Since I play the Overlord, I've noticed that I've had a very fighter/strategy game-ish mentality to Descent: there are winners and there are clear losers. This has lead me to a rather formulaic playstyle where I have a small but IMO powerful selection of Open Groups from all the expansions that I field on every scenario. This has given me plenty of wins against the heroes but I'm slightly afraid this will have a negative impact on enjoyability on the long run.

How many times would you like to face Golems in a row as hero, but on the other hand would you ever as the OL field Zombies or Cultists against your opponents unless you specifically want to make things easy for them? Why field a "tier 3" monster when you could put in it's place a "tier 1" monster?

This of course yet again underlines the sad fact that if the OL wins, one guy is happy but if the heroes win two to four guys get to whoop and celebrate.

You mension a specific of the competitiveness of this game. This game is special, it so not like one gainst one as in some other games. It is most of the time one against 2, 3 or 4. Therefore I think the overlord role is not for everyone. The man must find fun in celebrating alone and in loosing alone against a group who want to destroy him. It is psychical state and psychical problem I think.

You mension a specific of the competitiveness of this game. This game is special, it so not like one gainst one as in some other games. It is most of the time one against 2, 3 or 4. Therefore I think the overlord role is not for everyone. The man must find fun in celebrating alone and in loosing alone against a group who want to destroy him. It is psychical state and psychical problem I think.

This is true of course, though I wish there was a more complex system of monster deployment that would reward a diverse cast of beasties and nasties, akin to an army building game like the recent BattleLore 2. The problem really isn't that I win or lose, these are things that happen. The "problem" if there is one is that in my perception I have a very limited selection of universally good tools, which is why I always win by using the same methods and tools.

Sorry if I didn't word myself properly in the opening post.

...in my perception I have a very limited selection of universally good tools, which is why I always win by using the same methods and tools.

I understand. You think you found too quickly the only best or most effective way to play overlord and that the game does not force you to change it. Maybe there is that problem, I have not played so many games I could confirm if that is really true.

my experience is, that often the not direct way will work wonders. i once played the sorceres in rude awakening (the valnydra quest with the exploding imp) - where their summon ability suddenly ported imps around the map, enabling them to explde the very turn they spawned.

ofc - i always could pick the perfect choice for a quest and win. flat. goblin archers are insane damage dealers, ogres bring havoc into a hero team, knockback, revive and good health are really a bane... .

i try to get a good balance to it. i dont see the fun in always power game, win every encounter and the group gets more and more frustrated... .often i will pick a less optimal group to make the quest a little more interesting for the heroes - and for me. most time the heroes wont realize this "sacrifice", because they are more into the quest and dont reason with the coices the OL makes.

i am also using a paper, where i note which monsters i already played, to force me to use a different monster every quest, which i have not used until now. which resulted in some awesome discoveries.

+ i am gathering information from my own and other persons experiences about the hardiness of a quest. the harder the quest for the heroes to win, the kinder my monster pick. for example in the cardinals plight (which is most likely an autowin for the OL unless he is stupid) i would pick the bad of the bad, just to give the heroes this little shimmer of hope and give everyone a nice evening. + if it really geets close, my enjoyment is bigger all together.

i try to get a good balance to it. i dont see the fun in always power game, win every encounter and the group gets more and more frustrated... .often i will pick a less optimal group to make the quest a little more interesting for the heroes - and for me. most time the heroes wont realize this "sacrifice", because they are more into the quest and dont reason with the coices the OL makes.

I completely agree. Overlord could be sometimes a little like dungeon master to others, not just an oponent. So he can increase the fun in many ways. He can choose different monster just because of new situations and experience on the table.

also plot decks offer some alternative to "just beat the crap out of the heroes" - for instance bol goreth's plot deck lets you play with disease and poison condition.

this gives you the explainable opportunity to pick monsters around a poison/disease theme, to let your plot deck work. it will give you a thematically boost (rather then always picking those +3-critters)

If the OL is picking the same monsters all the time then the group can just change their tactics to focus on those monsters being picked all the time.

If the OL is using big monsters for instance, then focus on abilities that do a lot of damage to a single target. Also pick up immobilise + ranged weapons which is a total pain in the ass for big monsters. Immobilise the big guys every round then pew pew them down at ranged... bye bye shadow dragons.

If the overlord is trying to dish out huge amounts of damage by using lots of smaller monsters, then focus on lots of blast type effects.

