Thinking of buying some new board games

[shang]

Putting this in its new thread to keep the Memoir-thread on-topic and to spite Dave Long some more.

Despite still having a few unopened board games in my gaming room, I'm getting a terrible urge to buy some new games again. Maybe you boardgamers here can voice your opinions about my list and potentially talk me out of spending silly amounts of money on cardboard, wood and plastic.

Here's what I've been eyeing lately:

Antike (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/19600)
A (comparatively) fast empire building/conquest game. I haven't researched this game extensively, but it's gotten some good word of mouth.

Caylus (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18602)
Caylus doesn't really stand out for me with its theme and from reading the rules, but absolutely everyone who's played it seems to recommend it to me. I guess I need to get it sooner or later just to see what the fuss is all about.

Descent (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/17226)
Dungeon crawling with marvelous bits. I'm very fond of the "one bad guy versus all other players"-mechanic, but I'm worried that the game takes too long and is badly balanced. Although games like these are more about the story and experience than balanced game mechanics, the comments on BGG make it sound like you have to do a lot of tweaking or the game will be either impossible or a cakewalk (depending on the scenario and number of players) to the adventurers. The high price will probably keep me away from this game for now.

Dungeon Twister (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12995)
I'm a sucker for fantasy themed games, especially dungeon crawls. Even though this sounds like a pretty abstract game, and it's only for two players, I probably can't help buying it.

History of the World (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/224)
Vinci is one of my favorite games, and this sounds a lot like its meatier big brother.

Meuterer (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/902)
It's dirt cheap and sounds like a fun game. As bonus, it's from the maker of Attika, which is one my favorite games of all time.

Runebound (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21523)
Another fantasy romp. There are a lot of fantasy "adventure" board games, but most of them are broken in one way or another. Runebound sounds like it would work well when purchased with a couple of expansions. I'm especially interested in the Midnight expansions, since I like that one vs. the rest thing. Unfortunately the playing options for the bad guy sound a bit too limited.

Senjutsu (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/7064)
I'm really interested in this one, but it seems impossible to find anywhere (especially in Europe). Even though I'm not a great stratego fan, the theme is appealing to me and the game mechanics sound clever and functional.

Shadows Over Camelot (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/15062)
I don't own any cooperative games myself yet, so I've been looking over some options. Shadows Over Camelot has its fans, and the traitor mechanics sound pretty interesting.

Thurn and Taxis (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21790)
Cheapish, light and quick. I've heard that this is a very fun filler game, so it's a pretty easy pick.

Warrior Knights (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/22038)
I got interested in this game when it was compared to Wallenstein. I haven't played many wargames (War of the Ring is probably the closest thing to a wargame that I own), but this one sounds like it's streamlined enough and doesn't take the whole weekend.

Phew. I don't even know where I'm going to store all these games. I think I need help. :(

[HUMBY50]

My friend and I had plenty of fun with Zombies (http://www.twilightcreationsinc.com/zombies/), really needs more than two players to bring out the best in it though, as well as a large flat area to spread the board out on.

[Gordon Cameron]

I only played Caylus once but it seems good and deep and the boardgamerati seem to esteem it.

I love the idea of Runebound -- being an old Talisman-head -- but the actual gameplay of it seems a little "meh." Decent production values etc.; I just wasn't having much fun with the actual mechanics of combat etc. And it didn't have that quirky "what the hell will happen next" factor that made Talisman fun (and also probably made it an unbalanced mess).

[Calistas]

I just had a games night were we tried Memoir '44, Ra and Evo. Mem and Ra were new to me, Evo is an old favourite.

Memoir '44 was a lot of fun. It's pretty fast playing, pretty simple but half the time you're not entirely sure your skill matters as the right card at the right time can really swing things in your direction, or the other way! That being said, it is a lot of fun and it has a lot of flavour.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12 Ra was completely confusing for the first round, but as we got to the end of the game everyone had an "ahaa!" moment and we all got it. It's an amazingly clever game with so many subtle checks and balances, so many chances to screw each other over (with a smile on your face, half the time the other guy might not know he's being done in!) and so much strategy. The theme is very abstract, but it is excellent.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/1159 Evo is a great little game of dinosaurs expanding over an island. You use the points you earn to buy upgrades to your dinosaurs - hopefully to let you generate more points. It's a fun mechanism (using your own VPs to improve your dino) but it works wonderfully and them theme is great fun!

I'm really looking forward to picking up Friedrich, http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12891. It's been described as a 'Euro Wargame' and the system sounds like it beautifully simulates the tension of movement warfare and grand strategy, yet does so without horrible tables and dice rolls, and it plays fast.

Now, I notice you don't have some classics on there. Puerto Rico, St Petersberg, Settlers of Catan are all must haves as well!

[Gorath]

Thurn und Taxis won the "Spiel des Jahres 2006" award a few weeks ago, including a free "Sell 1M units this Christmas" card. ;)

[shang]

Now, I notice you don't have some classics on there. Puerto Rico, St Petersberg, Settlers of Catan are all must haves as well!

Oh, that's just the list of games I'm thinking of buying next. :) My full list of owned games is here (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/viewcollection.php3?username=shang&own=1&startletter=ALL).

Some games (like Settlers of Catan), I've already owned in the past and sold away.

Friedrich looks interesting, though. I've added it to my ever-growing list of games to get in the future.

[Hetzer]

Putting this in its new thread to keep the Memoir-thread on-topic and to spite Dave Long some more.

Despite still having a few unopened board games in my gaming room, I'm getting a terrible urge to buy some new games again. Maybe you boardgamers here can voice your opinions about my list and potentially talk me out of spending silly amounts of money on cardboard, wood and plastic.

Here's what I've been eyeing lately:

Antike (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/19600)
A (comparatively) fast empire building/conquest game. I haven't researched this game extensively, but it's gotten some good word of mouth.

Caylus (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18602)
Caylus doesn't really stand out for me with its theme and from reading the rules, but absolutely everyone who's played it seems to recommend it to me. I guess I need to get it sooner or later just to see what the fuss is all about.

Descent (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/17226)
Dungeon crawling with marvelous bits. I'm very fond of the "one bad guy versus all other players"-mechanic, but I'm worried that the game takes too long and is badly balanced. Although games like these are more about the story and experience than balanced game mechanics, the comments on BGG make it sound like you have to do a lot of tweaking or the game will be either impossible or a cakewalk (depending on the scenario and number of players) to the adventurers. The high price will probably keep me away from this game for now.

Dungeon Twister (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12995)
I'm a sucker for fantasy themed games, especially dungeon crawls. Even though this sounds like a pretty abstract game, and it's only for two players, I probably can't help buying it.

History of the World (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/224)
Vinci is one of my favorite games, and this sounds a lot like its meatier big brother.

Meuterer (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/902)
It's dirt cheap and sounds like a fun game. As bonus, it's from the maker of Attika, which is one my favorite games of all time.

Runebound (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21523)
Another fantasy romp. There are a lot of fantasy "adventure" board games, but most of them are broken in one way or another. Runebound sounds like it would work well when purchased with a couple of expansions. I'm especially interested in the Midnight expansions, since I like that one vs. the rest thing. Unfortunately the playing options for the bad guy sound a bit too limited.

Senjutsu (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/7064)
I'm really interested in this one, but it seems impossible to find anywhere (especially in Europe). Even though I'm not a great stratego fan, the theme is appealing to me and the game mechanics sound clever and functional.

Shadows Over Camelot (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/15062)
I don't own any cooperative games myself yet, so I've been looking over some options. Shadows Over Camelot has its fans, and the traitor mechanics sound pretty interesting.

Thurn and Taxis (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21790)
Cheapish, light and quick. I've heard that this is a very fun filler game, so it's a pretty easy pick.

Warrior Knights (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/22038)
I got interested in this game when it was compared to Wallenstein. I haven't played many wargames (War of the Ring is probably the closest thing to a wargame that I own), but this one sounds like it's streamlined enough and doesn't take the whole weekend.

Phew. I don't even know where I'm going to store all these games. I think I need help. :(

Ok a few thougts on some of the games:

History of the World:
Hmmm yes it is a little like a meatier brother of vinci, but it isnt as good. History is much more luck based as vinci as you never know what civs you get.

Shadow over camelot:

The traitor thing sounds interresting but in reality isnt, you cant do much as a traitor, you can only soak good cards and wait until the end of the game where you perhaps can break the game.

Warrior knights:

Yes its a good game (at least the old games workshop ed. from the last century)...

Only thing is, you have no clear frontiers as the castles that you own are plasterd over the whole map. As i remember it was a game with much backstabbing and political manouver. If you like chaotic games thats one for you.


Runebound:

Played it on a boardgame workshop last year... As i remember it wasnt that original... It played a little like Wizards from AH. Grab, if you can, a version of talisman instead, its much better....


Of course all of the above just my 2 eurocents

[Gordon Cameron]

It played a little like Wizards from AH.

Now that was a game I rather dug, back in the day.

[LionelThompson]

I bought Dungeon Twister thinking it would be a fun dungeon romp. It sucks. It passes itself off, as you mention, as an abstract similar to chess. Very bleh and I don't think buying the expansions for it will help.

You cannot go wrong with Caylus as I've touted its wonderfulness (or is the word wonderment) in another thread.

I have Runebound, and while it is okay, I MUCH prefer Return of the Heroes. The map is better, and changable, and it just feels more like an adventure game.

Shadows over Camelot I absolutely love. The downside is that you really need at least 4 players, and preferably as close to 7 as possible to make the game fun with a potential traitor. You will need to make clear the limits on communication in the game as well as too much talking about the contents of your hand makes the game easily beatable.

Someone brought up a good point about turn order in Thurn and Taxis, and to be honest, I've only played the game twice, but I really enjoyed it and would not mind adding it to my collection.

A couple of other titles to consider that I find to be 'excellent' of recent releases are Power Grid and Blue Moon City. Power Grid is a very tight game about providing power to a network of cities on one of a variety of maps (the original game includes the US and Germany, the expansion board has France and Italy I believe). The technique used to determine turn order, in addition to the scaling of payouts ensures that the game stays close until the end, although it is hardly a luckfest.

Blue Moon City was one of the SdJ finalists and I was fortunate enough to play it several times during my last game gathering. It too includes and adjustable board, but is about building stones to a great temple.

Oh, and I recently picked up Mykerinos on a prize table which I really liked. You explore deserts and pyramids hoping to gain favor from various benefactors who provide you with special abilities, and then you use those favors at the local museum to score points. It is a majority ownership type game, but one that to me works very well.

[Ben Sones]

I love the idea of Runebound -- being an old Talisman-head -- but the actual gameplay of it seems a little "meh." Decent production values etc.; I just wasn't having much fun with the actual mechanics of combat etc. And it didn't have that quirky "what the hell will happen next" factor that made Talisman fun (and also probably made it an unbalanced mess).
I wholeheartedly do not recommend Runebound. It's terrible. It has essentially all of Talisman's flaws--few player choices that matter, mostly random movement, mostly random encounters, random combat resolution, no player interaction, lots of downtime, way too fiddley for a game that is so random, excessive playtime--and none of Talisman's character.

Additionally, it has a few flaws of its own that make it an even worse game than Talisman, as far as I'm concerned. Encounters in the game world are 100% voluntary; you have to travel to special adventure spaces (which are scattered sparsely around the board) to find them. This deprives the game of the sense of tension that Talisman has (where you might stumble across something dangerous at almost any time). The movement system features a unique mechanic... that adds nothing of value to the game. I give the designer credit for finding a way to have a "roll and move" mechanic on a nonlinear board. But the only thing it adds to the game is an element of analysis paralysis (and consequently longer playtime) as players spend way too much time trying to figure out how to best use the icons they rolled to get to where they want to go. It becomes ever more annoying when you realize that all that analysis just doesn't matter. There are no interesting movement choices to be made because nothing ever happens in normal (non-adventure) hexes. Any given combination of movement dice either gets you closer to your desired destination, or it doesn't. It's an open-map equivalent of Talisman's "right or left" movement decision, except that nothing happens in 95% of the spaces on the Runebound board. And it takes three times as long for players to decide how to move.

Worst of all, the game has terrible pacing. You have to travel to red (the toughest) adventure spaces in order to win the game, and those are all scattered on the outer edge of the board. Less difficult adventure spaces show up a little further in, and only the easiest adventures are in the middle areas of the board. This means that as the game goes on, it takes longer and longer to get to anywhere that you need to go. By the end of the game, you'll be spending many eventless turns trudging across empty countryside (once someone defeats a challenge in an adventure space, that space becomes inactive; that means that late in the game, the middle areas of the board are just so much empty space).

