|
2-3, reduce the total destiny/story to 10 or 15, reduce any terrible statuses (grief stricken) to a set turn duration, game fixed.
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:14 |
|
|
Tippis posted:Pretty much, although there's some minor (situational) advantage to being 4 in that one person is always free to do something else than be involved in the storytelling. Even with 3, it can be a long game, and having that pause to make a quick dash for the fridge/wc/whatever can be helpful. At the same time, the pause won't be long enough to make people lose interest completely. The person to your right has to read the "reaction matrix"... something that can easily be handled by the person on your left as well if the person to your right REALLY needs to use the bathroom. 3 is really the ideal number. VVVV I'm not entirely sure that I've seen someone embrace their reputation so thoroughly. OmegaGoo fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
ETB posted:2-3, reduce the total destiny/story to 10 or 15, reduce any terrible statuses (grief stricken) to a set turn duration, game fixed.  You will never qualify for the Tales World Championship playing with ridiculous house rules. Rules as written or get the gently caress out. VVV I am a respected member of these august forums and have a highly esteemed boardgaming opinion, I will not stand for this slander 
Rutibex fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
OmegaGoo posted:VVVV I'm not entirely sure that I've seen someone embrace their reputation so thoroughly. Remember that kid in high school who was the butt of every joke and loved it anyway because it meant people were paying attention to him? He grew up and registered the username "rutibex" on the Something Awful forums.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
Jamesman posted:I like dungeon crawl-type board games. Are there any good recommendations? You're not the only one who wants another Hero Quest I've been looking for the exact same thing, and even spent time lately playing Hero Quest because, despite it's ages-8-and-up 80's gameplay, it's the only boardgame that satisfies the feeling of Adventure, of exploring an unknown dungeon and finding treasure and hidden monsters, and leveling up your character a bit, without demanding that you read a massive tome and spend half an hour creating a character just to swing an axe at an orc. Of what I've tried, Descent fails because you know the whole board, scenario rules, and victory conditions beforehand, and so it turns into a monster grinder. Super Dungeon Explore is at least upfront about being a monster grinder with attractive miniatures. MageKnight is about the most tedious, boring game I've ever played (in the fantasy-adventure regard and others), where you spend two minutes doing simple card arithmetic and then decide that you will defeat the dragon, meaning that combat has no risk - and therefore, excitement - whatsoever. I've backed Dungeon Saga for the same reason that I'll probably be picking up a copy of that Questionably Legal 25th Anniversary Hero Quest - I want something that's like Hero Quest, where there is a secret dungeon for a band of adventurers to explore, treasure and traps and monsters to find, a combat, gear, and stat system that's not braindead simple like HQ, and some semblance of narrative, with human-designed dungeons and encounters. So, pretty much a lightweight version of D&D. It's baffling that there's nothing like this out there, as most everyone I know loved Advanced/Hero/Warhammer Quest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
Thanks for the opinions, goons. Also, excuse my poorly spelled post a few pages back. I was posting on mobile at work and the auto complete kinda zorked me. The negative opinions I heard about Dead of Winter were different than some of the negative reviews I read, so it was helpful. I'll probably still pick it up eventually because I'm not sick of zombies for some reason and my wife likes them too. I'm hoping the theme will be enjoyable for her. Not to mention my sisters are horror movie nuts so they might like it too when the family gets together. Still, because of the criticisms I've heard, I'm de-prioritizing the buy for a bit. Texmo posted:MageKnight is about the most tedious, boring game I've ever played (in the fantasy-adventure regard and others), where you spend two minutes doing simple card arithmetic and then decide that you will defeat the dragon, meaning that combat has no risk - and therefore, excitement - whatsoever. I love Mage Knight but I generally play it solo. It's a great solo game because you can think all you want. I don't think I'd ever play it with more than three people, and I'd try to avoid people who over analyze. I can see where it would drag down if you have players spending a lot of time planning their moves out for optimal efficiency, especially in the end game when combats become sprawling death fests. Just to be clear, it's easy for players to SPEND that time planning in Mage Knight because the game rewards such planning and it's probably necessary for high-level play. I tend to play riskier, that's all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
What's some goon takes on Impulse? Most importantly, would it be better as a single player game?????