There are plenty of opportunities to win as the OL and plenty of ways to win as the heroes with the proper tactics.

Then again i could be saying this because lately i have been mopping the floor playing with the heroes (won all quests except 1 on current campaign halfway into act 2) and with playing the overlord (lost a single quest because i stupidly read over an important rule). Admittedly this has led to some tension lately playing this game.

Dumbing down your game though leads to another problem and that is when the opponent realises that you are dumbing your game down the win feels cheap and really not like a win at all. My opponents want to face me at my best so when they do win they can rub it in my face for the next week .

If the OL is using big monsters for instance, then focus on abilities that do a lot of damage to a single target. Also pick up immobilise + ranged weapons which is a total pain in the ass for big monsters. Immobilise the big guys every round then pew pew them down at ranged... bye bye shadow dragons.

Golems, as the OP mentioned using, are immune to Pierce and all conditions.

Descent is definitely a competitive game, however it's also a dungeon crawler with a story, so there are different playstyles.

• Some groups play to win, and for them, winning is the only way they can have fun, and if they aren't winning, they aren't having fun. (Comments from the OP suggest that this is either his personal playstyle if not also that of his group).
• Other groups play to win, but have fun so long as it is a good game. Winning isn't the only way they'll enjoy the game, so long as it doesn't seem completely pointless.
• Other groups just play to play (often coming from a Pen & Paper style RPG background) where the OL is more of a game-master who tries to ensure a good story and good session, leaning towards some victories, and letting the heroes win as well.

That said, if your heroes are finding a difficult time going against what you're throwing at them, chances are they may need to change up their tactics. Golems are pretty strong, but they don't take up as much space as shadow dragons, so are a bit harder to use for blocking. Chances are your heroes can probably avoid or ignore them to some extent, depending on the quests.

And yes, there are some monster groups which are just flat out better than others in MOST cases, and similarly, some that are worse in MOST cases. But you should always keep in mind the quest objectives and play to that. Smart heroes will eventually start positioning themselves so that blocking is less of an option for large monsters, and using other strategies, including sometimes giving up on a lesser quest objective to get more gold for future quests.

As is, if you want some specific tips to give to your heroes, let us know what they're running and what you're running and we can try to help on both sides.

I've found that my monster choices vary widely depending on the encounter and the group makeup. I'll usually almost always use at least one large monster group, but I frequently mix in harpies or goblin archers or barghests (or volucrux reavers, I love those things). One of my favorite combinations is Merriods and Volucrux reavers, where the merriod immobilizes them with reach and the reavers skirmish in, do heavy damage (they really do, their pierce 2 is insane), and just move back out and behind the merriods for cover. I use ettins frequently for throw. I don't use zombies much, but honestly, I think it's okay by game design to have certain groups be worse than others, as long as they get used in quests as mandatory. They can be useful because there are a lot of them, as long as you start on top of an important objective or respawn near it, but that's pretty rare.

Then again, I don't play with the conversion kit.

I don't entirely "play to win" as Overlord in Descent.

I play to the style of what the heroes like about games.

Some people want a challenge and are okay with losing or breaking a game, so i'll go all out and exploit any dominant strategy I can.

Some people just want to have a good time, so I will replace what I think are the 'best' moves with 'epic' moves, like a crazy move in chess that's so out of book it becomes chaotic.

There are some... i don't know the term... sore losers maybe? Those who feel the game is unbalanced? I dunno. If I come across them, I play making it look impossible, but somehow they feel like they can still win, or present situations where they can get those big strong attacks in and roll lucky enough to save the day.

Some people I have played with just like picking up treasure and don't really care about winning or losing. So i'll focus with situations involving search tokens, whether it be blocking the search token, or grinning when I am (bluffing) with a search trap card in my hand, whatever makes them go "WOO! SPACESHIP... I mean, TREASURE!" whenever they successfully search.

All that matters is I have fun when they have fun!

I like to play to win as well but I still Like to have fun. So i do like it when limitations are placed on me to provide challenge. I don't call it a house rule but when I pick monsters for an encounter I require both of the monster traits to match an encounter trait. This isn't always possible and makes some monsters rare but it makes the encounters seem more thematic.

I haven't studied the quests to determine if this excludes any monsters completely but I rarely field dragons or demons so.........

it was dissapointing to find that some quests allowed you to pick from the entire deck...

also I own every descent expansion for first edition so I have the expansion set and include them in my choices.

just my nickel and a half.