So that's my mini (or not-so-mini) Runebound review. Of the games on your list, I definitely recommend Caylus. It can seem a bit dry if you've just read the rules and not played, but in action it's the diametric opposite of Runebound: a tight game composed entirely of interesting decision-making.

While I haven't played them yet, I am also interested to hear feedback that anyone might have on Shadows Over Camelot and Warrior Knights. I love the concept of SOC, and I'm tempted to buy the game for the artwork alone (which is gorgeous (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/71233)).

[Jason McMaster]

You know, I've been wanting a game to play that's like Warhammer Quest or even Necromunda. I had almost every GW game released and my collection was destroyed/thrown away (man, when I realized all my Talisman stuff was gone I almost threw up), and I really am trying to build my board games up again.

Are there any comparably quest games and multi-level squad games to those two? I also miss Tyranid Attack and Space Hulk, but not as much. Is Hero's Quest any good?

[shang]

I wholeheartedly do not recommend Runebound. It's terrible. It has essentially all of Talisman's flaws--few player choices that matter, mostly random movement, mostly random encounters, random combat resolution, no player interaction, lots of downtime, way too fiddley for a game that is so random, excessive playtime--and none of Talisman's character.

Thanks. Your post definately made me reconsider getting Runebound. I guess is it's time to do what all fans of this particular board game genre are doing: make my own prototype..


I have Runebound, and while it is okay, I MUCH prefer Return of the Heroes. The map is better, and changable, and it just feels more like an adventure game.

Thanks, I hadn't noticed this game before. Looks worth reading up on.

[SlyFrog]

Runebound:

Played it on a boardgame workshop last year... As i remember it wasnt that original... It played a little like Wizards from AH. Grab, if you can, a version of talisman instead, its much better....

I disagree strongly with this. Talisman is much less interesting than Runebound in my opinion. Runebound isn't the greatest game ever, but we really enjoyed it, and basically sold Talisman once we found it.

[Jason McMaster]

Oh, anyone play the Lord of the Rings GW games? I see Necromunda is still around. Mordheim looks neat too.

[Tyjenks]

I am thinking of buying some friends that I can play boardgames with; are there friends for sale or trade at boardgamegeek?

[Odysseus]

Ben seems to be talking about Runebound 1st ed. The 2nd ed. cleared up some of those complaints, and added some optional rules for random wilderness encounters and more player interaction. Still, the game drags like hell sometimes--it ought to finish in half the time. (Edit to add: Ben's still right about most of his complaints. It's not a great design, and no retooling can change that.)

I agree that Return of the Heroes is a better pseudo-RPG. You can actually develop a strategy rather than being blown around by chance all the time.

[Jason McMaster]

I want to try Return of the Heroes, that sounds cool.

[SlyFrog]

Ben seems to be talking about Runebound 1st ed. The 2nd ed. cleared up some of those complaints, and added some optional rules for random wilderness encounters and more player interaction. Still, the game drags like hell sometimes--it ought to finish in half the time. (Edit to add: Ben's still right about most of his complaints. It's not a great design, and no retooling can change that.)

Return of the Heroes looks a bit like Candyland to me.

Play Runebound with the optional card countdown rule. It nicely resolves the play dragging issue, and adds some good tension to the game.

[SorenJohnson]

I love "History of the World"... it's the only history of the world board game I've played that actually kind of looks like the history of the world once it's done. Plus, it has a great mechanic for keeping all players in it until the very end. Plus, the rules are pretty simple. Highly underrated, in my book...

[Ben Sones]

Ben seems to be talking about Runebound 1st ed. The 2nd ed. cleared up some of those complaints, and added some optional rules for random wilderness encounters and more player interaction. Still, the game drags like hell sometimes--it ought to finish in half the time. (Edit to add: Ben's still right about most of his complaints. It's not a great design, and no retooling can change that.)
Yeah, I should have mentioned that. I do have the 1st Edition. I did download the 2nd edition rules and read through them when that version came out, however, to see how much they improved on the 1st edition's many shortcomings. My conclusion at the time was: not much. The new rules for random wilderness encounters (which the new rulebook strongly recommends using) are really clunky, involving multiple die rolls and a needlessly complex proceedure for determining what sort of card you encounter. I haven't played with these rules, but I'm guessing they make games last even longer than they did in 1st Edition, which is a step in the wrong direction. And the rest of the issues that I had with 1st edition seemed to make it into the 2nd edition intact.

I was so disappointed with Runebound, back when I picked it up, that I unearthed an old fantasy board game concept that I had worked on in the past, and started tinkering with it again. It's currently pretty close to "playable prototype" stage.

Good fantasy adventure games have always been something of a mythological beast, unfortunately. The only one that I've played that I still consider worthwhile is Magic Realm (which is an excellent game, though it has one major flaw: TOO COMPLEX. Good luck finding people who will play it with you). I've not played Return of the Heroes, though. I've seen the game in the store, but to be honest, I found the art a bit offputting (the game board, in particular, is fugly). Anyone care to elaborate on it's strengths?

[Ben Sones]

Ben seems to be talking about Runebound 1st ed. The 2nd ed. cleared up some of those complaints, and added some optional rules for random wilderness encounters and more player interaction. Still, the game drags like hell sometimes--it ought to finish in half the time. (Edit to add: Ben's still right about most of his complaints. It's not a great design, and no retooling can change that.)
Yeah, I should have mentioned that. I do have the 1st Edition. I did download the 2nd edition rules and read through them when that version came out, however, to see how much they improved on the 1st edition's many shortcomings. My conclusion at the time was: not much. The new rules for random wilderness encounters (which the new rulebook strongly recommends using) are really clunky, involving multiple die rolls and a needlessly complex proceedure for determining what sort of card you encounter. I haven't played with these rules, but I'm guessing they make games last even longer than they did in 1st Edition, which is a step in the wrong direction. And the rest of the issues that I had with 1st edition seemed to make it into the 2nd edition intact.

I was so disappointed with Runebound, back when I picked it up, that I unearthed an old fantasy board game concept that I came up with a number of years ago, and started tinkering with it again. It's currently pretty close to "playable prototype" stage.

Good fantasy adventure games have always been something of a mythological beast, unfortunately. The only one that I've played that I still consider worthwhile is Magic Realm (which is an excellent game, though it has one major flaw: TOO COMPLEX. Good luck finding people who will play it with you). I've not played Return of the Heroes, though. Anyone care to elaborate on it's strengths?

[Reldan]

Someone brought up a good point about turn order in Thurn and Taxis, and to be honest, I've only played the game twice, but I really enjoyed it and would not mind adding it to my collection.


It probably was me. Thurns and Taxi's seems like a nice, light game that has two major problems in my book:

1) Little player interaction. It's very much a 4-player game of solitaire. The most you really can do to affect other players is to complete goals before they do so you get the higher point completion bonuses and they get the lower ones. Which leads to...

2) Going first is huge. Assuming all things are equal (and they pretty much are), you get to complete stuff first, so you always get more points than the other players. There are very few goals to go after, and they are the same every game. The player going last gets screwed again and again. The game really needs some method of rotating turn order.

[Shieldwolf]

[QUOTE=LionelThompson]I bought Dungeon Twister thinking it would be a fun dungeon romp. It sucks. It passes itself off, as you mention, as an abstract similar to chess. Very bleh and I don't think buying the expansions for it will help.


YOU SIR ARE CRAZY!! DT is fantastic. It has almost no luck involved. A great game mechanic of moving the dungeon around to screw people and a stellar theme. I only own one expansion at this point and it too is great. I'm not sure that making it a 4 player game is a good idea, but I'm interested.

[Odysseus]

I've not played Return of the Heroes, though. I've seen the game in the store, but to be honest, I found the art a bit offputting (the game board, in particular, is fugly). Anyone care to elaborate on it's strengths?
The art is, in varying degrees, like Candyland and fugly.

RoTH borrows its map and movement style from Magic Realm where you move from node to node on a tile based map. The whole game has a MR-lite feel to it, in fact, and that can work against it if you think it leans too far to the -lite side.

Combat is very simple. Most critters require a single hit to defeat and it's the usual stat roll versus a target number. The number of dice you roll depends on your "experience cubes" in that stat. The target number is based on your level of skill with the stat, modified by the critter you're fighting. It's a far cry from the Runebound dicefest. It's also neat that you have two metrics happening with each stat: your training level, and your experience in the "real world" with that ability.

For most of the game you run around completing quests and fighting the things that block your path. The quests are mainly courier and escort missions like you find in MMOGs. As the game progresses, NPCs and useful places appear on the board that offer you ways to enhance your character or buy items. It's a good system, because this is where you develop your strategy for racing around the board.

At some point the Foozle appears, and his minions quickly flood the board. Now the race is to kill Foozle. Each character has a Heroic Quest, consisting of a couple of steps they must complete before they can confront the villain. I like the way Foozle appears, because it gives some time for players to recover from bad luck in the early game.

The bad guy is chosen randomly from a few different tiles, ala Arkham Horror. He's also facedown until somebody confronts him, so you don't know immediately if he's immune to Ranged or weak versus Melee or what. There is an NPC who can let you peak at the villain, but it's never a sure thing if this NPC shows up in time. I like how it all works, but sometimes it can make players way too timid--everybody powergames until they are godly, and the boss fight is a joke. Fortune follows the brave, though, and I tend to race to the finish and win more often than the munchkin players.

You fight Foozle by throwing a bunch of dice at him. Alas. His strengths and weaknesses are important if you're on the razor's edge of victory or defeat, but it's not hard to totally overwhelm him if you spent too much time on the map.

It's not a game that gives you a million options and huge decks of items and critters. It only takes a few plays before you've seen it all and done it all. You can tinker with the optional rules in various combinations, but the game can grow stale too quickly. The best way to play is with a group of players who race like their asses are on fire, rather than sluggishly roaming the map absorbing critters and quests.


PS: Also, the rule book is utter crap. Maybe they wanted to pay homage to MR's hideous 2nd ed. rulebook? Imagine if somebody took one of those spoken tutorials people are complaining about in that other thread, and turned it into a rule book--annoying dialects included. Yeah.

[SlyFrog]

Good fantasy adventure games have always been something of a mythological beast, unfortunately. The only one that I've played that I still consider worthwhile is Magic Realm (which is an excellent game, though it has one major flaw: TOO COMPLEX. Good luck finding people who will play it with you). I've not played Return of the Heroes, though. Anyone care to elaborate on it's strengths?

There is a program, RealmSpeak, that lets you play Magic Realm online and handles all the bookkeeping and other drudge work. You should check it out.

[slantz]

My 2 cents on some of the games mentioned (and not):

Runebound: I like Runebound (2nd ed.) a lot more than many of the people above seem to.

But I do definitely agree that the movement system is broken and a pointless (and uninteresting) waste of time. In fact, after only 2 games, we replaced it with a house rule replacing dice rolls with movement points (on a 1-to-1 basis) and assigning flat costs to terrain. The game moves faster and gets you to the interesting stuff faster.

I'm also a fan of adding an extra item card to each city at the beginning to give players more interesting choices from the get-go and get things moving a little faster.

One thing to note about Runebound is that it plays better with fewer people than more, because of the complete lack of interaction when it's not your turn. It's actually playable solo, and playing with 2-3 players works pretty well. More than that, and it basically becomes a spectator sport.

Dungeon Twister: I bought this only to discover that it wasn't quite what I was expecting. I was looking for an RPG-ish dungeon romp, and instead saw something that looked much more spacially oriented (somewhat in the direction of chess, as compared above.) I still haven't brought myself to try it out, but hopefully I'll still enjoy it for what it is, even if it's not what I bought it for.

World of Warcraft (the board game): Surprisingly few people talk about this game, but I think it's pretty solid. It has a lot in common with Runebound, but is more interesting, gives you more interesting decisions, and has less downtime for larger numbers of players. If you have more players (and more time), this is the clear trump to Runebound IMO. There are things it does better than any other game of its sort that I've seen, although it has its blemishes too...

The main drawbacks of WoW are 1) the two teams of players rarely interact, except in rare pvp battles. But there's still fairly little downtime, because there are so many character development options that you're almost always figuring out how to better tweak your character or what your team is going to do next turn. 2) The game is long. VERY long. Don't believe the time printed on the box, especially if you've got any 1st-time players. I think it says 2-4 hours, but a full 6-person game will likely run 8+ hours(!) 3) Not a drawback exactly, but the combat system is very unintuitive. But the upside of this is that it seems very original, and is the foundation for a wide variety of interesting combat-related abilities through talents, skills, and eq. So it's confusing to learn, but a really good system once you do.