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
Texmo posted:MageKnight is about the most tedious, boring game I've ever played (in the fantasy-adventure regard and others), where you spend two minutes doing simple card arithmetic and then decide that you will defeat the dragon, meaning that combat has no risk - and therefore, excitement - whatsoever. So do you avoid half the adventure sites in the game and only attack in the day? You're right, playing badly does make the game tedious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
I think that the connection people have between combat and dice rolling is some kind of Stockholm syndrome esque Warhammer inspired brain damage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
Gameko posted:The negative opinions I heard about Dead of Winter were different than some of the negative reviews I read, so it was helpful. I'll probably still pick it up eventually because I'm not sick of zombies for some reason and my wife likes them too. I'm hoping the theme will be enjoyable for her. Not to mention my sisters are horror movie nuts so they might like it too when the family gets together. Still, because of the criticisms I've heard, I'm de-prioritizing the buy for a bit. Buy City of Horror instead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:I think that the connection people have between combat and dice rolling is some kind of Stockholm syndrome esque Warhammer inspired brain damage. Rolling dice and failing for no good reason is way more boring than playing an adventure game with strategy game mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:10
|
|
|
quote:[–]AsmadiGames 3 points 1 year ago Hmm, that sheds some more light on the problem. Seems like it might be a case of both the current rights owner being borderline bankrupt, and the designer not being interested in seeing it reprinted. Welp
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:I think that the connection people have between combat and dice rolling is some kind of Stockholm syndrome esque Warhammer inspired brain damage. I find it's a distinction between combat being risk-based rather than decision-based, as if it lacks an element of uncertainty, I find it entirely unexciting. It's "pick the obvious good option from those you're randomly given" instead of "choose one of your selection of fixed options to gamble on", and 'pick the good option' doesn't exactly thrill me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
We found the person who actually prefers post-decision randomness.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
Exactly. You could spend all day listing examples of combat - military or sport, where the side that should have won on paper lost. The side that had more numbers, better equipment, a better position, superior training, etc... Sometimes they just lose because ?? I like how the poster above me described it -- you can stack the odds in your favor but you can never take a certain amount of gambling out of combat. Hence the dice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:We found the person who actually prefers post-decision randomness. The Gamblander; there can be only one. .... Imagined posted:Exactly. You could spend all day listing examples of combat - military or sport, where the side that should have won on paper lost. The side that had more numbers, better equipment, a better position, superior training, etc... Sometimes they just lose because ?? I like how the poster above me described it -- you can stack the odds in your favor but you can never take a certain amount of gambling out of combat. Hence the dice. Now we must fight. Texmo fucked around with this message at 05:48 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
Ehhhh, there's a few people in this thread who are pretty into X-Wing..
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
Imagined posted:Exactly. You could spend all day listing examples of combat - military or sport, where the side that should have won on paper lost. The side that had more numbers, better equipment, a better position, superior training, etc... Sometimes they just lose because ?? I like how the poster above me described it -- you can stack the odds in your favor but you can never take a certain amount of gambling out of combat. Hence the dice. You can still do this with pre-decision randomness and luck mitigation mechanisms in your game. A simple example is when you roll useless numbers in Castles of Burgundy and don't have enough workers to change them to anything good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Ehhhh, there's a few people in this thread who are pretty into X-Wing.. X-Wing is the best game a game about moving squares around and rolling dice could possibly be, but there's no way I would play it if it didn't have TIE interceptors mounted on those squares.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
Imagined posted:Exactly. You could spend all day listing examples of combat - military or sport, where the side that should have won on paper lost. The side that had more numbers, better equipment, a better position, superior training, etc... Sometimes they just lose because ?? I like how the poster above me described it -- you can stack the odds in your favor but you can never take a certain amount of gambling out of combat. Hence the dice. You can also find a ton of examples in military/sport where a favored side lost and the other country/team just fought/played better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:You can also find a ton of examples in military/sport where a favored side lost and the other country/team just fought/played better. Not to mention more than a few occasions where one side defeated the other simply by throwing enough dice at their opponent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
Texmo posted:Not to mention more than a few occasions where one side defeated the other simply by throwing enough dice at their opponent. The Miracle in Lancaster
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
This web game is pretty fun and plays like a dressed-up 2p card game. http://terrycavanaghgames.com/grabthembytheeyes/ Give it a shot and you'll see the connection to traditional games in the play and design.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
Imagined posted:Exactly. You could spend all day listing examples of combat - military or sport, where the side that should have won on paper lost. The side that had more numbers, better equipment, a better position, superior training, etc... Sometimes they just lose because ?? I like how the poster above me described it -- you can stack the odds in your favor but you can never take a certain amount of gambling out of combat. Hence the dice. Dice can also provide a few other things games-wise to players:
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 06:48
|
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:This web game is pretty fun and plays like a dressed-up 2p card game. Is there a specific term for card drafting where the price of something is determined by its position in the market? Is it a Dutch auction or something different? There's a game here but it seems to have a runaway leader problem and it could really do with a more complicated engine building mechanism. The resolution animation takes way too long as well but that's video games for you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
Most combat in non-wargames is either: - Handled badly when it uses dice. - Is not innovative enough to come up with a combat resolution system that doesn't use dice. The second point is brought you by Bonaparte at Marengo, Napoleon's Triumph and Guns of Gettysburg.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 08:47
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:The Miracle in Lancaster A six! A six! My kingdom for a six!