I don't call it a house rule but when I pick monsters for an encounter I require both of the monster traits to match an encounter trait. This isn't always possible and makes some monsters rare but it makes the encounters seem more thematic.

I'll often do this just for variety's sake unless I feel a compelling reason to grab something else.

I don't call it a house rule but when I pick monsters for an encounter I require both of the monster traits to match an encounter trait. This isn't always possible and makes some monsters rare but it makes the encounters seem more thematic.

I'll often do this just for variety's sake unless I feel a compelling reason to grab something else.

Like if you can get 2xp, or the heroes can get a relic you dont want them to have lolz

I don't call it a house rule but when I pick monsters for an encounter I require both of the monster traits to match an encounter trait. This isn't always possible and makes some monsters rare but it makes the encounters seem more thematic.

I'll often do this just for variety's sake unless I feel a compelling reason to grab something else.

I haven't actually ever felt the need to do this, because I feel like if you're playing well as the overlord, different maps favor a wide variety of enemies, and most of the monsters get used as open groups at one point or another. I think it's fine for some types to not be used as open groups, since they basically all have a quest or two (or more) in which they are mandatory.

It also greatly depends on group makeup. If I'm overlord and the heroes have a runemaster and a wildlander, I'm probably not going to use goblin archers or fire imps much, the ranged advantage is negated and they're too weak. Those classes don't have as high single target damage though, so I'd definitely consider rocking a shadow dragon or ettin or merriod, etc.

On the other hand, if they have the necromancer instead of the runemaster, extra attacks so I can keep the familiar off the map are helpful, and the necromancer can't blow up my stuff as much, so goblin archers become much more attractive.

The only monsters I don't think I ever voluntarily choose for my open group I believe are zombies.

Ony first campaign the characters speced high damage and speed so I would drop kobolds every chance.......he whined that creature mobs where too op. So when my character campaign came I speced multi attacks and such but then he built an OL deck that would cycle itself and allow him to squash me with giants......it seems like of you have almost unlimited options then certain creatures get too much play. I can see wanting variety but sometimes I prefer to try to make the best of a sub par group. You'd be surprised what you didn't know could be useful in the right situation.

The numbers dont tell the whole story.

The best tool, in my experience, the Overlord can wish for is a lone player. The kind of player that plays for himself, slow down the group, blocks line of sight for his team mates, make decisions solely based on what he wants (like not using a health potion to heal another hero).

I have 2 like that in a campaign I run as OL and it's freaking awesome

2 players that plays relatively coop and 2 others that don't really care for others. Sometimes I don't even have to play and just let them fall into oblivion lol. It's so freaking flagrant that I feel the need to throw some advices their way and I mostly receive from the loners "Don't listen to him, he's the bad guy"...that make me laugh so hard...and 2 turns later I win.

I already have 2 relics and we're not even half through yet lol.

I had a player like that once, Jain Fairwood as the wildlander. He kept charging off by himself to grab treasure, and in act one, I couldn't do much about it because of her heroic ability, she would take 5 damage as fatigue, rest, and then keep going. Once act 2 hit though, the behavior didn't change and she got annihilated constantly. I appreciated the free extra cards.

she would take 5 damage as fatigue

FYI: This isn't allowed in Descent 2e.

she would take 5 damage as fatigue

FYI: This isn't allowed in Descent 2e.

Jain Fairwood can't use her hero ability to take damage as fatigue?

she would take 5 damage as fatigue

FYI: This isn't allowed in Descent 2e.

Jain Fairwood can't use her hero ability to take damage as fatigue?

The way I see it she can and I can imagine that there is a communication problem: Griton might have taken Whitewing's statement like: 'She would take five damage instead of fatigue (to move) after she was already exhausted'

Could that be the case Griton?

She can. That is her heroic ability.

I'm doing two campaigns right now, I'm Jain (wildlander) in one and OL in the other. The one I'm OL my girlfriend is Jain (wildlander). It's So hard not to try to play her character for her and she also isn't a good loser so she really doesn't like the "you should have done this and that" chats after each session. Although I find them amusing.

I thought a Hero couldn't use any types of abilities that consume fatigue if he/she was at full fatigue...

I think he is saying Jain took damage from a monster but used her ability. Then would rest so he could never kill her when she was off on her own. If he is saying that Jain was receiving damage because she was using fatigue she didn't have to move, then you are right, you can't do that.