Anyway, I think WoW is a great RPG-ish game with remarkable depth, solid balance, and great replayability. The character development sytem alone (abilities, talents, and eq) is easiliy the deepest and most interesting of any board game I've played, and plays out differently each time.

Oh, and the upcoming expansion is a card-only expansion, which will add new gameplay options, more interesting decisions, and will *greatly* expand character development options (as if it needed it...)

EDIT: Changed "intuitive" to "unintuitive" (what was intended)

[Ben Sones]

The art is, in varying degrees, like Candyland and fugly.

I wouldn't let aesthetics stop me from buying a great game. I picked up Caylus, after all, and I'd rank it pretty high on the fugy scale (though I'm hoping that Mike Doyle will finish his redesigned Caylus board (http://mdoyle.blogspot.com/) soon, and put it up for download like he did with his Puerto Rico board). That said, bad art will often push a "maybe buy" game into "no sale" territory for me.

RoTH borrows its map and movement style from Magic Realm where you move from node to node on a tile based map. The whole game has a MR-lite feel to it, in fact, and that can work against it if you think it leans too far to the -lite side.

I don't necessarily mind lite. Lots of great games are simple. What I don't like are lite games with heavy rules, which is what most fantasy adventure games boil down to, unfortunately. Magic Realm being the big exception (it's a heavy game with heavy rules).

There is a program, RealmSpeak, that lets you play Magic Realm online and handles all the bookkeeping and other drudge work. You should check it out.

Yeah, I've seen it. It's pretty neat, though once you are familiar with the rules, they aren't that hard to deal with in practice. That's one of the things I like about MR--it's generally a pretty fast-paced game, and if players know what they are doing, you can finish it in under 90 minutes.

Not that I've played in, like, years. I tried to get my wife to learn the game once, but she just laughed at me when I showed her the rulebook.

[Bill]

It's not a new game, but Survive! is a great beer and pretzels game, and easy to find on ebay, usually for about $30. The goal is to get your people off of a rapidly sinking island to safety, avoiding sharks, whales, and sea monsters on the way. It has two nifty mechanics you use to screw your opponents: the island is made of hex tiles that are randomly placed, and each turn a player removes one (dumping anyone there into the water); and the players get to move one of the sea creatures per turn.

Whoever gets the most people to safety before the island sinks wins. Very easy to learn, full of action, and it plays quickly.

[SlyFrog]

Yeah, I've seen it. It's pretty neat, though once you are familiar with the rules, they aren't that hard to deal with in practice. That's one of the things I like about MR--it's generally a pretty fast-paced game, and if players know what they are doing, you can finish it in under 90 minutes.

Not that I've played in, like, years. I tried to get my wife to learn the game once, but she just laughed at me when I showed her the rulebook.

Yes, all that also depends on how much of it you decide to play (since it is really broken into four stages of play). The rules are hard for me to remember at least (when you are talking about the full blown rules, hiring squads of minions to go take out other squads of minions, multiple party combat and ambushing, etc.), so RealmSpeak helps. There is also just a fiddiness/clumsiness factor; it's harder to knock a stack of computer counters over than a reallife pile of cardboard. :) However, the computer is not as fun as having the real game spread out in front of you.

I am fortunate in that I have played the game with my wife; a lot of fun.

[Don Quixote]

Ah, fantasy adventure games. Good times. Here's my take on them

Runebound 2nd: We've played a few times now- and finally finished a game the last time. We just seem to start playing with only a little time (an hour and a half or so), and don't finish. This last time we did. The game iself is pretty fun- I've added all the 'Class Decks' which give the game a Dungeoneer-esque glory/peril system, and a neat Diablo-esgue customizable skill tree for each player. No, the decisions may not be as 'meaningful' as Magic Realm, but there are choices to be made, and it actually feels like a high-fantasy adventure. Always play with the 'soft knockouts' and 'faster leveling' rules from the rulebook, though. And if you can, pick up the class decks- they definately add a lot more interaction and flavor to the game.

Magic Realm: Whoa. I built a copy of this from scratch earlier this year. Endless hours cutting counters, redesigning cards, binding tomes of rules. I think I can honestly say that I have one of the nicest editions of this game in existence (but for a few not-quite-centered counter backs). We played it once. Whoa. I thought that reading 'Magic Realm in Plain English' thouroughly and a skim or two of 3rd ed would prepare me for the game. You can read about my session somewhere on the 'geek, or ask our esteemed Mr. Au- he was there. It was a nightmare. Since then, I've played Realmspeak a whole bunch and I pretty thouroughly understand the mechanics, if not neccesarily the deep strategies yet. I hope to get it back to the table soon- seems like our current group might be willing to give it another go. I still feel like it's overly complex and too cumbersome for it's own good, but would like to try some things...

Warhammer Quest: I just finished scratch-building a copy of this, too. I got around the 'no figures' thing by building it to the scale of all the HeroScape minis I have around, supplimented with a bunch of dirt-cheap common pre-painted D&D miniatures. We've played once, and it was great fun. Sure, lots and lots of random dice rolls, but it is fun, and there were so many 'oh, shit!' moments, we all loved it. We were slaughtered, too. Any co-op game that can keep the players asking for seconds immediatly after getting their assed kicked soundly is OK in my book.

[Calistas]

*sigh* - I bought Caylus today. Three games in a week. I've got to stop!

[shang]

*sigh* - I bought Caylus today. Three games in a week. I've got to stop!

Let me know how you like it after you get a chance to try it out. And don't feel bad about buying three games, my current order to milan-spiele is: Caylus, Meuterer, Antike, Warrior Knights, Dungeon Twister and Ra. ;) Still mulling over Runebound, though (oh, and I also bought Betrayal at the House on the Hill the other day).

[Jason McMaster]

I'm thinking about Dungeon Twister and the WoW game since my wife thinks it looks neat.

[Taranis]

WOW, Board Games are the hot topic on Quarter to 3....lol

I have another question for you guys has anyone played (Lock and load: Band of Heroes)? http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18460

It looks to be similar to Squad Leader, but not as tedious as ASL and might be a good compromise between the two. I know that LL:BOH is not made by the same company but it seems to be the spiritual successor to Squad Leader. I'm I way off base?

T
a
r
anis.....

[Calistas]

I've heard good things about WOW too. It manages to capture the feel of the game and also gives the player lots of interesting decisions. The size and cost and time of the thing is keeping me away, just as well a mate owns it!

[adamw]

WOW, Board Games are the hot topic on Quarter to 3....lol

Ah! The first step of my master plan (http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showthread.php?t=27940) is completed.

You know, it's days like this that make me wish my board handle was Foozle.

[adamw]

Despite still having a few unopened board games in my gaming room, I'm getting a terrible urge to buy some new games again.

GenCon (http://www.gencon.com) begins in just 5 days. I'm there with a huge bag of gold and nothing to do with it. "Ah, sorry, Mr. Vendor? You say you have some suggestions? Why, whatever could you mean...."

Antike (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/19600)
A (comparatively) fast empire building/conquest game. I haven't researched this game extensively, but it's gotten some good word of mouth.

It's funny you should mention this game because I've been looking closely at it too. Have you checked out Mare Nostrum (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/3931)? Or maybe Tempus (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/17161)? Of course, it's on a slow boat from China - literally! I mean, I ordered this game from Thought Hammer in December and it's been delayed until... well, until now. Eventually, I canceled my order. If it's at GenCon (and it very likely will be), I'm getting one. I need it.

Caylus (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18602)
Caylus doesn't really stand out for me with its theme and from reading the rules, but absolutely everyone who's played it seems to recommend it to me. I guess I need to get it sooner or later just to see what the fuss is all about.

If you love board games, you need to get this one. I have it and love it (but I still don't know exactly why). And Powergrid (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/2651) because, yes, it is all that and a bag of chips. Love that one too.

Descent (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/17226)
Dungeon crawling with marvelous bits. I'm very fond of the "one bad guy versus all other players"-mechanic, but I'm worried that the game takes too long and is badly balanced. Although games like these are more about the story and experience than balanced game mechanics, the comments on BGG make it sound like you have to do a lot of tweaking or the game will be either impossible or a cakewalk (depending on the scenario and number of players) to the adventurers. The high price will probably keep me away from this game for now.

You know, I was slobbering over this puppy at the last GenCon. I walked by the stack of exclusives several times a day, eyeing it like a hungry hyena. And like you, the price tag kept me away. You can get it on-line for quite a bit less - around $55 bucks (plus $3,000 bucks shipping because of its six ton weight). Anyhow, I *have* played it a few times (a bud has a copy) and really, truly like it. Balance? Who cares! It's nothing but a dungeon romp, pure and simple. It's not like Dungeon Quest (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/472) where the entire point is dying. Yes, yes, takes half the night to finish - 5 hours minimum I think. Some say you can play it in less time, but it hasn't happened with me. The scenarios are sweet, throwing in cursed swords and a princess to rescue and the like. The combat system is dicey (whee!), but I like it too because, well, it oozes theme from top to bottom. So I might just get this at the 'Con. And there's an expansion too. Yeah. Expansions. Yum!

Dungeon Twister (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12995)
I'm a sucker for fantasy themed games, especially dungeon crawls. Even though this sounds like a pretty abstract game, and it's only for two players, I probably can't help buying it.

It's really quite fun for two. And apparently there's a 3-4 player expansion out now - which apparently you can apparently play with 1-2 by itself - apparently. I don't play much because I don't often find myself with only one other person to play.

This is a good place to plug some of my work. Check out my blog page where I've compiled a list of dungeon crawl board games (http://crosscutgames.com/blog/fantasy-board-games/) you'll find nowhere else - not even in a Geek List. It's all research for my game. I'm wanting to create a page for each of them - and will as time goes by. For now, it's just a bunch of links back to the 'Geek. But it's grist for the fantasy game mill.

Runebound (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21523)
Another fantasy romp. There are a lot of fantasy "adventure" board games, but most of them are broken in one way or another. Runebound sounds like it would work well when purchased with a couple of expansions. I'm especially interested in the Midnight expansions, since I like that one vs. the rest thing. Unfortunately the playing options for the bad guy sound a bit too limited.

I own and have played this game a dozen times or so. I rather like it and accept it for what it is. Everyone has said what needs to be said about this one. But there is one thing worth mentioning: the character card decks. This adds alot to the game in my estimation. You can *play* cards against other players - hence adding to player interaction. You can build up your character - it's akin to MtG where you come with a deck of cards. Sure, this adds to the cost of the game, but... .you know, what everyone else said. It needs something to make it sizzle.

Shadows Over Camelot (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/15062)
I don't own any cooperative games myself yet, so I've been looking over some options. Shadows Over Camelot has its fans, and the traitor mechanics sound pretty interesting.

It's a beautiful game to look at no doubt. But this games has some flaws. With a full complement of players (what is it - seven?) you can easily beat this game each and every single time. Conversely, with three players, you hardly ever do. So the sweet spot is 4-5. But after they've played a few times, you can also beat this game. And after that, well, you're done. Game over. You've seen it all and you've "figured it out."

Warrior Knights (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/22038)
I got interested in this game when it was compared to Wallenstein. I haven't played many wargames (War of the Ring is probably the closest thing to a wargame that I own), but this one sounds like it's streamlined enough and doesn't take the whole weekend.

I'm playing this one at GenCon. I've played the old Games Workshop version and have some fond memories. It's kinda fiddly as I recall. We'll see.

[SlyFrog]

WOW, Board Games are the hot topic on Quarter to 3....lol

I have another question for you guys has anyone played (Lock and load: Band of Heroes)? http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18460

It looks to be similar to Squad Leader, but not as tedious as ASL and might be a good compromise between the two. I know that LL:BOH is not made by the same company but it seems to be the spiritual successor to Squad Leader. I'm I way off base?

If you are interested in that sort of thing, also consider Combat Commander which should be coming out fairly soon.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21050

[Taranis]

If you are interested in that sort of thing, also consider Combat Commander which should be coming out fairly soon.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21050
Thanks for the tip!

Yeah this is my sort of game, I really like Historical wargames. Does that make me a Geek or a Nerd? I leaning towards Nerd because of the historical emphases.

T
a
r
anis.....

[Jason Lutes]

Quixote's right about the addition of the character decks and optional rules to Runebound -- don't leave Tamalir without 'em! By and large, though, I do agree with Ben Sones -- the game (either edition) has real problems. The movement system is like a knife in the eye of the gods of game design, and all of the other points Ben makes are spot on. It's one of those games that depends on the energy of the group to succeed, otherwise it goes over like a lead balloon.

Here's the deal on the Runebound/Talisman comparison: they're both badly-designed games that can be fun if you have the right attitude and a lot of patience. But they're still badly-designed games.

