Ok, so this will be a combined rant/seeking advice post, so I apologize in advance in this is a somewhat long tangent. I've been playing the Shadow Rune campaign as the overlord against my wife, and a good friend and his wife. So far, we are through Act 1 and are just completed our first quest of Act 2. The problem I'm encountering is that I'm beginning to "burnout" as the overlord. As you all know, a lot of rules in Descent are ambiguous and a lot of debating between myself and the heroes can take place. It's never heated, but perhaps "spirited" would be the word to describe our debates on certain rules. The problem I have is that it seems like these debates are taking place with far more regularity as the campaign moves along and more and more skills, overlord cards, abilities, shop cards, relics etc are introduced.

Me, being the overlord, have no problem conceding something in the favor of the heroes, as long as it makes the most sense in the case of a poorly written rule/card etc. The problem comes in when I try to swing something in my favor using the same logic that has been used numerous times to tilt something in the heroes favor. By their reaction, you would think I'm trying to pull a fast one, and then another argument takes place. I try to be as fair as humanly possible, but I feel like I'm constantly letting them get away with things because I don't have the patience to continue to argue about it. I've lost encounters/quests that I'm certain I should have won had it been played correctly. I play the game to have fun, and winning isn't that important to me. However, having a fair and balanced game is high on my priority list.

Part of the problem, too, is due to me being 1 person, trying to convince 3 other people that they're wrong. It's far easier for them to team up and twist things in their favor. I try to refer to the FAQ as much as possible. While the FAQ does a good job and has settled debates in the past, it doesn't cover every scenario as many of you know. I would like to stress that I still enjoy the game, but as the campaign progresses, I find myself enjoying it less and less with each quest due to all of the bickering. I keep trying to remind the heroes that it is my job as overlord to try to prevent them from completing their objectives, and that it would be awfully boring if not. I also remind them that just because something might have an unfavorable outcome for them, it doesn't mean it's not a legal move. However, as soon as I start to pull ahead, or pull of a powerful combo of attack/overlord cards, I'm immediately questioned and it's assumed that I somehow pulled off an illegal move and the game gets bogged down while everything gets scrutinized. Then, in their next turn they'll pull off some crazy combo involving a ton of skills, fatigue moves, etc and wipe out and entire monster group in one turn and I don't complain as I realize it's part of the game.

So, my question for you fellow overlord players is have you found this to be par for the course when playing as the overlord and had a similar experience as me? If so, what did you do to remedy this problem, if anything? Any help is much appreciated.

So part of the answer to your question is, you'll have to suck some of this up. The game's rules are not well written - I'm in my fourth campaign right now, and it's still pretty rare that a session goes by without some kind of rules debate.

However, you bring up a really good point - and one I have dealt with very recently. During metagame discussions, it's easy for the overlord to be overwhelmed by the player numbers. One way to deal with this is to treat it like you would a roleplaying game. Have a group discussion with your players - IE, don't bring it up on the boards, bring it up to them and talk about the problem. It sounds like you're all grown-ups; when my friends and I were 16, that would lead to more arguments, but now we're old and fat and married and happy, and sitting down and talking like reasonable people tends to work. Do it when you're not playing.

Don't present it as an oppositional thing - keep it low key, but make it clear that what's going on is making the game less fun for you. Make sure they understand how easy it is - even if it's not there intention - for you to feel ganged up on, just because of the 3v1 nature of the situation. And be willing to say - assuming you ARE willing to say this - but be willing to say, if they don't seem to understand your complaints - that you'd prefer to step down as overlord or play a different game.

Be familiar with this thread: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/863073/ffg-sez-thread-link-to-wiki-in-1st-post-unoffici - it's a compendium of rulings for this game. Read through it once or twice, because FFG is not very good at this and they contradict themselves more than once. But, the fewer rules arguments you have, the happier you'll be. Then, talk to your players about setting up a (short!) timer on rules discussions, and once that timer is over, you resolve it taking turns - OL gets one ruling in his favor, heroes get the next.

If either you or your friends (or wife!) are the type of people who will try to game that system... you're not likely to be playing together (or married :-) very long anyway.

