@DAMaz

I understand what Whitewing means. It`s all about balance. If the hero buy the Rune plate to armour their mage, then they`ve left someone else unarmoured. That should be the OL`s next target.

And about the conversion kit monsters, our OL looks at all the monsters he has and he usually ends up choosing the same ones, over and over, either because some are too easy to defeat, or don`t have abilities that generate enough win factor. Having a ton to choose from isn`t an advantage if they`re all mediocre choices for the campaign you`re playing.

Do you mean sorcerers, DAMaz? Because they got a nerf, not a buff, as far as I remember.

Yeah, I'm not sure why armoring the mage - with the best armor in the game - isn't important. A black die counters the hearts on a red die - and there are no monsters (IIRC) that get MORE than a bonus red die going from act 1 to act 2, and most get less. 2 health and a black die doesn't make your guy invulnerable, but it's an enormous boost.

In general, Charmy, it looks like your problem is that your hero party is beating you, as the overlord. There are probably better ways to fix this than massive balance changes to the basic game.

They've avoided reprinting a number of monsters from the conversion kit for good reason. Look at the ones they have reprinted: on the whole they tend to be weaker than some of the ones they didn't reprint (kobolds for example). If you stick to the monsters that have been reprinted you should be fine. However, some monsters don't match well to 2nd edition Descent. The heroes that have been reprinted have seen significant changes as well. Stick to using reprinted and new heroes and you should be fine.

My point isn't that it is a good decision to armor the mage: I'm saying as the overlord it shouldn't hinder you much to have the mage armored. The mage is typically a ranged combatant who doesn't want to position himself in a way that makes him vulnerable, which means diving him to get the kill is an overcomittal which should get your monsters killed. If he's armored that doesn't change anything. If he gets armor and moves more freely, an extra black die won't stop you from punishing that with the right choices and plays. There are plenty of monsters with piercing which can punish, or monsters which can target the mage in other ways without even going after his hit points (barghets with howl come to mind).

A lot of overlords fixate way too much on direct hit point damage. Further, the rune plate is one of the most expensive act 1 items. Armor as a whole is a little on the weak side in this game because of how many different ways there are to attack the heroes, and because the overlord can always choose a different monster. The best option for the heroes is to focus on outrageous damage output and mobility, picking off your monsters before they can really do anything. The armor is a ton of gold that doesn't help achieve that, and frankly you can just kill someone else who doesn't have armor.

I (as the usual OL) and my heroes, get a kick out of reading the threads in this forum. This statement should not be taken as negative. There often is some very good insight, and strategy tips provided.

What amazes us, however, is the constant threads discussing how this hero, or this monster, or this ability, or this shop item is over powered and must be nerfed ASAP or the game will go down in flames.

While I will agree that some things may be a little stronger/weaker than I (or my heroes) may like, none of us feel anything needs to be nerfed or buffed for that matter. I don't think that every thing in the game should provide perfect balance.

For example, if the OL gets some new benefit, card deck, etc., the heroes don't also have to have the exact matching opposite ability/heroic feat, etc.

The game is enjoyable for the very fact that it allows an amazing amount of combinations of things ... some which work well, and some which may not work so well.

We play with all of the expansions, all of the LTs, all of the Hero and Monster Collections, and the CK. We have a really good time doing so, and sometimes combinations that we think will work well don't, and vice versa. But the beauty of the game is all of those combinations, and the endless amount of experimenting, etc.

I for one do not want to see things indiscriminately nerfed and/or buffed. Quite frankly, until very recently, we continued to play by most of the original rules, even ignoring FAQ items which were intended to better balance things.

While I may agree with some who think certain aspects of the game should be addressed, if it is not any time soon, I don't think the world will end, the game will cease, the sky is falling, etc.

@DAMaz

I understand what Whitewing means. It`s all about balance. If the hero buy the Rune plate to armour their mage, then they`ve left someone else unarmoured. That should be the OL`s next target.

And about the conversion kit monsters, our OL looks at all the monsters he has and he usually ends up choosing the same ones, over and over, either because some are too easy to defeat, or don`t have abilities that generate enough win factor. Having a ton to choose from isn`t an advantage if they`re all mediocre choices for the campaign you`re playing.

1) Well I think the mage is in most parties the most threatening hero. Maybe it's very close with the healer, but knocking out the number 1 source of damage that usually likes to attack as often and with as many abilities as possible to get rid of the blocking monsters most of the time is a legit strategy, because he will have full fatigue or nearly full fatigue for the next turn.

2) You can't choose every monster in every quest, so having more monsters is handy in this regard alone. Then you should adept your monsters to the skills and equipment of the heroes, having a larger variety of monsters with distinct advantages helps you in this regard. Calling Giants and Golems mediocre monsters is just stupid imo, just to mention 2 very powerfull monsters of the conversion kit that didn't get changed at all, when rereleased.

Do you mean sorcerers, DAMaz? Because they got a nerf, not a buff, as far as I remember.

Yeah, I'm not sure why armoring the mage - with the best armor in the game - isn't important. A black die counters the hearts on a red die - and there are no monsters (IIRC) that get MORE than a bonus red die going from act 1 to act 2, and most get less. 2 health and a black die doesn't make your guy invulnerable, but it's an enormous boost.

In general, Charmy, it looks like your problem is that your hero party is beating you, as the overlord. There are probably better ways to fix this than massive balance changes to the basic game.

Yes I meant sorcerers and I think it's a buff. Completely healing your master monster and instead killing a (maybe even wounded) regular sorcerer is a big buff considering the summon ability. The master does more damage and has more HP than a regular monster and you effectivly get one master for sacrificing a minion. This way you can summon and attack instantly next turn. It's only a nerf if you can't reinforce and the master is the last one to live.