A lot of people like Duel of Ages (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/6050), and it looks pretty tempting, but the super Photoshoppy artwork is too eye-goungingly awful for me to justify the expense.

[shang]

GenCon (http://www.gencon.com) begins in just 5 days. I'm there with a huge bag of gold and nothing to do with it. "Ah, sorry, Mr. Vendor? You say you have some suggestions? Why, whatever could you mean...."

In Finland, we'll have the RPGCon next weekend (which also contains board games). I'm hoping to test most of the games on my list there, before sending in my order.


It's funny you should mention this game because I've been looking closely at it too. Have you checked out Mare Nostrum (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/3931)? Or maybe Tempus (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/17161)? Of course, it's on a slow boat from China - literally! I mean, I ordered this game from Thought Hammer in December and it's been delayed until... well, until now. Eventually, I canceled my order. If it's at GenCon (and it very likely will be), I'm getting one. I need it.

I've been waiting for Tempus for some time, and it should be playable in the RPGCon here too. Mare Nostrum was up on my list some time ago too, but some perceived flaw (I don't actually remember what it was anymore) made me decide I need to try it before buying.


If you love board games, you need to get this one. I have it and love it (but I still don't know exactly why). And Powergrid (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/2651) because, yes, it is all that and a bag of chips. Love that one too.

There's so much praise for Caylus that, yeah, that's already decided. I own Powergrid already, but unfortunately haven't had the chance to play it more than a couple of times.


I'm playing this one at GenCon. I've played the old Games Workshop version and have some fond memories. It's kinda fiddly as I recall. We'll see.

Based on what I've read, the new version of Warrior Kings should be much less fiddly and faster to play. A friend of mine got to play it and he thinks it's great. Hopefully I'll get to play this one at the con too.

[Lorini]

Mare Nostrum has some balance problems, namely it's nearly impossible for the Greeks to win. Apparently the expansion fixes this, but I haven't played with the expansion.

I've played Thurn and Taxis more than 10 times and have not seen a first player problem. Try playing with different people. It would be pretty amazing for Thurn and Taxis to get the German Game of the Year award (the most prestigious award in eurogaming) with such a glaring flaw.

I will have by next week Tempus, Canal Mania, and Metromania. I should be able to have a report on them after the 12th (when I get to play them).

Lorini

[LionelThompson]

I think I am the only person on the planet who does not like it, but I really did not care for Tempus. In all fairness, I have only played it once, but I have no desire to try it again. The technology advancements are handled poorly IMHO as is the game of conquer which is far too luck dependent with the cards.

[McCrank]

Jeah, boardgames are the shit... I moved to playing them primarily a couple of years back, much more fufilling and interactive gaming expieriences with friends than videogames, but maybe Wii will change that :)

-Chris

[SlyFrog]

A lot of people like Duel of Ages (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/6050), and it looks pretty tempting, but the super Photoshoppy artwork is too eye-goungingly awful for me to justify the expense.

And with this, I have now come to the full realization that I have inverse appreciation of art from the bulk of society. I prefer EQ2 to WoW, I really like the overall look of Duel of Ages.

I guess I'll need to go buy some velvet Elvises and dogs playing poker and give up any illusion of taste right now. :)

[Aeek]

Antike (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/19600)
Just got this and had a 2 player game = 2 countries each, win by country.
The wheel works well, often 10s/turn and we were inexperienced.
Lengthy maneuver turns were rare. Little down time.

History of the World (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/224)
Reasonably long and usually boils down to who gets a good country in the last round. The United States is really bad - Monroe Doctrine. Lots of down time.


Tempus (http://boardgamegeek.com/game/17161)
Another fast empire game that sounds interesting.

[Don Quixote]

Hey- with the talk of fantasy adventure games floating around, I realised I forgot to ask- has anyone played Hunting Party (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18975)? The reviews on BGG make is seem like something I would like, and a copy keeps staring at me when I go into Gary's Games.

Has anyone here played it? People say that it's like a cross between a fantasy adventure game and Clue, which sounds pretty cool (though I think I would replace Clue with Mystery of The Abby, because of the supposed chaos involved). Good for three players, too- an under-represented number.

[McCrank]

Just to keep the chit-chat up, I played Java for the first time today with some buddies I had over. I loved Mexica and Tikal, which are the other two in the infamous "mask" trilogy from Kramer and Keisling, however I just plain hated this game! By the time the game ended, everyone was just dying from boredom, game is wrought with way too much analysis paralysis. Wore out it's welcome by at least a hour.

[Calistas]

Played Caylus yesterday, which is an excellent 'heavy' Euro game. There are many, many interesting decisions to make throughout your turn and it's quite easy to be overwhelmed with options! Really teaches you to focus on your goals. Anyway, highly recommended.

[SlyFrog]

We played Carcasonne and Tigris and Euphrats, both of which we enjoyed. Going to play the Settlers of Catan card game today, next up will probably be Ticket to Ride. Recently played Nexus Ops, Wilderness War, and Doom (with expansion). I'd mention that we also played Space Hulk, which is unfortunately long out of print.

[Dave Long]

Carcassonne rocks. I've got the kids playing it and they really enjoy it. My wife digs it too, but she's still getting caught out by farming at the end of the game.

[dogbert]

So, Antike or Tempus?

[SlyFrog]

Carcassonne rocks. I've got the kids playing it and they really enjoy it. My wife digs it too, but she's still getting caught out by farming at the end of the game.

We're the opposite. My wife was one of those freaks who grew up in a household that did logic puzzles, cryptograms, shit like that instead of watching television. So I, who apparently have no spacial recognition or plotting skill whatsoever, and always radically surprised when the game ends and she somehow has managed to win pretty much every city with farmers.

[Jasper]

So, Antike or Tempus?
Ooh! Tempus is out?

[dogbert]

Yep. The big online retailers have it in stock.

[SlyFrog]

The other issue I've discovered is that I either have too many games, or I have no memory (I'm sadly leaning more and more to the latter).

Does anyone else have the problem that they have to refresh on the rules for 20 minutes (and then it still feels like a new game) when they take something down from the shelf? It's not like I'd need help remembering how to play Monopoly, but I know if I grabbed Battle Line, Citadels, Blue Moon, or whatever, that I'd never be able to play without reskimming the rules.

It unfortunately cuts into the spontaneity of playing "lighter" games.

[Jason Lutes]

The other issue I've discovered is that I either have too many games, or I have no memory (I'm sadly leaning more and more to the latter).

Does anyone else have the problem that they have to refresh on the rules for 20 minutes (and then it still feels like a new game) when they take something down from the shelf? It's not like I'd need help remembering how to play Monopoly, but I know if I grabbed Battle Line, Citadels, Blue Moon, or whatever, that I'd never be able to play without reskimming the rules.

It unfortunately cuts into the spontaneity of playing "lighter" games.
I'm horrible at remembering rules, and almost always need to refresh my memory before starting a given session. What's worse, though, is plowing in without fully re-grokking, then finding out halfway through that you were ignoring some key issues. I've done that more times than I'd like to think about.

[Andrew Mayer]

I'm pretty good at remembering the rules pretty quickly. But I tend to memorize by strategies more than the rules themselves, and that keeps you from missing things for too long.

"Why can't I do this anymore? Oh, damn, that's right..."

[Kadath]

If you can find it, Junta by West End Games is the most fun board game I have ever played.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junta_(game)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/242


Sam

[Calistas]

It's quite hard to find is Junta, but it is well regarded! Like Kingmaker.

[Toddy]

I wholeheartedly do not recommend Runebound. It's terrible. It has essentially all of Talisman's flaws--few player choices that matter, mostly random movement, mostly random encounters, random combat resolution, no player interaction, lots of downtime, way too fiddley for a game that is so random, excessive playtime--and none of Talisman's character.

Additionally, it has a few flaws of its own that make it an even worse game than Talisman, as far as I'm concerned. Encounters in the game world are 100% voluntary; you have to travel to special adventure spaces (which are scattered sparsely around the board) to find them. This deprives the game of the sense of tension that Talisman has (where you might stumble across something dangerous at almost any time). The movement system features a unique mechanic... that adds nothing of value to the game. I give the designer credit for finding a way to have a "roll and move" mechanic on a nonlinear board. But the only thing it adds to the game is an element of analysis paralysis (and consequently longer playtime) as players spend way too much time trying to figure out how to best use the icons they rolled to get to where they want to go. It becomes ever more annoying when you realize that all that analysis just doesn't matter. There are no interesting movement choices to be made because nothing ever happens in normal (non-adventure) hexes. Any given combination of movement dice either gets you closer to your desired destination, or it doesn't. It's an open-map equivalent of Talisman's "right or left" movement decision, except that nothing happens in 95% of the spaces on the Runebound board. And it takes three times as long for players to decide how to move.

Worst of all, the game has terrible pacing. You have to travel to red (the toughest) adventure spaces in order to win the game, and those are all scattered on the outer edge of the board. Less difficult adventure spaces show up a little further in, and only the easiest adventures are in the middle areas of the board. This means that as the game goes on, it takes longer and longer to get to anywhere that you need to go. By the end of the game, you'll be spending many eventless turns trudging across empty countryside (once someone defeats a challenge in an adventure space, that space becomes inactive; that means that late in the game, the middle areas of the board are just so much empty space).

So that's my mini (or not-so-mini) Runebound review. Of the games on your list, I definitely recommend Caylus. It can seem a bit dry if you've just read the rules and not played, but in action it's the diametric opposite of Runebound: a tight game composed entirely of interesting decision-making.


Er, have you played Runebound that much? A lot of the flaws you cite really don't exist once you learn the cards. Well, IMHO, anyways:

Story/Theme: A story nicely develops through the card draws, from Green through Blue. For example, you can draw the dragon summoning event, and then hit a bunch of Blue dragon cards. Then there's all the Vorakesh minions, events like doom at the crossroads, etc. I find the story and land really well developed in Runebound, far, far more sensible and deeper than Talisman.

Combat: It ain't random. Sure, there are die rolls, but all based on skills, and almost everything can be buffed as you level-up and buy items. I love the three-phased combat system, as to me it's a great distillation of RPG combat.

Movement: Okay, this one doesn't make sense to me at all. The dice can be read in seconds. Sure, it's not instant, like it would be with rolling a numbered die, but this seems more realistic and gives the impression of actually making decisions while exploring, encountering obstacles, etc.

Yeah, you can get stuck on the board. I just played a game a few hours ago where a friend of mine got stuck in the mountains to the south. But there are many, many ways around this if you play smartly. There are a pile of cards that boost movement, along with a rune that allows for teleportation all over the game board with a die roll test. After you've played the game a few times, you realize that these cards are out there. Also, you realize that you need to get the hell out of the south right away. Most of the best encounters and terrain are in the north, along with five or six Reds.

Randomness: I agree that Runebound is very measured. But what do you want? Wouldn't surprise encounters be too random? I'll take set encounter spaces over "You're dead!" surprises any day. And Talisman is way, way too random in that regard.

[Toddy]

Oh, and I don't think the time complaint is totally valid, either. Once you know the game, you can get through games reasonably quickly. I've been playing two- and three-player games the past few weeks that usually clock around two-two-and-a-half hours on the dot. First few games way back when were crazy long, though, as we learned the rules, dice, and cards.

Also, I don't think you can fairly call Runebound badly designed. FFG made design decisions based on making a game that would be an upgrade of Talisman, for people who didn't want to pay $100+ for the OOP game on eBay. It wasn't trying to make a completely new adventure/RPG-styled board game. Just because you find flaws, etc., doesn't mean that the game itself was poorly designed. I've noticed some rule issues, but basically, I think Runebound is pretty much exactly what the devs intended it to be.

[Hanzii]

Where can one buy some friends that like to play games?

I have some of the games mentioned and would like the others... but I don't buy them, because they would just sit unplayed in my cupboard with all the other games.
It seems that while growing up, moving to the city and having kids I misplaced my rl gamerfriends along the way. My family somewhat likes to play, but - and there's no nice way to put it - are no match for me, so any logical game requiring strategy like Settlers of Catan ends with me winning and them suggesting yet another round of Trivial Pursuit...

[shang]

It's quite hard to find is Junta, but it is well regarded! Like Kingmaker.

Junta was just recently reprinted, so it shouldn't be that hard to find anymore.

[Calistas]

True Shang, not out here yet :)

Hanzi, drop an ad in at your local hobby shop or find people on BoardGameGeek.com that are local. Thats what I did and I have a regular group of 4-8 potential players now, between collects of the net and RL friends.

[Hanzii]

I'm wary about that suggestion.
I used to work in a local hobby shop and knows what kind of people come there...