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 09:24
|
|
|
But we in it shall be remembered- We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; For he to-day that rolls snake eyes with me Shall be my brother
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 10:01
|
|
|
Thank you everyone for your responses and recommendations. Unfortunately, none of them really look like they offer up the experience I am looking for. It's entirely possible I will enjoy some of the games suggested (I had looked into the D&D games before), but I was specifically looking for a game that met the criteria, and it seems like no such game exists. With one exception. Texmo posted:I've backed Dungeon Saga So now I guess I wait for this game to get a retail release and see if it still had everything in the box that it did when it was being crowdfunded. Or maybe I can come over and play your copy when you get it? Please? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 11:18
|
|
|
Jamesman posted:Thank you everyone for your responses and recommendations. Unfortunately, none of them really look like they offer up the experience I am looking for. It's entirely possible I will enjoy some of the games suggested (I had looked into the D&D games before), but I was specifically looking for a game that met the criteria, and it seems like no such game exists. I'm fighting back the bitter tears of disappointment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 12:06
|
|
|
Played Gravwell at my weekly meet last night. It was fun but I don't think its one for my collection. While there is a glimmer of strategy there in predicting what cards other people will play it was just too chaotic for my liking. Scoville was next with 5 of us playing. A lot of people on BGG say that with 4+ players it's too easy to run out of peppers, so much so that the game designer is thinking of releasing a pack of extra pepper pieces for people. We only ran out of one colour (black) in the very last round, and it didn't matter that much anyway because the guy immediately cashed his black peppers back in for a recipe. I have no idea how people are running out of peppers unless they're hoarding them the entire game or specifically harvesting to get as many peppers as possible rather than ones they actually need. All in the all the game was really enjoyable and well received. The cross-breeding/colour mixing mechanic is quite novel but not too hard to learn, and general opinion around the table was that the game felt very "complete", with no useless, extraneous mechanics and nothing that felt missing. We actually struggled to come up with any idea to expand the game, other than more recipe and auction cards. Played Roll for the Galaxy next and enjoyed it a lot more now I've had some experience of Race for the Galaxy and had a better understanding of the games mechanics. Had an excellent novelty goods points engine going on and a couple of planets/developments that allowed me to keep almost all of my dice in play throughout the game. Narrowly missed out on winning, but since I only got 20-something in my last game, I was more than happy with 41 points and second place. Finished off with Pandemic: Contagion. This was the first time I'd played it with 4 players and the first time the game ended because we ran out of cities. One player said it "wasn't what I expected at all" but still enjoyed it, and it filled the time nicely while the other two tables finished their games (one was playing Chaos in the Old World). That said I have to wonder whether there isn't so much a first player advantage as a last player disadvantage. The player who was going last each round felt that his options were severely limited because the rest of us were able to take advantage of each round's Event first, and while going last might technically make it easier for you to eradicate cities and get the special effects, once everyone's bumped up their infection rates it gets easier and easier for anyone to eradicate the cities. Personally I haven't noticed such a disadvantage, before last night I'd only ever played Contagion with 3 players and scores were always fairly close, but I'll keep on an eye on it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 12:44
|
|
|
Jamesman posted:Thank you everyone for your responses and recommendations. Unfortunately, none of them really look like they offer up the experience I am looking for. It's entirely possible I will enjoy some of the games suggested (I had looked into the D&D games before), but I was specifically looking for a game that met the criteria, and it seems like no such game exists. You know, your best bet is probably to play Descent: Journeys in the Dark 1st edition, and just not lay out the board until players open the doors connecting to them. Do you want actual random dungeon layout, or for the dungeon master player to be working from a map? Because if it's the latter, Descent 1st edition covers everything else you want pretty much exactly. Good luck finding it though, I think it's been largely discontinued. bobvonunheil fucked around with this message at 13:13 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 13:09