They've avoided reprinting a number of monsters from the conversion kit for good reason. Look at the ones they have reprinted: on the whole they tend to be weaker than some of the ones they didn't reprint (kobolds for example). If you stick to the monsters that have been reprinted you should be fine. However, some monsters don't match well to 2nd edition Descent. The heroes that have been reprinted have seen significant changes as well. Stick to using reprinted and new heroes and you should be fine.

My point isn't that it is a good decision to armor the mage: I'm saying as the overlord it shouldn't hinder you much to have the mage armored. The mage is typically a ranged combatant who doesn't want to position himself in a way that makes him vulnerable, which means diving him to get the kill is an overcomittal which should get your monsters killed. If he's armored that doesn't change anything. If he gets armor and moves more freely, an extra black die won't stop you from punishing that with the right choices and plays. There are plenty of monsters with piercing which can punish, or monsters which can target the mage in other ways without even going after his hit points (barghets with howl come to mind).

A lot of overlords fixate way too much on direct hit point damage. Further, the rune plate is one of the most expensive act 1 items. Armor as a whole is a little on the weak side in this game because of how many different ways there are to attack the heroes, and because the overlord can always choose a different monster. The best option for the heroes is to focus on outrageous damage output and mobility, picking off your monsters before they can really do anything. The armor is a ton of gold that doesn't help achieve that, and frankly you can just kill someone else who doesn't have armor.

1) I don't know I find giants, golems, sorcerers and wendigos to be among the strongest monsters of whole Descent 2E. Lavabeatles and Chaosbeasts are pretty strong as well.

It's true that they didn't reprint kobolds, but I think that's more because they take a lot of plastic to be produced. (you need 18 figures of them)

2) The mage always wants to position himself in a way that he can do a ton of damage. This means you often don't have to "dive" for him or he positioned himself in a way where he won't do much damage. Getting armor on your mage makes him endure more hits and thus gets a higher chance to get really good defensive rolls.

3) Naturally the mage has to move to inflict damage so they can't kill all the monsters in one turn or the OL made a huge mistake.

I have the new hero and monster kits, and frankly I have very little reason to use most of them much of the time. I've found little use for giants compared to ettins or merriods, sweep is so situational and the heroes are usually smart enough to just avoid it. Chaos beasts are decent and I've used them occasionally, same for sorcerers, but frankly overall the ones that have been updated are reasonably well balanced. My point is that you should, for balance and design reasons, avoid using the ones that haven't been or aren't being reprinted in new kits. The 1st edition monsters were designed for use in much larger maps and a much different game. The heroes in the CK are the bigger issue though.

I've had no difficulty limiting the mage's potential for damage, unless he's willing to risk himself heavily to get that damage done. Rune plate does indeed improve his survivability, but not to the extent where he can casually do whatever he wants or go wherever he wants. It's a good item, but it's absolutely not overpowered. Let me remind everyone that just because an item is better than other items doesn't mean it breaks game balance. Items don't have to be balanced against each other, they must be balanced against the overlord's options. Can the overlord still counter play? The answer is absolutely. Also, my favorite mage class, the conjurer, gains very little benefit from Rune Plate. (High Mage Quellen as the Conjurer is AMAZING).

Now, I'm not trying to tell people what they should or should not do in their own games. However, the idea was put forth to create a community balance patch of sorts, and frankly I think most of the ideas being floated are silly and unnecessary. If you want to houserule things and your players agree that's fine, but I can't agree that the nerfs to the heroes are needed.

I actually disagree that Rune Plate is overpowered. Armoring the mage isn't particularly helpful most of the time, and by act 2 the extra black die doesn't make that much of a difference anyway. Note that in Descent, the best overlord strategies are typically ones that do not revolve around knocking down the heroes, but rather ones that punish the heroes' specific weaknesses and rush map objectives. Of course it's great to punish the heroes and knock 'em out when they screw up, and it's good to pressure and harm them to force them to play more safely and slower (giving you more time to secure your objectives), but straight up getting the kill doesn't actually matter most of the time. I also find it's not usually that hard: even with rune plate there are a variety of monsters in act 1 that can obliterate mages (like volucrux reavers with reliable piercing 2, or other monsters that don't target heroes hit points like howling barghests or burrowing plague worms).

I don't get how you can defend the Rune Plate. Take a look at other armors in the game. Look at the Nerekhall Plate, an Act II item. Then look back at the Rune Plate. See the problem now? The Nerekhall plate costs more, and is an Act II item, yet it is strictly worse in every single way.

Everything you said about dealing with a Mage in Rune Plate is valid. Yes, there are counters. It is not insurmountable. That is not what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is that the item is too good compared to other items in its class. It is the "Diamond in the Rough" card that stands out so brightly from the others that games might be won or lost based on whether the Rune Plate was found in that campaign or not. Even a non-mage would rather wear Rune Plate than any other armor in the Act I deck.

My proposed change makes the Rune Plate a little more in line with other Act I items. Even with the change it still is one of the best items in the game.

I've played this game with a variety of players and different groups as overlord, and have hosted the game multiple times at local gaming and hobby stores. I've got a regular who's a world champion calibur chess player who really takes his time and analyzes things, and I usually still wind up winning in the end. I don't think the heroes need to be nerfed.

I'd like to think I'm quite good at strategy games too. The first Shadow Rune campaign I played against a group of heroes with more experience than me I won. After having played more, I still consider the Shadow Rune to be the hardest campaign for the Overlord to win, so that is saying something.

When I play it, I have to shutdown the heroes' ability to get treasure by time pressuring them so much that they can't 't pick up any search cards. I also have to tightly control every quest pick. If I play it any other way I would likely lose.

It means a lot of quests never get played because I feel limited to picking quests in which the time pressure is so intense that the heroes can't stop to grab any search cards without losing the objective.

That gets repetitive, and I don't have the luxury to do that in other campaigns which have less "race to the finish" quests. My proposed changes would not really have affected how my Shadow Rune games went, so I'm not proposing hero nerfs because I can't win. I am proposing it to make other strategies viable. They also weren't playing with the Treasure Hunter, which can get treasures without really interrupting his other actions.