I picked up two members for a D&D group while working there. One was a nice guy I could have picked as a friend anywhere while the other turned out to be the kliché loner geek that tried rules lawyering every session and managed to scare away the two female members of the group. I definately need a stronger vetting process for that to work again.

Junta? I've played that soo much, but fon't own the game. I'll buy it, just to own it.

Which was the best version of Cosmic Encounters released and is it avaliable anywhere? I loved that game but it's been a while.

[Calistas]

Hehe yeah that could make you gunshy Hanzii! I have been quite lucky really. I specify 'gamers in their 20s, 30s only please' ..to try and weed out the fruity dumb kids.

[Anders Hallin]

Oh great, then you get the people who manage to get into their 30s and still don't have friends!

[Ben Sones]

Er, have you played Runebound that much?
I swear to god, this is my #1 hot button pet peeve on this forum. Disagree with someone's opinion of a game? Imply that they haven't really played it.

Story/Theme: A story nicely develops through the card draws, from Green through Blue. For example, you can draw the dragon summoning event, and then hit a bunch of Blue dragon cards. Then there's all the Vorakesh minions, events like doom at the crossroads, etc. I find the story and land really well developed in Runebound, far, far more sensible and deeper than Talisman.
This is obviously going to be pointless to argue, since it largely boils down to personal taste. I gave a more specific explanation for why I think Runebound falls thematically flat for me, despite the fact that it has (as I also pointed out) more of a story than either Talisman or Magic Realm. My theory is that story isn't all that important in a board game, or at least far less important than atmosphere, which Runebound loses big points on thanks to its generically ugly board. It does better with the cards, although I think a lot of the card art is also pretty ugly.

Combat: It ain't random. Sure, there are die rolls, but all based on skills, and almost everything can be buffed as you level-up and buy items. I love the three-phased combat system, as to me it's a great distillation of RPG combat.
Buffing up your skills isn't a part of combat, though I'll grant you that there are definitely decisions to be made there (probably some of the most interesting decisions you'll make in the game, actually). I find the three-phased combat system pointlessly complex, sort of like the "Strength or Skill" combat system in Talisman that it is obviously trying to improve on. In theory, it gives the player a tactical choice to make in combat (attack with ranged, melee, or magic), but in practice there is almost always one choice that is clearly better than the others, based on how your character is buffed out. It does improve on Talisman a little, because sometimes you'll have to choose between attacking with a high likelyhood of success but low damage, or with a low likelihood of success but high damage. But the system is also considerably more fiddley than Talisman's, so I consider it sort of a wash.

Movement: Okay, this one doesn't make sense to me at all. The dice can be read in seconds. Sure, it's not instant, like it would be with rolling a numbered die, but this seems more realistic and gives the impression of actually making decisions while exploring, encountering obstacles, etc.
To each his own, I guess. I hate the movement mechanic in Runebound. Studying a random outcome to try to find the optimum application doesn't really constitute a "decision" in my book.

Randomness: I agree that Runebound is very measured. But what do you want? Wouldn't surprise encounters be too random? I'll take set encounter spaces over "You're dead!" surprises any day. And Talisman is way, way too random in that regard.
I'll agree that this is the toughest design challenge that this sort of game faces, and that Talisman encounters are far too arbitrary. But Runebound "solves" the problem by not even trying. What I want, ideally, is a system where you can gauge risk in a general sense (i.e. you know what you could encounter in a given area of the board), but don't know what you will encounter specifically, if anything. Magic Realm does this, though it has other design issues (namely, being so horrifically complex that it's impossible to get people to play it). Travelling around the Runebound board is dishwater dull (unless you like the movement mechanic, I guess, which I don't), and I think that's both a design flaw and a thematic shortcoming.

Oh, and I don't think the time complaint is totally valid, either. Once you know the game, you can get through games reasonably quickly. I've been playing two- and three-player games the past few weeks that usually clock around two-two-and-a-half hours on the dot.
I think even that is too long for this particular game, but maybe that's just me. If I'm going to put more than 60-90 minutes into a game, it needs to have a lot more strategic meat than Runebound has.

Also, I don't think you can fairly call Runebound badly designed. FFG made design decisions based on making a game that would be an upgrade of Talisman, for people who didn't want to pay $100+ for the OOP game on eBay. It wasn't trying to make a completely new adventure/RPG-styled board game. Just because you find flaws, etc., doesn't mean that the game itself was poorly designed. I've noticed some rule issues, but basically, I think Runebound is pretty much exactly what the devs intended it to be.
By that metric, you can't fairly call any game badly designed.

[Jason Lutes]

Agreed with Ben on all points. It's not a total disaster, but the game's like a C+ for me. The only reason I keep playing is for that adventure game fix. And no offense, Toddy, but you're off your nut trying to defendRunebound's movement system. It almost couldn't be worse.

[Odysseus]

Which was the best version of Cosmic Encounters released and is it avaliable anywhere? I loved that game but it's been a while.

Mayfair version, IMHO. Usually there's 1 or 2 being sold on eBay. The current auction is up to $125, though.

I've heard the Hasbro/Avalon Hill version is okay, if a bit over-simplified, and it's available at much lower prices.

[Chris Woods]

About Descent:

We have played this a few times now and are really enjoying it. The tactical combat is actually really meaty and the mechanics are set up such that the hero's have to try to press through the dungeon fast or lose to the Overlord completely by time. It's been really fun.

That said, there are small scaling issues. Specifically with 2 or 3 players (2 heroes) you basically need to drop the Overlord's card draw down to one card/turn or the Overlord will wipe the party 100% of the time. With 5 players you need to up the Overlords draw to 3 or the players will waltz through the dungeon. Finally, the players shouldn't be able to buy treasures from a chest they haven't found yet.

Those are honestly really small changes, though, and the game itself is very enjoyable. There isn't as much of an "experience" mechanic (read: None at all) as I would have preferred, but I imagine that's to keep the game moving. The rules for the players are really simple so it's easy to teach people how to be a PC (the rules for the overlord are much more complex from a boardgame standpoint) and it's interesting how the Heroes are playing an RPG while the Overlord is essentially playing a wargame. There are already many scenarios out from fans combined with the 9 shipping with the game to ensure a lot of replayability, and the number of unique heroes (20?) plus the fact you get random skills for your hero make the party side of things always feel very, very new.

All in all, the game is really fun but takes some time (expect 3 hours) to play a scenario through.

Chris Woods

[Lorini]

To the person who is looking for gamer friends--it would help if you told us your real location, this way in case you were in the same area someone else was, you could hook up! I knew that TomChick is in the LA area, so I told him about the local Gamesday and I'm ACTUALLY GOING TO MEET TOMCHICK IN PERSON!!! How cool is that? :) :)

Lorini

[Andrew Mayer]

TI'm ACTUALLY GOING TO MEET TOMCHICK IN PERSON!!! How cool is that? :) :)

Lorini

What's the scale? On a 1-10 I'd give it a 4.5 with your bitter ex as a one, and Joss Whedon as 10.

[slantz]

Agreed with Ben on all points. It's not a total disaster, but the game's like a C+ for me. The only reason I keep playing is for that adventure game fix. And no offense, Toddy, but you're off your nut trying to defendRunebound's movement system. It almost couldn't be worse.
Well, it does have one minor positive aspect: It provides a basis for various abilities in the game -- stuff like "reroll a movement die" and what-not.

Not that it justifies it. As I posted earlier, we have a house rule totally replacing the movement system, but even that is a pain in the ass because some of the class decks I picked up have cards that center around the built-in movement system...

[Alan Au]

What's the scale? On a 1-10 I'd give it a 4.5 with your bitter ex as a one, and Joss Whedon as 10.What happens if Joss Whedon is your bitter ex?

- Alan

[Jasper]

Er, have you played Runebound that much?
I can't speak for Ben, but I've played the game a bunch, and his remarks match my experience and sound like he's played the game a fair bit. Sure, the movement system gets a bit better after you've used it a while, and sure it's better to play with the optional rules/expansion/2nd edition, but even then the game leaves me cold. I wanted to like it, but in the end felt it was too difficult to fix, as it's fiddly and the power curve ramps so sharply it's impossible to balance the difficulty.

On the other hand, it's not like the other adventure board games I've played are much better. :-/

[Jasper]

About Descent:

We have played this a few times now and are really enjoying it. The tactical combat is actually really meaty and the mechanics are set up such that the hero's have to try to press through the dungeon fast or lose to the Overlord completely by time. It's been really fun.
I've been eyeing this one for some time, but the price has put me off and I've wanted to hear more word of mouth.

Out of curiousity, which other adventure boardgames do you like?

[LionelThompson]

Where can one buy some friends that like to play games?

I have some of the games mentioned and would like the others... but I don't buy them, because they would just sit unplayed in my cupboard with all the other games.
It seems that while growing up, moving to the city and having kids I misplaced my rl gamerfriends along the way. My family somewhat likes to play, but - and there's no nice way to put it - are no match for me, so any logical game requiring strategy like Settlers of Catan ends with me winning and them suggesting yet another round of Trivial Pursuit...

There's a Yahoo group, 'spielfrieks' that is made up of game designers and fans. If you really are looking for a group to join, you could post in there the city you are in and you may have some luck. Likewise, if you happen to live in Atlanta I could come up with a few groups including our semi-annual Gamefest coming up this weekend: www.atlantagamefest.com

[TomChick]

What's the scale? On a 1-10 I'd give it a 4.5 with your bitter ex as a one, and Joss Whedon as 10.

A 4.5? That's like a 7.3 on Gamespot, or an 8.2 at IGN. Ouch.

Was it because I met you at an E3 event where people clump up and don't really get to talk to each other? Because IIRC, you were at the cool kids' table.

But as Lorini mentioned, the Internet is a great resource for finding fellow boardgamers, even if you do have to deal with the occasional socially ill-at-ease man-child.

I remember in the 90s when I was so deeply into CCGs that I was spending lots of money buying the frickin' things, lots of time building decks and arranging them, but very little time actually playing. So I went online, poked around, and eventually fell in with a bunch of dudes who played Jyhad every weekend. Turns out they all knew each other from the same church group and would alternate playing at each other's houses after putting wives/kids to bed. I sucked at the game because I didn't buy nearly as many cards as them, plus I didn't really know any of them personally, so when the games ground to a halt so they could chat about whatnot, I was left sort of twiddling my thumbs waiting on someone to shut up and take his goddamn turn already.

I lasted about a month before I just went back to the buying and arranging.

Luckily, a bunch of the guys at Shoot Club have been swayed over to boardgames this summer, so I have something to do with all the boardgames I've bought beside just wistfully re-reading the rules.

-Tom

[awdougherty]

Luckily, a bunch of the guys at Shoot Club have been swayed over to boardgames this summer, so I have something to do with all the boardgames I've bought beside just wistfully re-reading the rules.

-Tom

Glad to know I'm not the only one who does this. I have a bunch of games but the main guys I play with have moved further and further away geographically. But man, do I know the rules to a few games pretty well (not sure how they actually play though).

[adamw]

Glad to know I'm not the only one who does this. I have a bunch of games but the main guys I play with have moved further and further away geographically. But man, do I know the rules to a few games pretty well (not sure how they actually play though).

You have to give this some time. My gamer friends also moved or became disinterested. But here in the last few years, I found out a guy down the street (I mean - literally down the street!) loves board games almost as much as me (because I've never met a soul IRL who enjoys board games as much as I). He had a bud who wanted to play and I found another fellow at work and well, there you go. Four players. Bingo. We play every other week. Marvelous. I'm gaming again!

My only problem is time limits now. We can only play a 2 hour game (yeah, after the kids go to bed). It kinda limits us a bit, but limits also push your creativity in nice directions.

So. Back to adventure board games. I'm going to maybe pick up Return of the Heroes (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/8170) and maybe Hunting Party (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18975) at GenCon. And just in general keep my eyes open for unexpected fantasy adventure games and the like. There's one I vaguely remember, but can't find on the 'Geek. I'm still looking. I think it came out not too long ago. What was that name? Dang.

[dogbert]

On the 'I need people to game with' front - if anyone in San Francisco wants to game, drop me a PM. Always interested in playing some boardgames with someone new.

[TomChick]

Anyone in the Los Angeles area should come out to the Gamesday event on August 19th at the Burbank Moose Lodge (http://www.google.com/maps?hl=en&hs=fzc&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=moose+lodge&near=Burbank,+CA&cid=0,0,15040688254127226134&ll=34.180854,-118.332172&spn=0,.02&sa=X&oi=local&ct=image).

I've never been to one of these before, but I'll be at this one with a few games in tow. Meeting me only rates a 4.5 on the Andrew Mayer Scale of Meeting Folks, but Lorini will be there as well, and I'm sure she rates much higher.