Hope some of this advice helps. This kind of problem is tough to solve, but is doable. You may want to look at some indie RPG boards - dealing with this type of situation is fairly central to a lot of the ethos of many of those types of games.

This seems to be a reoccurring theme in my group as well! We have not played a campaign yet but two encounters have been enough to drive me bonkers! I love to play the game, but being the overlord is a challenge!

I truly believe this is simply the RPG mindset "heroes" can't seem to get past. They seem to forget I'm trying to win the game just as much as they are!

Everything is laid out in front of them! The only thing hidden is my overlord deck! However I too concede to the players due to my RPG mindset of making a great adventure a fun time for all!!!

My solution since I own it all, I set up and play myself and no matter if I win as the overlord or the heroes I have fun and I don't cheat cause it is fun to see how all the heroes do against me! and I learn the encounters better and know when to give in and when its not fair

personal rant Trenloe the strong is a beast! Without traps in your overlord hand to stop his movement he destroys my biggest monsters almost single handedly!!! (epic play, heroes upgrade act 1 weapons) I usually do this so I get an agent.

I'm sorry, Amoshias, but some of your comments can be really hard to take and maybe a little out of line. Please be kind and not make stabs at people. I am sure he is happily married and I am sure they conduct them selves like adults. But even adults have disagreements. We are all human, right?

And being human means that the OL feels pressure and sometimes unduly.

That web page Amoshias points out is good. You, your heroes and your dog should know these rules (in my case, my cats ^.~). Most of my heroes know this page better then I do, which is great since I am super busy and can't read over it. I trust my heroes not to lie to me and help keep me in line as well as themselves.

I think allot of OLs get this at some point. And I think a kind reminder from time to time that you are very much ok with them wining is good, but also let them know you are trying to win. I did this once in a recent quest where Bread turned to me and asked "Why Harpies?" after we had just said they are a really awesome group for a quest just like that. I smiled to him and I said "Because I want to win." It might have been a little of a surprise since I normally don't go pro-try-hard like that, but this time I wanted to because, well, I wanted to. For once, I didn't want to over complicate the go of this. And it worked. I won by a hair.

If the stubbornness of the heroes keeps mounting, I would suggest setting the campaign aside for a little while so that you can do some epics where other hero players get a stab at the OL seat. Let them see how fair or unfair their ruling is.

Otherwise keep your chin up, sir, and gave them hell. After all, you might know turns ahead that you might have no chance at this, but that's ok. Your job is to make them work for it!

I encountered this my first full campaign as overlord as well. The heroes definitely called me on every move I made that they didn't expect, often accusing me of bending the rules in my favor. It was their first time playing the game, and a couple of them are very competitive people. I definitely felt that they could gang up on me in favor of a particular interpretation of the rules unless there was an official word- this caused me to become very attentive to the subtleties of the rules of this game, as well as submit several official rules questions.

I tried to be a compromising OL, but it's important to draw a line and not let the heroes walk all over you. I think the problem alleviates itself as everyone becomes more experienced with the game (it's true, nothing in the game is "hidden" except some cards, so every move should be foreseeable to every player if he is attentive enough.)

The bottom line is that the game is supposed to be fun. If you can't reach a point where that's the case, this might not be the game for your group. Also, I recommend changing up the OL between campaigns. This serves two purposes:

-One person is not constantly experiencing OL fatigue.

-Since everyone gets a chance to play both roles, understanding of both perspectives is encouraged, and helps the "spirited" discussions to be more objective and civil.

I'm sorry, Amoshias, but some of your comments can be really hard to take and maybe a little out of line. Please be kind and not make stabs at people. I am sure he is happily married and I am sure they conduct them selves like adults. But even adults have disagreements. We are all human, right?

...huh?

I feel like you must be misreading something I wrote... you know a smiley (:-) ) signifies a joke, right? I'm not honestly suggesting that I think he's got a bad marriage or that he and his wife are going to divorce because of Descent. Quite the opposite, I'm suggesting that because he's playing with people he's close to, he is much more likely to be able to trust them not to game a system that (with strangers, for instance) would be easily abusable.