I will address your remaining points one by one.

1. Unnecessary, since it's entirely the overlord's choice to play rumor quests (unless the travel card which forces one shows up, which should have consequences). The overlord shouldn't play the card unless he believes he has an advantage and can win it reliably without allowing the heroes too much time to gather treasure, or the reward is significant enough that letting the heroes get some treasure is acceptable. I admit I sometimes never play one during a campaign due to not believing I'm ahead enough to do so, but other times I have no problem slapping 2 of them down in a row and taking some nice relics. The trick is to determine when you are likely to win the rumor quests and evaluate risk/reward of the amount of treasure they are likely to get in the time allotted, and whether the rewards are worth it. Some of the extra overlord cards are insanely useful.

You yourself admit you are reluctant to play rumors. Overlord relics are often not useful. In some campaigns that are very relic heavy, like Shadow Rune, or other campaigns where you often don't have lieutenants, you will never have a chance to even use the vast majority of them. The main benefit of earninga relic most of the time is denying the heroes the relic, and of course the best way to do that is to never play the quest in the first place.

I think a player is making a tactical blunder playing a rumor quest as OL, even if they are winning. All it takes is one good item purchase to swing the balance of power hugely in the heroes' favor. "Oh look, Nanok just got the Bearded Axe early in Act I, guess my master Giants and Shadow Dragons are not living more than one turn after all. Time to use legions of small monsters again.."

The Overlord doesn't get lucky campaign changing boosts like this. I want to keep the gold from spiraling out of control while simultaneously making the rumor quests get played with regularity. I think everyone at the table benefits from this.

And yes, a handful of Overlord rewards are good. Also some are terrible. Check out the last Manor of Ravens overlord reward for example

3. This is just silly. The people who developed the game did this for a very specific reason, there's no reason to nerf hero treasure further. If you're struggling as the overlord, you're likely making some poor choices here and there. I believe balance is very close to 50/50 as it is.

Why is this silly? The "Nothing" was in the base game. The heroes get free items worth hundreds of gold from a chest.

The secret passage can be solved in a single hero turn on occasion.

To go as far as to say that my proposal is "silly" leads me to believe you must be of an opinion that the "Nothing" should never have been in the game in the first place. I don't share that. Most things in the game have a chance to fail. Searching should too.

4. Ridiculous overnerf, and you're limiting one of the most fun things for the heroes. Good shuffling should be enough to deal with this, the probability is that it won't show up more than half the time in quests anyway.

This argument doesn't make sense to me. If your position of "good shuffling" is correct, and the heroes shouldn't be seeing it more than half the time, then allowing it to be looted only once per Act changes very little!

What this change does do is weaken the Treasure Hunter's ability to raid the search deck every quest for the Treasure Chest so they get it constantly. I am not the only person who thinks there is a big problem with that. Without the chests there the TH still gives the heroes a massive gold boost so they can buy more stuff anyway.

I take it you've never had a campaign where the heroes got so many chests that they started passing on the cards on shopping phases because the item deck was picked clean of everything they wanted. Lucky you!

5. You should simply just not allow the use of heroes or monsters from the conversion kit period: the balance in it is poor at best. There's a reason most of the repints have had significant changes.

6. See above.

I don't understand this position. More choice is good. Why eliminate all the great stuff from the conversion kit just because some of it has balance issues? Why not tweak them so they become playable and fun instead?

Nanok is fun to play. I don't want to ban him. I want to bring him in line so he isn't an obviously superior warrior choice which overshadows all others.

7. I don't consider Elder Mok to be that broken as some people here do (the reprint that is). In general, I find that forcing heroes to stay together weakens their ability to achieve the objectives considerably. Most heroes don't have the ability to consistently regen hit points or stamina each turn without surrendering actions to do so, and all of the healer classes are rather limited in what they can do in any given turn with their stamina. If the group does have the ability to consistently regen hit points or stamina, then there are other sacrifices they have made to get that. There are many ways to punish heroes being clumped up, and if they aren't clumped up, Elder Mok loses most of his oomph. Also, his might and awareness are poor. Last time I played against Elder Mok was just last week, and black venom (bandits from Manor of Ravens, great monsters btw if treasure is a concern for you) really shut him down hard. Wasn't at all difficult to hit him with doom and then pummel him into oblivion with doom on him.

Everything you are saying is true. There are counters to Mok. I am not disputing that.

What I am saying is that Mok in his current state is so much better than other healers. Compare poor Ispher's ability to recover 1 heart on his turn with Mok's ability to potentially recover 4 of either stamina or hearts. Even with my proposed nerf he is STILL better than Ispher in pretty much every way.

The game is better when more choices become competitive. Ispher should be buffed, for example.

8. This shouldn't be an issue anyway, just shuffle the deck once at the start of the game, and put drawn travel cards into a discard pile. Don't shuffle the deck again until you run out of travel cards (which you shouldn't).

This is not how things work currently. According to official rulings, the travel deck is supposed to be reshuffled after every quest. This means it is certainly possible to get that random merchant giving out free items every single quest if the heroes are lucky enough. My proposed rule simply ensures that does not happen multiple times.

9. If you know the heroes have a skill that makes winning a specific quest very likely for them, then it's your job as overlord to avoid playing that quest. All you have to do is win the previous quest and choose a different one. Hell, the quest you are complaining about is a rumor quest, which is entirely your choice whether to play it or not because the heroes can't play it until you play the card. And if, and I mean if, the heroes manage the unlikely scenario of drawing the travel card that forces you to play a rumor quest and it's the only one you have in your hand, and they have Prayer of Peace, then I would say that the heroes deserve an advantage. And even then, that quest isn't is a sure win for them because the second part you left out is that skarn gets knocked out of the building when defeated, heals a bunch, and can then go on to escape still, winning you the quest. The only thing you forfeit in this scenario is the overlord card, it's still playable, especially with a saved dash card, proper positioning of the bandits and wraiths, etc. This doesn't need changing, and I consider prayer of peace one of the weaker options for the disciple early on in the game. I'd much rather have Cleansing Touch, Divine Fury, or Time of Need. Considering that it requires 2 XP, you could simply pre-empt it by playing this quest before they have 2 XP, right after the introduction if you won that.