-Tom

[Jason Lutes]

So. Back to adventure board games. I'm going to maybe pick up Return of the Heroes (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/8170) and maybe Hunting Party (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18975) at GenCon. And just in general keep my eyes open for unexpected fantasy adventure games and the like. There's one I vaguely remember, but can't find on the 'Geek. I'm still looking. I think it came out not too long ago. What was that name? Dang.
Make sure to give us a Marvel Heroes report if you get a chance to see it at GenCon, Adam!

[SlyFrog]

Anyone in the Los Angeles area should come out to the Gamesday event on August 19th at the Burbank Moose Lodge (http://www.google.com/maps?hl=en&hs=fzc&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=moose+lodge&near=Burbank,+CA&cid=0,0,15040688254127226134&ll=34.180854,-118.332172&spn=0,.02&sa=X&oi=local&ct=image).

I've never been to one of these before, but I'll be at this one with a few games in tow. Meeting me only rates a 4.5 on the Andrew Mayer Scale of Meeting Folks, but Lorini will be there as well, and I'm sure she rates much higher.

Make sure to bring whatever that shit was that Clarice put in her nose for the autopsy in Silence of the Lambs.

[caesarbear]

Antike has Meeples!
You can't go wrong by a game with Meeples.http://www.geocities.com/caesarbear2004/img/RedMeeple1.jpg

[Winterrain]

Anybody still plays RoboRally?

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18

They rereleased the game in 2005.

[slantz]

As I mentioned in another thread recently, RoboRally is fun but flawed IMO.

Rather than rehash it all here, I'll trust in your forum-searching skills...

[Chris Woods]

I've been eyeing this one for some time, but the price has put me off and I've wanted to hear more word of mouth.

Out of curiousity, which other adventure boardgames do you like?

Well, I've only played one other "Adventure" boardgame, Talisman, and I did not like it because there were no meaningful decisions and there was too much randomness.

If it helps, here is a general list of "top rated" board-games I like/don't and why:

Good:
Puerto Rico (Low Randomness; Interesting decisions)
Amun-Re (Fun Theme; Low Randomness)
Memoir '44 (Fun Theme; Interesting Decisions)
Settlers of Catan (Interesting Decisions; Good Player Interaction)

Bad:
Princes of Florence (No Interesting Decisions, game feels like it plays itself.)
Tigris & Euphretes (Too abstract. Don't try to have a theme if you want board mechanics this abstract.)
Caricosonne (Too abstract again)

That's basically the extent of my board gaming knowledge. To put things in prospective a bit more, I like Descent because:

- It's hard for both "sides". It's refreshing to be a "Hero" in an RPG where death is a reality and success is hard earned.

This basically means it's meater then games like Talisman where success was a forgone conclusion in many, many of the encounters. At all times in Descent I feel like Death is a possibility. Even apparently "safe" times (like moving) because the Overlord might spring a trap.

- You have weapons to fight randomness.
* You use a 3 to 5 dice
* You can add dice after you roll by using fatigue
* You can "Aim" allowing you to reroll any dice
* You can "Dodge" forcing the Overlord to reroll any dice
* If your the Overlord, you have like 10 monsters so one roll doesn't affect you.

This basically means no one action will make or break you. It is possible in games like "Age of Imperialism" to loose large amounts of power based on a single die roll. Alternatively in games like Magic the Gathering a string of bad draws can leave you crippled. In Descent I feel like I have weapons to fight those situations, and while I will get the occasional miss it doesn't majorly affect the rest of the game.

- There are no "bad" rolls, just different ones

If you roll low damage it means you had to roll high surges or range based on the way the dice works. So, unless you roll an outright miss (1/6 chance) all rolls are good, just different. It's not like Talisman where 5 is clearly better then 4, etc.

- The scenarios are creative

The scenarios are much more then just a wargame with heroes thing. They have riddles, puzzles, special rules, etc. which make them all unique and interesting. The first one (the intro to the dark) is completely straightforward, but it's the intro scenario to learn the game so it gets leeway.

- Very "Concrete"

Opposite of abstract I guess. I buy a sword and I get a card that clearly shows what my sword looks like. Monsters have cool little models so I know what a manticore looks like and why I'm afraid of him, etc. This is a big deal with me as I like to "Get into" games which is why really popular games like T&E lost me. I can't "get into" red tile = war. I don't even understand why I can't goth farm and declare way in a given area, etc. It's just too abstract.

Well cut my hair and call me Kitsune, that was a long post.

Chris Woods

[Winterrain]

As I mentioned in another thread recently, RoboRally is fun but flawed IMO.

Rather than rehash it all here, I'll trust in your forum-searching skills...

Found your post. OMG my friends (even female ones) are supposedly geeks I guess. But I ditto on the upgrade cards issue. Hard to obtain. I will try to give out a free upgrade card next game session, too. Thanks for the input.

[Jasper]

I've found a couple of things made Robo Rally more fun for me:
- Giving all robots an upgrade card (or two) that they cannot lose.
- Get rid of the helicoptor upgrade.
- Avoid the urge to use all the cool maps, and just use 4 flags in a twisty route that crosses itself on one, or at most two maps. The game becomes alot less fun if there's enough space for players to seperate enough that they can't effect each other.

[Jasper]

Well, I've only played one other "Adventure" boardgame, Talisman, and I did not like it because there were no meaningful decisions and there was too much randomness.
Thanks for the review Chris, that does sound pretty good, and addresses alot of what I feel are the short comings of adventure games. I'll have to wait a bit to get it though, since I just ordered Tempus and Game of Thrones: Storm of Swords. :-)

[Hanzii]

I've found a couple of things made Robo Rally more fun for me:
- Giving all robots an upgrade card (or two) that they cannot lose.
- Get rid of the helicoptor upgrade.
- Avoid the urge to use all the cool maps, and just use 4 flags in a twisty route that crosses itself on one, or at most two maps. The game becomes alot less fun if there's enough space for players to seperate enough that they can't effect each other.

I love Roborally (I even painted my robots) and I agree - that's pretty much how we ended up playing, Tight maps with robots having to cross paths to get to new flags and everyone starts with an upgrade.

Filthy Rich by Garfield is also a fun simple game - but not with a lot of depth,

[adamw]

Make sure to give us a Marvel Heroes report if you get a chance to see it at GenCon, Adam!

Will do. I play at 10:00 AM on Thursday. I'll report as soon as I can. I'm playing just about 24 hours a day until Sunday... so there you go.

If it's truly a great game (and I mean *great*), I'll be buying it. For some reason, I don't have good vibes at the moment. But I'm curious if they can bust it open. Can Fantasy Flight make a game that gives you the feel of a comicbook? Very difficult to do, so I'm doubting Thomas for now, but anxious to see!

[SlyFrog]

Will do. I play at 10:00 AM on Thursday. I'll report as soon as I can. I'm playing just about 24 hours a day until Sunday... so there you go.

If it's truly a great game (and I mean *great*), I'll be buying it. For some reason, I don't have good vibes at the moment. But I'm curious if they can bust it open. Can Fantasy Flight make a game that gives you the feel of a comicbook? Very difficult to do, so I'm doubting Thomas for now, but anxious to see!

Yeah, but it's not really "Fantasy Flight," it's those Italian dudes who made the recent War of the Ring game (which is quite good). Fantasy Flight is basically just a U.S. publisher/distributor to my knowledge.

[adamw]

Yeah, but it's not really "Fantasy Flight," it's those Italian dudes who made the recent War of the Ring game (which is quite good). Fantasy Flight is basically just a U.S. publisher/distributor to my knowledge.

Right, right. I knew that as I typed it. Oh, and coincidently, I'm playing War of the Ring on Friday! I'll never get to play that epic scale game with my gaming group. We simply don't have the time. But that's what GenCon is all about.

[zabuni]

It's strange that Jason McMaster posted in the thread, even though he hates board games (http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2006/08/column_the_gentleman_nerd_why.php). :-)

Of course, one who covers the boards doesn't really have to read the column, as it basically is covered in this thread and the Cosmic Encounter one.

[awdougherty]

Just to throw it out there, anyone have any experience with Columbia's Front games (Eastfront, Westfront...)? Anyone own the new versions? My group wants the next level of a European Theater game and currently (as I mentioned), we have Europe Engulfed. Not sure if it's the right fit though.

[Calistas]

Europe Engulfed is good, but it's BIG. You are looking at 6-7 hours for the '42 (iirc) scenario, and a lot more for the '39.

It's good fun, but the players need to be fairly well versed in the rules to make the most of it as bad decisions at the start will haunt you. Also, the political rules require a lot of attention (although they are pretty nice additions to the flavour of the game).

[Backov]

Thanks for the Descent love, I bought it a few days ago and had my first game with a couple friends and my wife last night. It was a hit.

[Nathan]

It's a boardgame, once you get past the collectible part: I picked up some figures for Wizards new Dreamblade game the other day. Looks interesting, but I'm not sure how many figures I'm going to need to get two good warbands out of it so I can really play.

[adamw]

Make sure to give us a Marvel Heroes report if you get a chance to see it at GenCon, Adam!

Here's my report: I didn't get to play it. Fantasy Flight didn't get the game in until later afternoon Friday. My game was scheduled for Thursday - so, no dice for me.

I did stand and watch the game being played in the vendor area for about 45 minutes. The guy demo'ing was just reading the rules, so it was all kinda confusing. I didn't get too much of a feel for the game mechanics. It had something to do with the current player playing cards that boosted up this threat level on the board, then the other players would essentially spend the threat points to play villians and support cards - a bit like the mechanic in Dungeoneer except any unspent threat points were lost. The player would then have to fight at least one villian. Each hero had three categories of combat they could choose (yellow, orange and red I think?). Each player had four heroes (X-Men, Fantastic Four, Avengers or what appeared to be the Defenders - Dr. Strange, Spidey, and a couple others). One hero was fighting and it wasn't clear to me how you could bring the others in as support.

Anyhow, the player would secretly pick a colored chit matching the combat style they were using. It kinda reduced the complex super powers into these three categories. Each hero card has some specials they could do - but I didn't see those come into play. Then you'd play through 3 rounds of combat: what was essentially strength, some second one (energy?) and a third that I think was will power - representing the different parts of a super battel. Basically, you rolled a number of dice equal to your power and who every had more hits would score a KO on the opponent. After a round of each of the three types, you could continue or withdraw.

If the hero won, he'd get a 'head line card' - that represented what was going on with the baddie. These represented victory points which were tracked with a score track going around the entire board (like many Euro games these days). The board was laid out like a city scape with colored areas. Each area had about 4-5 largish spaces representing that section of the city. The spaces translated to these head line cards which has a special place to sit on the board. And there was some larger them of cards moving along another side of the board. It was a bit confusing - but like I said, the demo guy had never even read the rules before. So don't let this description put you off too much. I would have *loved* to have actually played, but you know, so would 10,000 other people standing around.

Over all, very nice game bits. Wonderful minis for each hero. Nice but washed out board. I chalked that up to first printing. Pretty clear mechanics I think. Nice superhero feel it seems. But I felt you'd have to know and love the Marvel universe to fully appreciate the cards. I'm sure one could play just the mechanics, but all the flavor text and situations were a straight pull from Marvel. Excelsior! I have no idea how the game *truly* feels and plays. As for me, I'm not sure if my game group would get into it as I don't know how much of the Marvel universe they know. So as of now, I'm not terribly interested in owning it.

As an aside, I did pick up Thurn and Taxis (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21790) (looks truly good), Return of the Heroes (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/8170) (wretched, horrible rules! and too many game bits not easily seperated - first play, not great), a fast fantasy card game called Treasure and Traps (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/24410) (which is actually very good and great fun for a diversion), and a game called Sevinpold (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/19274) which I bought because the developer was a nice fellow.

[Jason Lutes]

Thanks for the report, Adam. I'll go cruise BGG in a few days to see if anyone over there got to try it out.

[Backov]

A question for Descent players..

It says in the (downloaded) FAQ something about the overlord getting threat for attacking players. However, it says nothing about that in the rules whatsoever..

There's 3 or so magical items that are not treasure cards (they are double sided) and don't have gold values, so are not shop items.. What are they for?

[Jason McMaster]

Man, finally, BGG is back up

[adamw]

A question for Descent players..

It says in the (downloaded) FAQ something about the overlord getting threat for attacking players. However, it says nothing about that in the rules whatsoever..

I've never played that way and frankly would guess that would further unbalance the game. Each time I've played as Overlord (ok - only twice), I've completely thumped the player characters. I'm mean THUMPED - easily. Given more threat would just further the problem of Overload thumpage.

There's 3 or so magical items that are not treasure cards (they are double sided) and don't have gold values, so are not shop items.. What are they for?

