf with a gangster theme.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Sounds like a group I shouldn't play with. Got it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
If that post is not 100% pure stdh.txt, then Azran needs to be euthanized for associating with those people more than once. (It's stdh.txt) Jedit fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Jan 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Azran posted:Then the biggest idiot in the group asked me to find a way to put The Resistance inside Dungeons and Dragons 3.5. He is also the guy who enforces marxist economy theory and Game of thrones politics logic every time he DMs while also playing a player character.  for some reason the thing that jumps out to me is DM'ing while playing a character because uh, don't know much about tabletop RPGs but I'm pretty sure that's not supposed to work like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
I have a friend who very very recently has been getting into tabletop gaming; we started a Star Wars RPG campaign solely because he saw the books on my shelf and asked 'so, is this like D&D only with Jedi?' and was hooked from there. Then we had one scheduled game night where the campaign kinda fell through so we played 7 Wonders and Dominion instead. After that gaming session, he remarked to me that he really enjoyed that the games had a lot going on for every player, and that nobody was eliminated halfway through the game. Turns out that prior to this, his only real board gaming experience was stuff like monopoly. I love converting new people
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Azran posted:
The gently caress are you even playing with people like this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Azran posted:He is also the guy who enforces marxist economy theory Good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:
GM-controlled PCs are hardly unheard of, but they're very rarely well done. And I mean, it's an understandable desire; One of the main reasons I don't like DMing is because you don't get the satisfaction of things like leveling up or being a hero. A few games actually make that part of the rules like Ryuu-tama, where the GM's character is basically a magical scribe that follows the PCs around in secret and uses some cantrips to make the journey more exciting. Usually it just ends up as someone who exists to completely dominate the story, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
Lorini posted:I'm sorry but that Risk story is nearly Facebook funny. "WTF? You're supposed to actually ATTACK??! NO WAY!" 7 player Risk is more a game of Psychology. Who ever becomes the obvious first leader will be ganged up on; to win you must appear not to win. Don't take any continents bigger than South America or Australia so as not to draw attention to yourself. Always attack a single country of no importance every turn to get a card but not more than one so as not to piss anyone off. Horde cards until you are literally required to cash them in. At this point a few other people will have cashed in so you should get a nice bonus. Use this new huge army to try and take out another player immediately and take their cards; if you manage you take out at least one other player at this point you're set up well to win via chain reaction of player elimination.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:
Bad DMs will inject their Mary Sue NPC into the game and 'play' them with the group.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Jedit posted:If that post is not 100% pure stdh.txt, then Azran needs to be euthanized for associating with those people more than once. I wish it was stdh.txt. I am from Argentina so racist jokes and the like are dime a dozen. This guy in particular is 100% Argentinian, but slightly copper skinned instead of totally white. So his nickname is "slave" and "black". Not surprising at all for an Argentinian, and they are tired of me saying it is racist to the point of discrimination talk being vetoed whenever I am around since even the guy in particular is fine with it. gently caress, his girlfriend calls him negro too. It is a running joke for their group (who have known each other for way longer than I have been in it, they were class mates for year and we are all in our twenties) to always make sure "the Negro dies first". A 'negro' is any kind of criminal here, matter actual skin colour or ethnicity. A "China Man" is anyone with slanted eyes. A "Jew" is anyone who is cheap and greedy. A "gipsy" is someone who does not wash often, Etc. It annoys me a lot but that is literally every Argentinian I have met. It doesn't help either that they consider Family Guy, 9gag and Adam Sandler to be the paragons of comedy. Anyways Monopoly and Mafia sucked.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:52 |
|
|
How many copies of Cards Against Humanity does your group own?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:20
|
|