On the off chance that you read it that way, Glorious, please accept my sincere apologies.

I'm sorry, Amoshias, but some of your comments can be really hard to take and maybe a little out of line. Please be kind and not make stabs at people. I am sure he is happily married and I am sure they conduct them selves like adults. But even adults have disagreements. We are all human, right?

...huh?

I feel like you must be misreading something I wrote... you know a smiley (:-) ) signifies a joke, right? I'm not honestly suggesting that I think he's got a bad marriage or that he and his wife are going to divorce because of Descent. Quite the opposite, I'm suggesting that because he's playing with people he's close to, he is much more likely to be able to trust them not to game a system that (with strangers, for instance) would be easily abusable.

On the off chance that you read it that way, Glorious, please accept my sincere apologies.

No worries to either of you. Amoshias, I took your comments as sarcasm, so again no worries. Kunzite, I also appreciate you looking out for the forum members' well being.

I appreciate a lot of the responses and it's good to see that I'm not the only one who has encountered these situations. I do own all of the expansions for this game, so more campaigns are on the way in the future. We do plan on switching it up on who plays the overlord, and my good friend (who I admittedly have the most run-ins with rule wise) will play the overlord in our next campaign, which will most likely be Labyrinth of Ruin with Lair of the Wyrm mixed in. This is all of our first time playing Descent, so hopefully as we get a better grasp on things and more people experience playing as the overlord, a lot of this will work itself out.

As I stated previously, we're a close comprised of myself, my wife, a good friend of mine since we were in elementary school, and his wife, so I have no concerns over this game getting in the way of anything personal. I just wish the back and forth bickering, and the guilt trips that are hurled my way could come to an end or at least be diminished significantly as I thoroughly enjoy this game (hence already purchasing the expansions). I must say though, I'm definitely looking forward to playing some co-op games like Eldritch Horror in between campaigns to kinda break things up a bit, haha.

I think most groups have the same problem when starting to play descent, it used to happen alot during my groups first and second campaigns but I have to say that we have fewer and fewer rule debates as time goes on.

The length and heat of the discussions have also been reduced by alot, we still have debates but now we resolve them quite fast and without much bickering.

Since we know the rules quite well and have seen most situations at this point we can use our experiance to resolve most discussions and agree on how we will play a certain skill/rule/etc.
After the session I will double check any uncertainties with the FAQ, people on this forum or send a rules question directly to FFG.

As most of the others have said, talk to your group and explain the situation, read the eratta and unoffical FAQ and have them both at hand when playing if possible.

Trust me, things will get better once everyone learns and plays by the actual rules, though it is quite a time consuming process for sure.

It's you against them basically, so tensions will naturally arise.

The typical situation that has been occuring a lot in my playgroups is when you get to use a rule or ability that your heroes had not seen coming. They can get really frustrated. Like, if your heroes do not know what your monsters have for abilities, then you activate Knockback on a Hulk and throw a hero into the lava. You may say that your heroes could have asked about it earlier, but you are also responsible somehow for going through every component supposed to be visible to all players. I go through monsters prior to starting the encounter but I also go through Plot cards so we can avoid BS discussions afterwards where heroes basically accuse me to pull off cheap/cheaty wins out of abilities they did not know I possessed. Basically heroes have troubles with the OL hiding OL cards since they all have everything visible on the table so it is easy for them to blame me for deliberately missing out some rules or pointers over the course of the game.

Of course if you have an equally knowledgeable partner across the table then it helps a great deal.

The most recent situation of that kind was interesting. They basically wanted to grant a downed hero a Valor token for the reason that I could get an Infection token off the atttack killing off that hero. "If you can can do it, we can do it, period". That was tense.

The most recent situation of that kind was interesting. They basically wanted to grant a downed hero a Valor token for the reason that I could get an Infection token off the atttack killing off that hero. "If you can can do it, we can do it, period". That was tense.

Wow, though crowd! Glad my group is more reasonable

Have you tried using their argument against them?