Special quests. Some of the scenarios have special magic items you find.

[Calistas]

Man, finally, BGG is back up

...and down again.

[Chris Woods]

A question for Descent players..

It says in the (downloaded) FAQ something about the overlord getting threat for attacking players. However, it says nothing about that in the rules whatsoever..


When the Overlord makes an attack roll he generates one threat for every two surges on the dice. I am sure this is in the rules, but it might be in a weird spot.

There's 3 or so magical items that are not treasure cards (they are double sided) and don't have gold values, so are not shop items.. What are they for?

See: Quests 6, 7, 8 off the top of my head. (Might be 5, 6, 7). Anyhow, they are special quest items.

I've never played that way and frankly would guess that would further unbalance the game. Each time I've played as Overlord (ok - only twice), I've completely thumped the player characters. I'm mean THUMPED - easily. Given more threat would just further the problem of Overload thumpage.

You likely played vs. 2 heroes. Against 2 heroes the overlord should only be drawing one card a turn. You will need the surge threat in this situation to stay active. (Note: The draw one card/turn is a house rule that everyone I've spoken with uses because it's the only way the game remains balanced. It's not in the rules, per say, but it's necessary.)

By many, many accounts the game is very balanced overlord vs. 3 heroes, but it's also pretty clear they didn't even try to balance it outside that range. (The only change from 3 heroes to 2 is 1 threat a turn, which is probably only 20% of the overlords actual threat intake. Meanwhile, the players lost 1/3rd of their fighting power.)

Chris Woods

[adamw]

You likely played vs. 2 heroes. Against 2 heroes the overlord should only be drawing one card a turn. You will need the surge threat in this situation to stay active. (Note: The draw one card/turn is a house rule that everyone I've spoken with uses because it's the only way the game remains balanced. It's not in the rules, per say, but it's necessary.)

I anticipated this retort and should have clarified. Both times I played were against 4 and 6 (yes 6!) adventurers. Both moderated by Fantasy Flight - making my rules adherence assured. Both times I thumped them. Thumped! The unbalance is in the way you can pin down and cripple players with monsters. You can spawn in monsters almost every turn. With 6 opponents, I was bringing in 6 threat each turn. More than enough. After 6 hours of play, I had all the nasty cards in play (doom et al) and a surplus of 20+ threat. I literally had to back off.

It could very well be the quests I played were especially nasty. Certainly possible. But the web attack from master spiders is unbalanced IMHO. Too hard to get out of for characters (1 in 3 chance) and the Overlord and pile it on - taking a character out of the game. I had a guy webbed for something like 45-60 minutes. Master sorcerers with undying also a bit much. 1 in 3 they come back again - fully healed.

[Chris Woods]

I don't know, your experience basically flies in the face of mine and every single other person I've had any contact with. 4 Heroes is generally presumed to be biased in favor of the Heroes.

So far as the quest, Quest #2 is the only one that is so scathingly difficult for the players that it might account for your experience. I doubt very seriously you played #2 though, because the dungeon design is such that you won't get any spawns against 4 players.

Saying you can spawn every turn is a little disingenuous. You need:

1- the card. There are only 9 spawn cards (off the top of my head.) 2x Skel, 2x Beastmen, 2x Spiders, 2x Razorwing, 1x Sorcerers. There are 50? 60? Overlord cards. You will only be spawning 9 out of 25 or 30 turns of a game. A far cry from "every turn."

2- Non-LOS revealed areas. With 4 (or 6!) heroes having a position to spawn can be almost impossible. A smart party will force you to either a- spawn two areas behind them or b- not be able to spawn at all. Even a dumb party will prevent you from spawning right on top of them.

Webbing melee characters is hard because you have to do damage to get the web effect, and melee characters are tough to damage with White, Yellow, Black as your dice. You could web a mage pretty easy, but mages will fry you from a range so it's significantly less of a problem to them. (Smart mages will use Ghost Armor to prevent you from getting the web effect.) finally, Web is only present on red spiders, of which you will only have 1 or perhaps 2 in any given game. A smart party will kill the spider before it ever moves.

Further, against 4 people they should have breached an area and killed well over half the monsters present in that area before you even had a chance to activate them. (In many cases, 4 players can breech and clear a room before the Overlord even gets to move.) As such, web might be "annoying" but it would hardly be dangerous. You can, at the very worst, bring in two spawns (2 cards drawn a turn) which is only 1 monster per player. Any character is very capable of killing a 1 monster a turn, so your spawns ought to have only lasted two turns at the very worst.

Finally, even in 2 man games it takes 3-5 monsters to bring a full health mage to zero health in one turn. With 4 party members, their turns response will be to kill every single monster out there while the mage respawns in towne. You'll get 2 conquest tokens, but the party get 3 conquest tokens for every area they enter so they come out ahead. You have to kill at least two party members per area to be making headway, and treasure chests give conquest caches so likely if you were killing 2 mages (or 1 fighter) every single area you'd only be breaking even.

All in all, I very strongly believe your experience is not indicative of the game in even the most remote fashion. Something had to be critically different to account for even 4 players vs. Overlord being "way to easy on the Overlord". Either you had world-class Bad players or were somehow misinterpreting the rules.

EDIT: Master Sorcerers? What dungeon has more then two? You can't spawn them in. Yeah, they're annoying but by the time the party reaches them they should have opened at least one silver level chest, and that's 4-8 (6-12!?!) silver treasures. They will one shot your red sorcerers. Even with undying, they will get killed repeatedly until you fail the roll.

Chris Woods

[adamw]

Saying you can spawn every turn is a little disingenuous.... A far cry from "every turn."

It was a feeling, not a perfect statistic. And yes, there were several turns in a row where I was spawning. At one point, there was no room *left* to spawn. Your LOS point is of course valid, but we were playing a Mike Z custom quest - where the room was filled with darkness - limiting LOS to 5 . There's also an Overlord card that does the same thing (which I had) and brought that down on them in the very next room with the same results. Unusual? Maybe so. Completely crazy unheard of? Nope.

Webbing melee characters is hard because you have to do damage to get the web effect, and melee characters are tough to damage with White, Yellow, Black as your dice.

The rules say: "After inflicting at least 1 damage (before applying the effects of armor) to a figure with a Web attack, place a web token next to that figure. A figure can have more than one web token next to it at a time." We asked Fantasy Flight this question (they were standing right there after all) and the word was: as long as you don't roll a miss and you have at least one heart showing, you web them. Not hard to do at all in my experience. And really, two webs are more than enough to keep a warrior out of commission.

Any character is very capable of killing a 1 monster a turn, so your spawns ought to have only lasted two turns at the very worst.

So I guess you're arguing the players were dumb. You'll have to take that up with them - whoever they were. But it wasn't our experience that a character could take out a monster in a single turn. They can roll a miss. They can roll low damage. And the monsters can have 3, 4 or more armor. It gets nasty. Monster's don't drop in a single turn. Not nearly always.

You'll get 2 conquest tokens, but the party get 3 conquest tokens for every area they enter so they come out ahead.

We didn't play with the party getting conquest tokens simply by entering every area - only if they activated a glyph. And they had to get to it which wasn't remotely automatic.

We were playing with a house rule, however. We let the characters go into negative conquest tokens - which by the way, happened after room #2. I had them down to -9 at one point. When I stepped away as Overlord after SIX hours of play, they were at -3. That, my friend, is a proper thumping.

Now I will agree that after a few nice chests, the entire game tips over the other way - also bad I think. The game just isn't balanced.

All in all, I very strongly believe your experience is not indicative of the game in even the most remote fashion. Something had to be critically different to account for even 4 players vs. Overlord being "way to easy on the Overlord".

Character's were idiots? Hey, I can't say. They seemed fairly bright to me. Not playing the rules right? Take that up with Fantasy Flight. They were on hand to answer every question. They supervised us playing. Can you say the same?

But seriously, this is all academic. My biggest gripe is the amount of time it takes to play. It's crazy long combats. We got through 3 rooms in FIVE HOURS of play. That's just nuts.

Having said all this, I do like the game. Really. It's a hoot. I'd play it again. I don't mind the balance problem *that* much, but of the 3 times I've played (only twice as Overlord), the Overlord kinda has to lay back a bit to make it fun for the players. I actually had my monsters at one point bunch up so a blast would take 3-4 of them out. Cleared the area for me, gave the characters a boost. That's all fun. So don't get your undies in a bunch. It's all fine and dandy.

[McCrank]

Just thought I'd post that I had a chance to try out the new Wallace game last night (Tempus); lot of hype around this one, and frankly it fell flat with me and my group. I'll admit I'm a huge Wallace fanboy, I think Age of Steam and Struggle of Empires are two of the best games ever, but his recent releases have been falling flat (this and Byzantium) to name a few. I was hoping this would be the definitive "civilization lite" game, but it's not. In fact, it's not even a decent abstract strategy game (what it feels like it comes off as in the end). Keeping my hopes up for Antike, and Wallace's next game due to premiere at Essen 06 Perikles.

-Chris

[shang]

Got to try a couple of new games last weekend:

Caylus (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18602): We played this with five, and nobody had played before or even read the rules much. While I liked all the mechanics in the game, I think I prefer Puerto Rico, and with it's length, I doubt Caylus would be played much with my gaming group.

Shadows Over Camelot (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/15062): We had five knights and no traitor. While the game was pretty fun, I'm somewhat sceptical about replayability. I'd play this every once in a while, but I'm not in a hurry to actually add it to my own collection.

Farlander (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/10196): Only got to try this with two players, which is a shame, because I think the game might have been more interesting with three or four. Nevertheless, I enjoyed playing this a lot. I think Farlander would be an excellent light filler in the similar vein as Clans (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/4636)


I also ended up reading the rules and card list for Blue Moon (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/9446), and it sounded so good that I ordered the base set and every expansion short after. This is my new manic obsession, and I'm finding it hard to get anything done at work while thinking and reading about Blue Moon strategies and decks. Hopefully it'll be good.

I also read about the new editions of Antiquity (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/13122) and Roads & Boats (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/875) and I'm tempted (especially Antiquity).

[Vesper]

It's a boardgame, once you get past the collectible part: I picked up some figures for Wizards new Dreamblade game the other day. Looks interesting, but I'm not sure how many figures I'm going to need to get two good warbands out of it so I can really play. At GenCon this weekend, my friend and I picked up 1 starter each of Dreamblade and had a great time playing with the stuff right out of the box. Additional figs will give you the opportunity to match up some figures that work together, but the game really seems to be fun regardless of warband composition. The mechanics of how things spawn and their relative power really is quite ingenuous. It's not like Magic where you need to worry about a "mana curve." You're just as likely to get a 10-spawn cost creature out on turn 1 as you are on turn 8. The only exception to this is that bringing out figs from the same aspect make it slightly cheaper.

After playing the demo and back at the hotel, I liked it enough to sign up for the release tournament on Saturday. I only played 4 rounds (it went 10.. with each one over an hour) but had a great time. Looking forward to playing Dreamblade a lot more.


As a suggestion to the original poster: Check out Arkham Horror. This is currently my favorite board game of the past year or so, and I've been on a bit of a boardgame kick. It's a great cooperative game with quite a bit of depth. It's also on the difficult side, as appropriate for the subject matter. I just picked up the Dunwich Horror expansion for it at the show and can't wait to try it out next week. Despite getting other newer games, this is the one we always go back to.

[gdunbar]

Shadows Over Camelot (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/15062): We had five knights and no traitor. While the game was pretty fun, I'm somewhat sceptical about replayability. I'd play this every once in a while, but I'm not in a hurry to actually add it to my own collection.
[\quote]

You have to play with a traitor; the game itself is pretty meh, so all of the fun is in sneaky behavior and wild accusations. That said after 5-10 games, I've had my fill; I'd still play but I'm not going to suggest it any more.

[QUOTE=shang]I also read about the new editions of Antiquity (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/13122) and Roads & Boats (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/875) and I'm tempted (especially Antiquity).

I own and have played both, and I'd actually go R&B. Antiquity is better themed and works pretty well, but I really like the logistics/puzzle play of R&B more. Both are long and mega-fiddly, which you probably already know but just in case...

Geoff

[Chris Woods]

It was a feeling, not a perfect statistic. And yes, there were several turns in a row where I was spawning. At one point, there was no room *left* to spawn. Your LOS point is of course valid, but we were playing a Mike Z custom quest - where the room was filled with darkness - limiting LOS to 5 . There's also an Overlord card that does the same thing (which I had) and brought that down on them in the very next room with the same results. Unusual? Maybe so. Completely crazy unheard of? Nope.


So wait, you're basing your balance observations on a map that isn't in the game that uses rules that aren't covered in the game? I mean, there maybe could be another source of a imbalance here....