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:But we in it shall be remembered- If I owned a game store that would be forever painted on the front window.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 13:21
|
|
|
Reminder to guys that backed this: the pledge manager closes after tomorrow. Glad this kickstarter was brought up here, as I hadn't checked! I'm now locked in for the $100 base set, which looks pretty awesome, and the fact that they're playtesting the rules was what swung it for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 13:32
|
|
|
Jamesman posted:Thank you everyone for your responses and recommendations. Unfortunately, none of them really look like they offer up the experience I am looking for. It's entirely possible I will enjoy some of the games suggested (I had looked into the D&D games before), but I was specifically looking for a game that met the criteria, and it seems like no such game exists. I think your best option is to buy Decent, and use the pieces to play one-shot scenarios of DnD 4th Ed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 13:38
|
|
|
Jamesman posted:Thank you everyone for your responses and recommendations. Unfortunately, none of them really look like they offer up the experience I am looking for. It's entirely possible I will enjoy some of the games suggested (I had looked into the D&D games before), but I was specifically looking for a game that met the criteria, and it seems like no such game exists. You should try playing Diablo 2 Dungeons and Dragons edition. It is basically exactly what you are after (you can replace the chits with some generic fantasy minis if you want): https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/12544/dungeons-dragons-boardgame-diablo-ii-edition http://www.wizards.com/diabloii/Diablo2FastPlay.pdf 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
Texmo posted:I find it's a distinction between combat being risk-based rather than decision-based, as if it lacks an element of uncertainty, I find it entirely unexciting. This is a completely false distinction. Both types of games are asking you to do the exact thing: look at a series of options and choice the optimal one. In the case of the 'gamble', you're still going to be calculating and selecting the best option based on probability and risk vs. reward assessments. The only distinction between the two is that the gamble presents you with a chance of the optimal choice failing, and the sub-optimal choices succeeding. Now if you require the possibility of your decisions having no impact on your success or failure in order for you to have fun, then that's alright; it just means that Mage Knight is probably not the game for you. But the good news is that there is no shortage of roll-dice-to-win games on the market! Also if a game where the randomization happened pre-decision presents you with a single 'obvious good option', that's a good example of bad game design (a prime example of which are market row deckbuilders like Ascension). In other news, my yearly CSI order arrived...  I'm so freaking excited about games I'll never get to play because my primary game meetup is full of Feld-loving Vlaada-haters. If I can get just one person to learn and play Tash-Kalar with me, I'll be happy, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
Paper Kaiju posted:In other news, my yearly CSI order arrived... LOL this was my big order for the year too, exactly. Exactly. Good luck getting Tash-Kalar out there. I think it looks very solid and fun, and the abstract nature of the gameplay doesn't bother me at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
Jamesman posted:Thank you everyone for your responses and recommendations. Unfortunately, none of them really look like they offer up the experience I am looking for. It's entirely possible I will enjoy some of the games suggested (I had looked into the D&D games before), but I was specifically looking for a game that met the criteria, and it seems like no such game exists. Unless I'm missing something obvious on the kickstarter page, Dungeon Saga also has the map built before the scenario starts. And y'know it looks like yet another forgettable kickstarter game that relies on spectacle and miniatures to sell.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:14 |
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Ehhhh, there's a few people in this thread who are pretty into X-Wing.. The dice aren't the final arbiters of success, however. There are tons of ways to modify it afterwards which is what I enjoy about the game. Now if there was a way to incorporate a deck of cards you draw from and can manipulate like the old Star Wars CCG...
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 17:14
|
|