Arguing that this quest is doable for the Overlord in this situation is not realistic. If you read the quest, you'll notice that it is the heroes that decide where Skarn ends up after he is defeated in the Rookery. If the heroes place Skarn in the northern part of the map, you will notice that there is a locked door there that no one except Skarn and the Heroes can open, so all those bandits and wraiths are not gonna be helping.

Skarn will be stunned after he's defeated in the Rookery and cannot open the door on his next turn. With all the time in the world, the heroes can easily ensure that he is defeated in the Rookery while most of the team still has their actions. He only heals 12 health on landing, and the heroes have been untouched the entire time. The heroes simply jump from the rookery and defeat Skarn with the remainder of their actions. They really cannot lose this encounter barring some supreme miraculous string of bad luck.

Furthermore, this quest is just one example of how Prayer of Peace can break encounters. It is an ill-conceived design in its current form.

I believe my proposed version addresses these issues while still making it a useful skill. I don't think its a nerf to this skill, simply a change that keeps its original intent without breaking things.

10. Berserker is a little underpowered, but changing it because you don't like the thematics is a bad reason. I don't have a major problem with this change, but it's not going to help make the berserker any more playable when you've got the Knight available (I believe a properly played Knight is still better than the Marshall, too much freaking mobility and support).

I am not saying there is no counterplay to I Am the Law. What I am saying is that I Am the Law again is strictly superior to other similar skills in its category. There is a reason most of the things I've brought up are also brought up by other people again and again in forum conversations here and on BGG.

Everything you say about the Knight I agree with, and maybe the Berserker does need more buffs to make him more desirable. I would love to hear any proposals you have in that area. Personally I think Charge is an awesome skill on a fast Warrior, and the fact that it ignores Immobilize makes it better still.

It should be fairly telling that for the most part, your changes are all directed at nerfing the heroes.

There are tons of heroes, items and skills which need to be buffed too. A whole bunch of the heroes never see the light of day because their current form is so bad. I'd like to see that changed, hence my suggestion of a mod pack or something similar.

Also, Prayer of peace requires 2 stamina and an action to activate. It may win you a few battles, but if the disciple gets to use it all the time, regularly, the OL is doing something wrong.

In the situations I mentioned, the Disciple is simply using Prayer of Peace and then resting, so the stamina cost is not a factor. And again, in the situations I mentioned, there is nothing the OL did 'wrong' other than end up in the quest to begin with. Picking a quest should not be an auto-lose.

Again, I don't think my proposed Prayer of Peace is a nerf. It simply changes it so it doesn't break encounters.

Yup. To comment on what whitewing said earlier, too. The more I think about it, the more I think basic 2 is a great way to punish the Marshal. There are 2 "befuddle" cards, but also many of the other cards are great at getting the heroes to suffer extra fatigue. Even "Mental Error" (which Alys is likely to pass) is a "Alys suffers 1 fatigue" card. If shee happens to fail, the attack gains +2 instead and a surge. She's likely to pass one of the blinding speed tests, but not both. I'm also not really bothered by "By the Book," since it's only once per turn.

I think you're right about Basic II being better for Alys, but I still generally take Basic I except in rare circumstances. Giving up Dash and Frenzy is a huge sacrifice for the significantly inferior Blinding Speed and 1x Flurry. I only take Basic II if I'm playing vs. 4 heroes with unique archetypes, and their attributes have key weaknesses in areas that jive with Basic II's cards. This is not as often as I'd like.

In general, Charmy, it looks like your problem is that your hero party is beating you, as the overlord. There are probably better ways to fix this than massive balance changes to the basic game.

As I mentioned, I'm not proposing these changes because I'm having trouble winning.

Many of the proposed changes I made will not have any impact on the average game. They address the major outliers.

If you dont' play with specific heroes/classes you would never even notice these changes. If you aren't abusing classes like the TH for tons of item cards you didn't buy, then you won't notice the changes. If you were actively avoiding rumors, like most clever OLs are doing right now, then you wouldn't have noticed the changes.

Let me remind everyone that just because an item is better than other items doesn't mean it breaks game balance. Items don't have to be balanced against each other, they must be balanced against the overlord's options. Can the overlord still counter play? The answer is absolutely. Also, my favorite mage class, the conjurer, gains very little benefit from Rune Plate. (High Mage Quellen as the Conjurer is AMAZING).

If an Act I item is far far superior to every other item in its own deck, and would be completely at home inside an Act II deck with other comparable Act II items, I think that is a clear sign of imbalance. If you still believe that it isn't imbalanced, then I think I'm out of bullets here,and will let my argument stand as is.

Also, when you were saying that defeating the heroes should not be the strategy of choice for the overlord, please remember there are times when that IS the required objective. Many of the finale quests, The Wyrm Rises Encounters 1 and 2, and more have the explicit objective of defeating heroes to win. Improving survivability by leaps and bounds is hard to deal with in those situations.

What amazes us, however, is the constant threads discussing how this hero, or this monster, or this ability, or this shop item is over powered and must be nerfed ASAP or the game will go down in flames.

While I will agree that some things may be a little stronger/weaker than I (or my heroes) may like, none of us feel anything needs to be nerfed or buffed for that matter. I don't think that every thing in the game should provide perfect balance.

For example, if the OL gets some new benefit, card deck, etc., the heroes don't also have to have the exact matching opposite ability/heroic feat, etc.

I'm not trying to signal a disaster warning here. The sky is not falling. I don't want the OL and Hero to move in lockstep with each other.