As always, the sceptical have the biggest mouth, so it can lead to some spicy situations. In that case I was so tired of the bs that I didn't even get the balls to check for a FAQ entry and granted them the **** token since it was such a particular situation. But yeah, at this precise time, there was a me versus them situation for a rule they tried to exploit to their advantage. And yes, I am really looking forward to experiencing the same again with me in the role of the person taking advantage of said rule. Feels like I can wait for a long time, lol.

Same thing with the closed door on a dragon, which I couldn't find an explanation for at the time, they actually said we would vote for the outcome No way the dragon would be killed I said, no way the dragon would be pushed forward said the heroes, so I had to revert 3 actions just to get the clarification later on, that the monster could have well remained in place. What's frustrating is not that somebody is disputing my interpretation of the rules or that I end up in a difficult situation because of my own misunderstanding, the big problem in my mind is that NOBODY is actually taking my side or even remotely considering that I could be right. That just won't happen, lol. Then yes, it's 4 vs 1.

Oh I almost forgot but by players absolutely DESPISE the rule making lieutenants raising up after death have one additional action. Unfairness, they say! Yeah..

The LoS rule is also a classic example. They would always push for getting LoS in ridiculous angles because it looks like they could draw a line although clear passage would clearly be arguable. On the other hand my monsters apparently cannot shoot from corners or "exploiting" the same rule as it makes no sense in comparison. A hero archer may lean towards a side and throw an arrow due to sheer agility (heck, the mini itself looks like the hero can shoot from every angle), but a goblin is so stiff and stupid that he has to shoot from the middle of its square. Nobody is arguing about these things really as it would get ridiculous all the time, but people still make comments of that kind as the game progresses.

Also, I play Frenzy on a monster. They have Grisban and his third attack action, but playing Frenzy is cheaty in comparison, I don't know why. Actually I do, it's because I know they can activate Cosby's third action as the hero sheet appears visible in front of me whereas they have no idea I hold this OL card. But yeah..

"And we don't know if you're not changing the campaign track sheet and re-spec yourself for free since you have full control of everything". I mean, I think they trust me but still these comments arise from time to time, making the game psychologically tough! Tough to be the OL.

Also, I play Frenzy on a monster. They have Grisban and his third attack action, but playing Frenzy is cheaty in comparison, I don't know why. Actually I do, it's because I know they can activate Cosby's third action as the hero sheet appears visible in front of me whereas they have no idea I hold this OL card. But yeah..

Thats part of what makes it challenging for the heroes if you ask me, they know full well (or should atleast) what cards you might have in your hand and they need to plan their actions accordingly and in some cases just assume that you can play dash/frenzy/etc.

Overall it sounds like a though situation for you and Im not sure that I would actually play with people like that...I mean, this is a game after all! It is supposed to be fun! Fun for ALL the players, not just the heroes.

Also, I play Frenzy on a monster. They have Grisban and his third attack action, but playing Frenzy is cheaty in comparison, I don't know why. Actually I do, it's because I know they can activate Cosby's third action as the hero sheet appears visible in front of me whereas they have no idea I hold this OL card. But yeah..

Thats part of what makes it challenging for the heroes if you ask me, they know full well (or should atleast) what cards you might have in your hand and they need to plan their actions accordingly and in some cases just assume that you can play dash/frenzy/etc.

Overall it sounds like a though situation for you and Im not sure that I would actually play with people like that...I mean, this is a game after all! It is supposed to be fun! Fun for ALL the players, not just the heroes.

That's the thing, you're not really a player from their perspective, you're the "human" pulling the strings behind the monsters instead of some random automated mechanism with spawn points, action priority and standard monster behaviour systems and whatnot. As said earlier by some other poster, you're the GM and you make informed decisions to make it tough for the heroes, but the bottom line is that it remains THEIR adventure and you're only here to put some sticks in their wheels. Heck no, you're slapping them in the face and then get all your minions wiped out afterwards, that could summarize my experience with Descent lol. But it feels good doing so, har!

The storyline does not help much on that point as there isn't much said about you anyway, heck it could do some good if you claimed to be Zachareth instead of some unclear evil figure.

On a personal note, I play the English version of this game but we talk a different language which is not my native one either so arguing can be tricky at times, although I would still claim that it works more than alright mainly because we try to be reasonable and make sense of things. That's where we normally land after 15 minutes of heated discussion lol.