The overlord card you're talking about (Gust of Wind) does very little on the maps that ship with the game because the areas are so small that LOS range 5 is more then enough.

So far as players not offing monsters in a single turn I don't know what to say. A generic fighter with a generic sword from the shop deals Red + Green + Black + Black + Black damage, which is average 6.3 (range 2-10) damage presuming the fighter in question drew absolutely no skills that improve damage and got absolutely no surges. On average that will one-shot any creature but the tier 3-4 ones (Giants, Ogres, Manticores, Dragons, Demons) which any of the actual maps that shipped with the game use sparingly and there are no cards to spawn them.

You're right about spiders, I read that totally wrong. Good find.

Anyhow, it's really outlandish to be playing a map that doesn't ship with the game nor is provided in any expansion or add-on anywhere supported by FFG and then act like the game isn't balanced.

Chris Woods

[Jasper]

Just thought I'd post that I had a chance to try out the new Wallace game last night (Tempus); lot of hype around this one, and frankly it fell flat with me and my group.
I just got my copy and haven't had a chance to play it, but reading the rules (generally a good predictor for me of whether I'll like a game) left we wondering what all the fuss was about. It's light enough that it's purely an abstract game, with the "theme" just welded on -- and a civ games needs more flavor than that. There wasn't a single cool mechanic in it that I'd consider lifting either. :-/

I'm still planning on bringing it out for play some night though (it's not actually bad), so perhaps my opinion will change. Definitely not as good as something like Vinci.

[Jasper]

[You have to play with a traitor; the game itself is pretty meh, so all of the fun is in sneaky behavior and wild accusations. That said after 5-10 games, I've had my fill; I'd still play but I'm not going to suggest it any more.
Same here. The game is no challenge and dull without a traitor, but I've pretty much had my fill of it regardless. I like the idea of a cooperative game, but Shadows Over Camelot just isn't it.

[adamw]

So wait, you're basing your balance observations on a map that isn't in the game that uses rules that aren't covered in the game? I mean, there maybe could be another source of a imbalance here....

Anyhow, it's really outlandish to be playing a map that doesn't ship with the game nor is provided in any expansion or add-on anywhere supported by FFG and then act like the game isn't balanced.

Only one out of the three was not shipped with the game - and it was designed by Mike Z - chief play tester dude for Fantasy Flight. Available on FFG web site. Pretty high quality stuff. Ding it if you will, but I don't think it takes away from the point. As for outlandish? Nah.

[Vesper]

I wasn't real big on Descent either.. Basically I have the same complaint that I did with Doom - the spawn mechanic. I find it really goofy/stupid when the players can round a corner and suddenly the room they were just in has 10 monsters in it. I guess I was hoping for something a lot closer to the old Hero Quest game. It'd probably help if I thought of it more like Gauntlet than D&D-Lite.

[Chris Woods]

Only one out of the three was not shipped with the game - and it was designed by Mike Z - chief play tester dude for Fantasy Flight. Available on FFG web site. Pretty high quality stuff. Ding it if you will, but I don't think it takes away from the point. As for outlandish? Nah.

Yeah, I see what you're saying really. One would want a boardgame to be rather resilient to added content, so this discussion was just a bunch of confusion on my part. To keep it civil in the future, I've put together a list of games that might not be balanced when played with unsupported modifications (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=every+fucking+single+game+ever+made&btnG=Google+Search).

I did look at the one mod by Mike Z that was linked on FFG's site. It says nothing about having permanent LOS 5 (or even temporarily having that effect) so I have no idea what mod you were playing but it doesn't appear to be the same one he has on their site.

Chris Woods

[adamw]

Yeah, I see what you're saying really. One would want a boardgame to be rather resilient to added content, so this discussion was just a bunch of confusion on my part.

It's so nice to work things out in such a civil way (http://www.cs.utah.edu/~mflatt/bumpy/iwasright.html).

[SqueakyFoo]

Caylus: We played this with five, and nobody had played before or even read the rules much. While I liked all the mechanics in the game, I think I prefer Puerto Rico, and with it's length, I doubt Caylus would be played much with my gaming group.
My experience as well. I picked up Caylus based on recommendations here. The mechanics were all well and good but it took too much time and felt too... random. I guess since no one really knew all the rules or what all the buildings did must've had an effect. But it really just took too damn long to play.


Anyway, since this seems to be the general board game thread, I'll mention this here:

I picked up Aqua Romana today and played a couple of games of it. It's a decent fun little path building game similar to the old PC game Pipe Dream. The opportunities for fucking other players over made the game a blast (and sometimes hilarious) to play.

[AndrewM]

I played Europe Engulfed for the first time for about 10 hours today. We only got up to the first stages German invasion of the Soviet Union. I made a severe mistake early on that cause the invasion of France to be easier for Germany than the invasion of Poland, and I gained a new appreciation for lighterweight Euro games.

[Calistas]

Hehe, EE is fun, but it requires both players to be commited!

Had another game of Caylus today. I tend to do worse each time and an unltra-competitive friend of mine (nice guy, just plays hard) won again, and really managed to wind me up.

Even tho I know the game, I just can't seem to keep myself rolling. I need to practice online somewhere! :(

[SlyFrog]

I played Europe Engulfed for the first time for about 10 hours today. We only got up to the first stages German invasion of the Soviet Union. I made a severe mistake early on that cause the invasion of France to be easier for Germany than the invasion of Poland, and I gained a new appreciation for lighterweight Euro games.

What did you do that could possibly make that game take 10 hours to play through about 2 years of the war? We played the entire thing in about 5-6 hours.

[AndrewM]

What did you do that could possibly make that game take 10 hours to play through about 2 years of the war? We played the entire thing in about 5-6 hours.

The first few turns were very slow because we spent a lot of time looking up rules. Towards the end we were moving along at a good clip.

We actually had three players for most of the time, but I don't think that slows things down.

[awdougherty]

Calistas, SlyFrog, quick EE question. Do you use any of the optional rules? Ideally, my group would love to play with pretty much all of the optional rules, including those that link historical events to the actual game situation instead of just by date (I think section 14). I guess one other question, is there a guide to help with all of the political exceptions or have you learned them simply from playing? The organization in the rules doesn't seem to click with my brain.

Picked up Eastfront 2 but haven't had a chance to play it yet. Never played the first but always heard good things and I dig the block system. Read through the rules and was pleasantly surprised by the relative simplicity even though it spans 26 pages (a lot of columbia games have only 8 pages of rules).

[McCrank]

Just a couple of quick notes from my lighter group's session yesterday:

1. Kung Fu Fighting - I cant recommend this card game enough, simply brilliant, and a quick 20 minute filler full of fun. After a brawl has broken out in a tea shop, kung-fu masters go at it to see who the last one standing will be!

2. Hex Hex - A fun "hot potato" type game where players keep playing different cards to bouce the hex around the table, dont let it land on you! This game was a riot...

3. For Sale - Probably the best quick auction game I've played, while not as intricate as heavier games like Ra and Modern Art, for 15 minutes, this CANT be beat!

4. El Grande - Finished it up with the heavy game, each time I play this game it just strips away more love for it. While initially I thought it was a great game, it's age of 10+ years is starting to show through, there are a ton of better area control games out now.

[SlyFrog]

Calistas, SlyFrog, quick EE question. Do you use any of the optional rules? Ideally, my group would love to play with pretty much all of the optional rules, including those that link historical events to the actual game situation instead of just by date (I think section 14). I guess one other question, is there a guide to help with all of the political exceptions or have you learned them simply from playing? The organization in the rules doesn't seem to click with my brain.

Picked up Eastfront 2 but haven't had a chance to play it yet. Never played the first but always heard good things and I dig the block system. Read through the rules and was pleasantly surprised by the relative simplicity even though it spans 26 pages (a lot of columbia games have only 8 pages of rules).

We did not play with all the optional rules, in part because many of them (from recollection, I haven't played in a bit) "hardwire" historical events even more, which I don't like.

I agree that the political exceptions don't exactly click, but I recall there not being that many of them that we were able to make do. I also think I had some good cheat sheets to help out.

[adamw]

1. Kung Fu Fighting - I cant recommend this card game enough, simply brilliant, and a quick 20 minute filler full of fun. After a brawl has broken out in a tea shop, kung-fu masters go at it to see who the last one standing will be!

Could you say a few more words about this one? I saw it played at GenCon this year and *almost* got it. But I couldn't pull the trigger.

3. For Sale - Probably the best quick auction game I've played, while not as intricate as heavier games like Ra and Modern Art, for 15 minutes, this CANT be beat!

Agreed! I have alot love for this one too. Not only is it a great filler game, but you can explain it in 3 minutes. Gamers love it, non-gamers love it. As another nice filler card game, I recently picked up Treasures and Traps (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/24410). If you like a fantasy themed game, you really should give it a go. Very simple, very fast and loads of fun.

[AndrewM]

I guess one other question, is there a guide to help with all of the political exceptions or have you learned them simply from playing? The organization in the rules doesn't seem to click with my brain.
This wasn't directed to me, but GMT Games has a nice player aid card that summarizes the political rules in a single page, sorted by area they apply to. I personally found this much much better than try to dig through the rules all the time:

http://www.gmtgames.com/living_rules/EE_Play_Aid-H&S.pdf

Also on their site, you can find revised rules, which clears up at least some minor problems in the rules. For instance, the rules in the box don't say that all existing French units go away when Vichy France is declared. We decided they must, because otherwise it would be stupid, but it wasn't actually said. We spent a lot of time digging through the rules looking for it. We haven't actually played with the revised rules. Maybe next time.

[Calistas]

Aw - Well, i've only played the ... 42 scenario on? The one with very few political rules - just for that reason. We didn't have them memorised and didn't want to try just yet :D

[McCrank]

Could you say a few more words about this one? I saw it played at GenCon this year and *almost* got it. But I couldn't pull the trigger.



Agreed! I have alot love for this one too. Not only is it a great filler game, but you can explain it in 3 minutes. Gamers love it, non-gamers love it. As another nice filler card game, I recently picked up Treasures and Traps (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/24410). If you like a fantasy themed game, you really should give it a go. Very simple, very fast and loads of fun.

Basically, Kung-Fu Fighting is a hand management game. You fill your hand up to 7 cards at the beginning of your turn. You can always place a stance in your stance box, and can always carry one weapon. You get 20 hit points to fight with. Everyone can take turn doing attacks with "booster" cards, for instance I could do a super magnificent running up the wall trip on you, and you would have to have a balanced card to block it.

[scharmers]

I just picked up Runebound the other day (from Phoenix Games up here in Mulkiteo WA). I've only had time to play through a "learn-the-rules" solitaire game, but it seems like a solid beer & pretzels fantasy hack. What's the general opinion here about this one?

[Jason Lutes]

I just picked up Runebound the other day (from Phoenix Games up here in Mulkiteo WA). I've only had time to play through a "learn-the-rules" solitaire game, but it seems like a solid beer & pretzels fantasy hack. What's the general opinion here about this one?
Mixed. Some of us like it, some of us don't. Check the top of this thread.

[shang]

My big order from Germany just arrived with: Antike (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/19600), Warrior Knights (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/22038), Blue Moon City (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21882), Dungeon Twister (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12995), Serenissima (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/232), Geschenkt (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12942), For Sale (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/172) and High Society (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/220).

Hopefully I'll have the time to test these soon.

[Jason McMaster]

I'm pretty fond of Runebound and it's cool that you can get card expansions cheap.

[scharmers]

Yeah, actually went through the thread here. The comments pretty much mirror what I think about the game both ways - the movement system is yucky (nice try for trying to kill MPs, but MPs are a wargame cliche for a reason...they work) but I think the rest of the game seems to be pretty fun and balanced based on one (1) complete playthrough.

So how do RB players really solo this thing? I understand that the Doomtrack or some other hurry along mechanic is necessary to prevent a soloer from just moseying through the game, but do you play hardcore dead-is-dead or what?

[Shieldwolf]

Just picked up

mykerinos
Winner's Circle
Blue Moon City
Louis XIV
Hunting Party
Cleopatra and the society of architects
Intrigue

[Backov]

Played Descent again the other night and I can echo some of the comments. With 3 players against the Overlord it was very hard to win.

We managed to pick up one copper and one gold chest.. The two chests outfitted the fighters fairly decently but we still died a few times.

Finally at the end the overlord had gone through his deck 2-3 times, had all of his powers in front of him, and could spawn a giant army to fight us pretty much at will. When we opened rooms they were generally packed full of master monsters. We lost.

Anyway, it really bogs down in the late game. It's a game that would be a great PC game like the various Settlers implementations.