I believe the vast majority of the game remains unencumbered by what I'm proposing.

I love this game, even in its current form. I would just like it to be better, and I think the more balanced it is, the better it gets in my view. Getting people to agree on balance is tougher, and it definitely seems I'm in an uphill battle on this thread at least.

I hope my posts have given some food for thought at least. Look forward to more discussions. I have plenty more ideas

I'm not going to touch on all of your points, but just regarding Rune Plate- it is an awesome piece of armor, and it's easily one of the most beneficial Act 1 shop cards. I don't mind having it in the Act 1 deck, however, because it's one of the few really good items the heroes are guaranteed to see. Those Act 2 armors that Rune Plate measures up to have no certainty of being available at all.

Before you laugh that point off- I'm currently coming to the end of a Labyrinth of Ruin campaign- we've played 2 Act 2 quests so far, no rumors. The heroes have not seen a single Act 2 melee weapon in the shop. There have been 2 treasure chests in Act 2- Obsidian Scalemail and Ice Storm. We have a knight and a skirmisher who, 1 quest before the finale are still rolling blue/red Act 1 weapons. and we may have to fight the finale that way. This could just as easily have happened with armor, runes, or bows.

I'm not going to touch on all of your points, but just regarding Rune Plate- it is an awesome piece of armor, and it's easily one of the most beneficial Act 1 shop cards. I don't mind having it in the Act 1 deck, however, because it's one of the few really good items the heroes are guaranteed to see. Those Act 2 armors that Rune Plate measures up to have no certainty of being available at all.

Before you laugh that point off- I'm currently coming to the end of a Labyrinth of Ruin campaign- we've played 2 Act 2 quests so far, no rumors. The heroes have not seen a single Act 2 melee weapon in the shop. There have been 2 treasure chests in Act 2- Obsidian Scalemail and Ice Storm. We have a knight and a skirmisher who, 1 quest before the finale are still rolling blue/red Act 1 weapons. and we may have to fight the finale that way. This could just as easily have happened with armor, runes, or bows.

This is why giving them extra shopping phases from rumor quests can be dangerous.

This is turning into a huge mess of quotations so I'm not going to quote.

Firstly: it doesn't matter how good runeplate is compared to other items. It's perfectly acceptable for an item to be better than other items. For balance purposes, the only thing that matters is whether it breaks the interactions between overlord and heroes. It does not, and therefore does not need a nerf.

It's a strategy game. If your complaint is that you don't pick quests which don't favor you so nerf the heroes so they don't favor the heroes, then you're missing the point. There should be quests that slightly favor heroes so that they have quests to pick when they win. If you just want to play every quest, try playing in not campaign mode. I have no problem with not playing every quest each time.

I'm not reluctant to play rumors, I just don't always do so. Sometimes it's hugely advantageous to do so when I know it's a clear win and the relic is nice and the overlord card reward is nice. The bonus threat is great.

It's silly because the developers specifically knew what they were doing when they decided to replace the nothing card with the secret room card. It was a very deliberate decision, not a mistake. It's not imbalancing at all to have them replace nothing, and it's a silly nerf to treasure when it's not needed. And yeah, I don't think the nothing should be in the game. It's not fun when it shows up, it doesn't add anything to the game, and I don't like adding silly risk for no reason. The search cards are already highly variable.

What it changes is that you're forcibly altering a mechanic for no reason other than the fact that you seem to think heroes shouldn't be able to get treasure easily. Most of your changes target treasure gaining, and I think you're way off course here. Don't fix what isn't broken, and the mechanic as is simply is not broken. We're discussing a list of possible community wide agreed upon nerfs or buffs, and nothing you've listed is convincing enough to qualify. Community nerfs must be OBVIOUS.

If you want to change him for your games sure, it's your game. As a community change? No. I don't think Nanok needs it. I also don't think he overshadows other warriors. I'd rather play Syn'drael, she's got the best freaking heroic feat in the game. Trenloe is also better than Nanok. The extra surge is nice but frankly, warriors typically don't have all that much to spend surges on.

I dispute the notion that Mok is that much better than other healers.

So what if the heroes get lucky occasionally? If your shuffling is so piss poor that they get the same draws over and over again, then I still think you can win from there.

I've won this quest after having the heroes massacre skarn in the rookery. Proper positioning and usage of the wraiths and bandits to ensure that the heroes place skarn in an optimal location for you. Proper use of overlord cards from there is fine. And if they've got an ability set that makes this quest a bad choice for you, don't choose it.

I think the marshall is around where warriors should be on average, but they're all playable and can win so I don't see the need to place nerfs or buffs. The berserker is a little weak but cripple is still sick good.

The thing is, I don't think any of what you are proposing actually improves the game. I think it places unnecessary limits on hero progress, which unjustly manipulates probabilities in favor of the overlord. The rumor quest mechanic already unfairly rewards the overlord by design because he has the ultimate say in whether they are played or not: except in the extreme rare case that travel card shows up, the overlord will only ever play a rumor quest when it benefits him. It's a risk/reward system: the overlord is rewarded for good planning and estimation of success odds, but the risk is if he estimates poorly, the heroes can get extra loot. That's mechanically a good system. If you want to play the rumor quests, you can always play them individually or in a mini-campaign.

And yes, knocking the heroes out in the finale is often required, which is why winning all the others to give you a huge edge compensates heavily for a tanky group. I've found in act 2 it's not at all difficult to burst down even the tankiest of heroes with 3 dice monsters. I've wrecked entire act 2 groups with a single master shadow dragon. And frankly, the Shadow Rune campaign is the worst designed of all of them: Labyrinth of Ruin and Shadow of Nerekhall are vast improvements.

Wow. Usually I am ready to pounce and provide my 1.3 cents worth. But @Zaltyre and @Whitewing have said it all. Sigh.