Haha, this thread has turned rather humorous and I enjoy everyone's input. I guess I will share a specific example, one that ultimately lead me to start this thread. I still don't know who is right in this situation, as I've sent a question to FFG but haven't heard back yet. In the quest "The Desecrated Tomb", my good friend argued that Khorayt has to have the shadow ability as he's the most powerful shadow dragon as described by the text and wouldn't make sense otherwise. My argument was that he doesn't have the shadow ability due to the fact that it's not listed on his specifications in the quest guide, and per the golden rules, the quest guide always overrules would be normal rules. We argued about this for quite some time and I finally just caved and said "fine, he has the shadow ability so I will have to spend a surge with Alric Farrow to attack him". This inevitably lead to a couple of misses which ultimately cost me a victory as Alric was beaten down by 1 of the heroes and Khorayt and the heroes snatched the blade and ran off for the exit. Upon reading further, it dawned on me that the shadow ability doesn't pertain to Alric Farrow as he's a monster, and is listed as a monster in the quest guide. It specifically states that a "adjacent hero must spend a surge or the attack is a miss". I texted my buddy and said "yeah, I think we played that wrong because shadow only pertains to heroes, and heroes can't attack Khorayt and cause damage anyway, so that's probably why they didn't bother adding shadow to Khrayt's specifications as it is irrelevant. This lead my buddy to argue that since it says that Alric Farrow is considered a "hero in that he can perform a stand up action during this quest" that he's considered a hero in general. I didn't even have the energy to argue back and say "well, if that's the case than I could've attacked twice every turn and that encounter would've been over awfully quick".

So, this lead me to send a question to FFG just to be safe, as I'm sure similar scenarios will come up in future campaigns and my goal is to have a fair and balanced game that is played as close to the rules as possible. My intent isn't to have one of those "see, I told you so!" moments, but rather to educate the group as we go forward so that more time can be spent playing the game and less time arguing.

@Glorious Strategist: Alric is a hero because he can stand up? Wow your friend is grasping at straws there. Sounds like some serious rules-lawyery exploitation going on there. Though there is nothing in the rules to back up his ideas, and they pretty clearly shoot him down in black and white. Alric is a lieutenant, end of story.

Your friends seem to be looking for any way to ensure they will win, throwing around whatever BS they can to achieve that. You're not doing them any favors by giving in.

@Indalecio: The OL should be seen as another player, and I wish there was a better way to get that point across. Hell the rule book clearly says that, if you can get the heroes to bother reading it. Maybe FFG has the right idea with the co-op adventure packs. Sounds like very few people actually want the monsters to be able to win a game.

I just wish the back and forth bickering, and the guilt trips that are hurled my way could come to an end or at least be diminished significantly as I thoroughly enjoy this game (hence already purchasing the expansions).

This is an issue that should definitely be addressed out of game. It's a trust / respect issue really. If you play with players that feel like you're the kind of person who will cheat / pull the wool over their eyes, this needs to change, and is ultimately the root of the entire problem. There are a few things that can help alleviate it, but they are band-aid solutions, not a cure.

The most recent situation of that kind was interesting. They basically wanted to grant a downed hero a Valor token for the reason that I could get an Infection token off the atttack killing off that hero. "If you can can do it, we can do it, period". That was tense.

A bit off-topic, but I'm unsure of what rule/ability you're referring to. We might be able to help provide the actual rules-based reasoning for each case.

In the quest "The Desecrated Tomb", my good friend argued that Khorayt has to have the shadow ability as he's the most powerful shadow dragon as described by the text and wouldn't make sense otherwise.

This is possibly the biggest game-rules fallacy that people try to use. NEVER assume that just because something makes thematic sense that it suddenly should have a rule for it. Board Games are not table-top roleplaying games.

So, in general, here are a few tips I recommend you take BEFORE you play your next game. Perhaps an email discussion is better so that there's lots of time for people to discuss things. Do them in your own way and with whatever level of sugar-coating you feel is appropriate, but I'm going to be blunt here.