Firstly: it doesn't matter how good runeplate is compared to other items. It's perfectly acceptable for an item to be better than other items. For balance purposes, the only thing that matters is whether it breaks the interactions between overlord and heroes. It does not, and therefore does not need a nerf.

Hmm, I guess I do have a little more to say about this.

I make games for a living, so I believe I know what I'm talking about when I say huge treasure disparities are not a good thing to have happen. With the exception of very special, hard to acquire items like mystical Relic rewards, items of a similar category and price should be within a decent range of one another.

I don't know if you play video games, but look at any RPG in them. Go to the shop in one and you won't find, "Wooden Sword" for 500gp next to "+4 Mythril Axe" for 400gp. All you end up seeing then is item homogenization, where everyone who plays the game buys the same obviously superior stuff. Similarly, heroes will save up for the rune plate at the end of Act I every time, which is boring and predictable. Its better if there is at least some debate going on between possible alternatives.

It doesn't make sense thematically either. Something as awesomely powerful as the Rune Plate would not be valued by shop keepers as cheaper than some Nerekhall Plate. The marketplace would not have priced it that way.

It's a strategy game. If your complaint is that you don't pick quests which don't favor you so nerf the heroes so they don't favor the heroes, then you're missing the point. There should be quests that slightly favor heroes so that they have quests to pick when they win. If you just want to play every quest, try playing in not campaign mode. I have no problem with not playing every quest each time.

I don't think the things I was proposing make the heroes less likely to win these quests. They simply slow down their ability to amass treasure on maps where they aren't already so time pressured that they can't search the tokens anyway.

You're right in that I wanted to target gold runs. As is, I feel as Overlord that I must always try to hit the heroes in the pocket books by choosing quests where treasure opportunities are scarce and they have to run as fast as possible through the map to have a chance of winning. I wanted to be able to mix things up without digging myself into a grave in doing so.

I'm not reluctant to play rumors, I just don't always do so. Sometimes it's hugely advantageous to do so when I know it's a clear win and the relic is nice and the overlord card reward is nice. The bonus threat is great.

You only get bonus threat if you don't actually spend more threat than you amassed in trying to win the quest.

You pointed out that you only play Rumors if you feel "ahead enough to do so". And as AiriusTorpora said, it is very dangerous to give the heroes additional shopping phases.

I would prefer it if the mechanics of the game allowed for times when an Overlord would play a rumor to try to catch up to the heroes. If it is something where the overlord must feel "ahead enough" to play one, then they just aren't going to get played much outside of Epic or Mini-Campaign play.

It's silly because the developers specifically knew what they were doing when they decided to replace the nothing card with the secret room card. It was a very deliberate decision, not a mistake. It's not imbalancing at all to have them replace nothing, and it's a silly nerf to treasure when it's not needed. And yeah, I don't think the nothing should be in the game. It's not fun when it shows up, it doesn't add anything to the game, and I don't like adding silly risk for no reason. The search cards are already highly variable.

Its odd to me that you so strongly dislike the CK heroes and monster balance, and yet you use the "developers specifically knew what they were doing" argument when it comes to the "Nothing". They don't always get it right.

But yes, since you are of the view the "Nothing" should never have been in the game in the first place, convincing you that it should be added alongside Secret Passage is unlikely to succeed. I don't think its a "silly risk". Most things in the game are subject to chance and have a possibility of failure. The search cards are not 'highly variable'. They are worth either 25 or 50gp each with the exception of the chest and passage. I think 0-50gp improves the variability, at least a little.

What it changes is that you're forcibly altering a mechanic for no reason other than the fact that you seem to think heroes shouldn't be able to get treasure easily. Most of your changes target treasure gaining, and I think you're way off course here. Don't fix what isn't broken, and the mechanic as is simply is not broken. We're discussing a list of possible community wide agreed upon nerfs or buffs, and nothing you've listed is convincing enough to qualify. Community nerfs must be OBVIOUS.

So what if the heroes get lucky occasionally? If your shuffling is so piss poor that they get the same draws over and over again, then I still think you can win from there.

Since I haven't heard much support for my ideas yet, I'll concede that point. Perhaps I'll end up proposing them as an optional mod pack. My views were obvious to me, for what that's worth.

The heroes already acquire treasure regularly to increase their power. However, if the heroes are very lucky, they may end up with more treasure chests than they should be getting on average, secret passage and travel cards which award them dozens of additional items by the end of the campaign that they didn't pay for. There is no similar lucky streak for the Overlord. No travel card gives the Overlord additional open monster groups, exp, additional defense dice, or other permanent buffs.

I also observed you didn't mention my point about how by the current rules the travel deck should be reshuffled at the end of each quest.

Since you were not shuffling the travel deck, which is roughly equivalent to my proposal of removing item-giving cards, then at least we agree on that point.

I don't think Nanok needs it. I also don't think he overshadows other warriors. I'd rather play Syn'drael, she's got the best freaking heroic feat in the game. Trenloe is also better than Nanok. The extra surge is nice but frankly, warriors typically don't have all that much to spend surges on.

Huh? Trenloe?

Trenloe has 3 speed and 3 stamina vs 4 and 4.

Trenloe's heroic feat doesn't hold a candle to Nanok's. Remove one defense die, something that might increase your damage? Versus: "How about I just not get dealt 11 damage, cursed and immobilized by that big monster attack."

With many of the weapons in the game the extra free surge could translate into +3 damage or more. I don't know about your warriors, but my warriors love having all the surges they can get when wielding things like the Grinding Axe!

I dispute the notion that Mok is that much better than other healers.

Unfortunately you did not make any additional argument here. Even if it doesn't show in this thread, there is a large amount of the community that believes Mok is way better than most healers in the game. He was completely broken prior to his re-printing, and now only slightly less so.

I've won this quest after having the heroes massacre skarn in the rookery. Proper positioning and usage of the wraiths and bandits to ensure that the heroes place skarn in an optimal location for you. Proper use of overlord cards from there is fine. And if they've got an ability set that makes this quest a bad choice for you, don't choose it.

I don't think you actually read my post carefully. I already pointed out that the Wraiths and Bandits cannot join the battle because the locked door requiring attribute tests is in the way. You really believe a stunned Skarn can hold out against 4 healthy heroes by himself for the two turns it will take him to unstun himself, move to and successfully open the door with 12 health? And that's assuming they don't just block the door entirely with familiars/stones/etc.

I hope someone steps in and backs me up on this, because I know I'm right on this point.

I haven't played Manor of Ravens yet, I can't comment on the Skarn stuff.

Regarding Trenloe (I'm speaking here of H&M version): He's amazing. We have Trenloe the Knight in our party, outfitted with Elven Boots and the Ring of Power, making him almost as good as 4/4 (though his range is shorter on "Advance.") He has the obsidian scalemail for armor, and so recovers 2 fatigue most times he is attacked. Gray + black + 1 requires a lucky (or unlucky, depending how you see it) roll to get through for most monsters. He also has a high willpower, making him difficult to dark charm.

Regarding Rune Plate, I still disagree. Yes, it's priced lower than other things of its "caliber." Yes, it's of a higher quality than many Act 1 items. However, it's not the best there is. If a hero party only had 175 gold, I'd buy the Elven Boots+ the Mana Weave (class dependent) over the Rune Plate. If I have the gold to spare, it will go on the shopping list, no doubt- but how do you know when you've got gold to spare? Every wonderful item may come up in the first shopping step of Act 2 (costing upwards of 1000 gold,) and then there could be utterly useless baubles for the rest of the campaign. Having money left in the bank is crucial for the heroes in Act 2, and dropping your last bundle on Rune Plate is not always the best idea.

As for the search deck, I think there's less distinction between your positions than you think. There are 12 cards in the search deck:

3x Stamina Potion = $25 each

3x Health Potion = $25 each

1x Power Potion = $50

1x Fire Flask = $50

1x Warding Talisman = $50

1x Curse Doll = $50

1x Treasure Chest = $0-125 (Act/Item dependent)

1x Nothing (or Secret Passage) = $0

Most encounters have 4 search tokens, 2 encounters per quest. If a party searches all the tokens, they're most likely to get about 250 gold (assuming the treasure chest is sold, and has an average resale of $50) with a 2/3 chance of finding the treasure chest. There is also a 2/3 chance of finding the nothing card (or secret passage.)

The secret passage is not a direct benefit for the heroes- it's a higher risk/higher reward offer. Instead of "nothing," they get "maybe nothing, at the cost of actions during the quest," and "definitely nothing, if you choose to ignore it."

If you increase the search deck size from 12 to 13, you decrease the chance of finding the treasure chest by 5%, and decrease the average gold accumulated closer to 225. Over the course of a whole campaign, that's just 200 less gold for the heroes (which is not nothing,) but more than made up for by playing a single rumor quest.

Mok is great at healing himself, but depending on the healer class/build, there are days I'd much rather have Avric or Augur at my back than Mok. The revamped Sahla and Andira Runehand look to be pretty formidable, as well.

Regarding Trenloe (I'm speaking here of H&M version): He's amazing. We have Trenloe the Knight in our party, outfitted with Elven Boots and the Ring of Power, making him almost as good as 4/4 (though his range is shorter on "Advance.") He has the obsidian scalemail for armor, and so recovers 2 fatigue most times he is attacked. Gray + black + 1 requires a lucky (or unlucky, depending how you see it) roll to get through for most monsters. He also has a high willpower, making him difficult to dark charm.

Elven Boots and the Ring of Power make Nanok pretty much a 5/5, so that isn't unique to Trenloe. Verikas is great too once you compensate for his 3/3, but Nanok starts off great right off the bat.

And he doesn't have the "Advance" problem.

I will grant you that Trenloe has higher defensive potential than Nanok for sure, but Nanok has higher offensive power.

Being more difficult to Dark Charm is great, but 2 vs 3 Perception is a big deal too. Nanok is significantly more likely to evade things like Pit Traps, Trip Wires, etc.

People also seem to forget that it isn't that Nanok can't wear armor. He certainly can. There are many times where the extra damage output of the surge isn't necessary, such as when clearing out Kobolds or other weaker creatures. In those situations, at the start of turn Nanok can don the Obsidian Scalemail with the best of them and be rolling Black + Black, which puts him easily on even footing with Trenloe in the defense department.

And as I said earlier, there is no contest when it comes to Heroic Feats.

I continue to believe he is broken. I guess we'll what FFG does with him in his reprinting...

Regarding Rune Plate, I still disagree. Yes, it's priced lower than other things of its "caliber." Yes, it's of a higher quality than many Act 1 items. However, it's not the best there is. If a hero party only had 175 gold, I'd buy the Elven Boots+ the Mana Weave (class dependent) over the Rune Plate. If I have the gold to spare, it will go on the shopping list, no doubt- but how do you know when you've got gold to spare? Every wonderful item may come up in the first shopping step of Act 2 (costing upwards of 1000 gold,) and then there could be utterly useless baubles for the rest of the campaign. Having money left in the bank is crucial for the heroes in Act 2, and dropping your last bundle on Rune Plate is not always the best idea.

What you say is true, but that is the case no matter how badly OP an Act I item is. If there was an Act I weapon that gave BRR damage, it would be massively out of place as well. However, it still might be better to take "Elven Boots + Mana Weave" going into Act II for the reasons you stated.

If we start to tolerate items like Rune Plate being in the game untouched, and more get added, its going to mess with Act I's balance. The more of them there are, the more likely these super items could show up early in Act I. Soon the OL is struggling because he doesn't have access to Act II monsters, but is starting to face Act II caliber equipment.