1. Lay out that the guilt trips / constant assumptions that you're cheating or twisting the rules to your own benefit have to stop. Your players may not realize that they're ganging up on you, but they definitely are. Since others are likely to have a chance to play the overlord at some point, your goal is that the rules should fall on the side of what FFG intended, not necessarily in the OL's favor since you know you'll be a Hero soon anyway and that should be everyone else's goal as well.
2. If they can't trust you to know all of the rules and make the final call based on your own research, have everyone read them on their own. Link everyone to the digital rulebooks, the most updated FAQ and the FFG Sez post (linked above). Ask everyone to take some time to read those posts and replies so that they can see the mysteries behind the rulings that may not yet be published. Anyone attempting to argue from a place of ignorance should not have a say in the matter; if they want a voice, they need to do the leg-work to be well informed.
3. Tell them that reasoning for arguing rules must come from a rules-based perspective. Everything else is the equivalent of a logical fallacy and should be avoided. These points should pretty much apply to all board games. (Storytelling tabletop games like D&D are different. They are non-competitive and everything is up to the GM anyway.)
   1. Thematic enforcement of rules DO NOT APPLY. Ever. It's ALWAYS better to come up with some thematic idea to fit the rules than vice versa. (e.g. Khorayt doesn't have Shadow because he's turned it into extra health.) And even if you can't, that just means you're not being creative enough, and does NOT mean that you should change the rules.
   2. Just because it kind of works similarly in one case doesn't mean it always works that way in other similar situations. (e.g. A Lieutenant can "stand up like a hero" does not mean that Lieutenant is treated as a hero for all intents and purposes. The "like a hero" stops at his ability to stand up and doesn't affect anything else. Anything else explicitly mentioned in that process supersedes everything else, including the bit that mentions it only takes a single action. Reasoning being that since no monster gets a Revive action, it'd be too easy to keep the Lt. down)
   3. If the rules don't say you can, you can't. (This should be a golden rule that is only superseded by situations where you don't have a choice.)
4. Encourage your players to read through the quest guide, read all of your available overlord cards and monster abilities. If they have any questions, they should be asked before a quest starts. None of this is secret anyway.
5. I encourage you to point out any weird rules issues, Errata, or other combos before a quest starts. If you have a strategy that you know is legal, but that you think your heroes will find unexpected and as such will get defensive about when they see it for the first time, point out that it's legal before the quest starts. Yeah, you may be giving up some of your strategy, but it's better than a debate that you have to lose to and play wrong just so your players don't flip the table.

Lastly, if none of the above continues, playing a game is often not worth the stress of dealing with these kinds of players. Find another game, or find other players. Hopefully it won't come to that, though.

Best of luck!

I know that kinda heroes grabbing for straws as well. But I can turn the screw a notch tighter.

My just-now disciple loves to plan the moves for all heroes (four heroes plus Raythen) and if the others don't do his bidding he argues as long as it takes so that they do what he wants. He even withdraws their minis and places them where HE needs them.

Thematic enforcement of rules DO NOT APPLY. Ever.

Agreed, that if played in a serious competitive context, thematics are trumped by official rulings. And this should eliminate much of the bickering over the rules that some have found so taxing.

However, Descent can also be played in a light RPG context, in which thematics may have a small role to play in implementing house rules that enhance how a group enjoys playing. Even here, as long as everyone knows the rules ahead of time, and agrees upon them, much of the rules bickering can be eliminated.

My just-now disciple loves to plan the moves for all heroes (four heroes plus Raythen) and if the others don't do his bidding he argues as long as it takes so that they do what he wants. He even withdraws their minis and places them where HE needs them.

I'd tell him that the next time he does it, he sits out the rest of the quest while everyone gets to control his character while he watches. It's one thing to argue strategy, it's another to completely take over. IMO, it's better to not play with those kinds of players.

agreed and I already lost a player dear to me because she couldn't stand it, but I don't have much of a choice regarding players.

Well, I could still kick him out and take her in again...

Thematic enforcement of rules DO NOT APPLY. Ever.

Agreed, that if played in a serious competitive context, thematics are trumped by official rulings. And this should eliminate much of the bickering over the rules that some have found so taxing.

However, Descent can also be played in a light RPG context, in which thematics may have a small role to play in implementing house rules that enhance how a group enjoys playing. Even here, as long as everyone knows the rules ahead of time, and agrees upon them, much of the rules bickering can be eliminated.

I agree, thematics do NOT trump the rules. Another example of a debate I encountered on the same day as the Khorayt "shadow" debate was about gold and search cards. The heroes were under the impression that search items were allowed to be carried into new quests if not used. I showed them the rules and the section about search cards going back into the search deck at the end of each quest. They then argued that if not used, they should get double the gold. For example, they would get the 25 gold up front for finding a stamina potion, and then if they didn't use the stamina potion, they could sell it back for ANOTHER 25 gold, basically getting 50 gold for 1 stamina potion. I tried telling them that this was incorrect, but they were already mad that they couldn't keep their search items between quests so they weren't having any of my reasoning. I can't find anywhere in the rules where it says that their interpretation is correct, but then again I can't find anywhere where it specifically says they're wrong either. In my opinion, therein lies the problem with this game. It's far too open to interpretation and can easily be taken over by stronger personality types.

Sorry but you can't let them get away with everything. As a teacher by profession I can tell you that the more you give, the more they will try to grab from your cold lifeless hands. Thinking about it...being a teacher does really improve my OLing....

Geez, your play group sounds insufferable. What's so enjoyable about bullying someone into giving you vastly unfair advantages? You need a group that cares more about what the rules actually are than about securing the win.

Thematic enforcement of rules DO NOT APPLY. Ever.

Agreed, that if played in a serious competitive context, thematics are trumped by official rulings. And this should eliminate much of the bickering over the rules that some have found so taxing.

However, Descent can also be played in a light RPG context, in which thematics may have a small role to play in implementing house rules that enhance how a group enjoys playing. Even here, as long as everyone knows the rules ahead of time, and agrees upon them, much of the rules bickering can be eliminated.

I agree, thematics do NOT trump the rules. Another example of a debate I encountered on the same day as the Khorayt "shadow" debate was about gold and search cards. The heroes were under the impression that search items were allowed to be carried into new quests if not used. I showed them the rules and the section about search cards going back into the search deck at the end of each quest. They then argued that if not used, they should get double the gold. For example, they would get the 25 gold up front for finding a stamina potion, and then if they didn't use the stamina potion, they could sell it back for ANOTHER 25 gold, basically getting 50 gold for 1 stamina potion. I tried telling them that this was incorrect, but they were already mad that they couldn't keep their search items between quests so they weren't having any of my reasoning. I can't find anywhere in the rules where it says that their interpretation is correct, but then again I can't find anywhere where it specifically says they're wrong either. In my opinion, therein lies the problem with this game. It's far too open to interpretation and can easily be taken over by stronger personality types.

Mechanics always work precisely how the rules spell them out to work. They never work on the basis of "the rules don't say it doesn't work this way also, so we can do this!"

It specifically states that all search card items are sold at the end of the quest and returned to the search deck, and that the gold obtained is precisely equal to the numbers on the cards, regardless of whether they are sold or not. It doesn't say using them gets you half value and not using them gets you double.

I'm sorry, Amoshias, but some of your comments can be really hard to take and maybe a little out of line. Please be kind and not make stabs at people. I am sure he is happily married and I am sure they conduct them selves like adults. But even adults have disagreements. We are all human, right?

...huh?

I feel like you must be misreading something I wrote... you know a smiley (:-) ) signifies a joke, right? I'm not honestly suggesting that I think he's got a bad marriage or that he and his wife are going to divorce because of Descent. Quite the opposite, I'm suggesting that because he's playing with people he's close to, he is much more likely to be able to trust them not to game a system that (with strangers, for instance) would be easily abusable.

On the off chance that you read it that way, Glorious, please accept my sincere apologies.

Ah, sorry about that then ^.^ No worries then! Sometimes it's hard to read sarcasm/joking. Just looking out for the form people. I am glad you meant the very opposite. You are correct, it's awesome when couples can play games together. Makes me happy.

It's all good!