If you increase the search deck size from 12 to 13, you decrease the chance of finding the treasure chest by 5%, and decrease the average gold accumulated closer to 225. Over the course of a whole campaign, that's just 200 less gold for the heroes (which is not nothing,) but more than made up for by playing a single rumor quest.

I agree, what I propose is a minor change, and your points help elucidate that. That's why I was surprised that Whitewing was calling my idea to bring back "Nothing" silly. Its a minor change that gives a bit more risk to treasure, but doesn't affect the average treasure gain much.

Mok is great at healing himself, but depending on the healer class/build, there are days I'd much rather have Avric or Augur at my back than Mok. The revamped Sahla and Andira Runehand look to be pretty formidable, as well.

Looking at the new versions, wow Sahla and Andira were significantly buffed! That is another way to balance things. If they'd rather bring the other healers up to the level of Mok rather than bringing him down to them, then it still achieves the goal of giving the players interesting choices.

I have to say that the more I play this game, the more I find it balanced. Furthermore, I find that more and more cards are interesting in different situations. There were cards I had completely overlooked before, that I start to play again because I have changed my view on their useability. I still stand firm on the fact Dash feels way above any other card in terms of power, but overall I am having a blast playing Basic II with situational yet powerful effects. There seems to be a viable strategy against any kind of heroes setting and I am really glad that my initial sceptism has been proven wrong. Like many others here I am playing the Overlord exclusively, but I am having a kick out of finding weaknesses in the hero party and trying to capitalize on that.

I am for instance facing Leoric of the Book as a Runemaster, who has worn a Rune Plate since the first quest due to a lucky shot at the best card in the search deck. While not a purchase per say, thus not a waste of money nor a wrong choice by any means, I´m somehow happy he´s the hero wearing it and not one of the other dudes. Rolling gray + black dice is quite a thing in act I, but it's a nothing compared to Syndrael/Knight million defense dices and upgrades because of the shield. I find that stunning the mage or splitting him from the group (since he always tends to want to shoot at something) has revealed being a better choice to make as the overlord. I have found that he is still killable if I wanted to go all-in for it, but in the end it feels always better to have him as far as possible from the group to avoid his stupid boost to his 3-spaces away pals. That's how I handle him normally.

In terms of what I would consider as being overpowered, I even changed my mind about the Immobilized condition. I use that a lot against my heroes and yet they still find a way to come over it. Similarly, I accept the fact there are abilities played against me that are going to straight kill or incapacitate 2-3 monsters each round if the heroes want that. On the other hand that's as many actions spent to not go for the quest objective, precisely like when they focus on killing the poor Mimic. A monster is a big flashy target but it's above all an action/fatigue sink. Like I said sometime earlier, every monster has an unprinted "number of actions required to kill" figure, and that's all I´m reading (plus abilities of course).

Well said, Indalecio. There is really no argument against the usefulness of cards like "Dash" and "Frenzy," but on the whole I find Basic 2 an absolute joy to play- rather than being a hammer smashing the hero's skulls in, it allows me to be a constant thorn in their side, and for that reason feels a good deal more sinister. I had to deal with Leoric the Necromancer and Jaes the Runemaster,- but the tactic was the same- keep Leoric out of the center of battle. Save your "Uncontrolled Power" for him, when he does attack- instead of the Runemaster suffering a fatigue to add surge = +2, you just make him suffer a wound and a fatigue, and then another fatigue for good measure.

Currently, I'm part of a hero party made up of Trenloe the Knight (with advance, elven boots, and oath of honor) Jain the Wildlander (with her heroic feat and nimble,) Orkell the Skirmisher (with Carve a Path) and Quellen the Geomancer (with Ways of Stone.) "Immobilize" is nothing but a minor annoyance. The only one who likes to move with fatigue is Jain, and that's because she has "Fleet of Foot."

On the issue of Rune Plate: you're still missing the point. It's not available every shop phase, it's a random chance, which is what makes it acceptable that it be better. Yes, it's always available in the big shop phase at the end of act 1, but then you start drawing act 2 items which are superior. The Rune Plate has some oomph to it, but the fact that it always goes on the mage (which tends to be someone less valuable to armor given that the character is not frequently diving into melee) is a restriction that compensates. I think the item is on the high end of act 1 equipment but not overpowered. The single best Act 1 item is clearly the Crossbow, followed by the Bearded Axe, and I still don't think those need nerfs. The random nature of the shop deck combined with options for plot decks (Rylan Olliven for example) and rumor cards that can screw with it makes it perfectly acceptable for there to be some items that are better than others.

Armor is also substantially less useful in general than equipment which improves mobility and offensive prowess.

And Trenloe's heroic ability is freaking nuts.

As for the seeming inconsistency of what they developers intended: When they released the original game they didn't have a strong feel for balance just yet, the original campaign is filled with some poor design and problems that make a variety of quests problematic. The Conversion Kit was a very early release before they got a real feel for game balance. When they released secret rooms in Lair of the Wyrm, they had a good amount of time to examine the product they had released and made an informed decision to replace the nothing card after having feedback and experience leaving it alone. That is not the same thing as balance mistakes made upon initial release of a brand new game. The later campaigns are vast improvements and the balance gets much better.

Also, the Rune plate is not the best armour in act I in any case.

Tha aurium mail, available to heroes if they win a series of Rumours.

It has a black die as it's base defence, and you exhaust it to add an extra brown. It has no drawbacks and is not limited as to who it provides those benefits to. It can go on your warrior, you healer, your rogue or your mage.

I'm going to have to agree with Logan Lashley being incredibly overpowered. He picked up the crossbow in our game, an exotic weapon with pierce 2, he gets pierce one for using the exotic weapon, he gets an extra damage if he's not near anyone, gets a free movement for being near treasure, free movement when he attacks, cannot be immobilized and has pretty decent stats in everything.

There are 3 different scenarios where he was able to literally end them before I got my first turn. He is a hero who essentially says "hey, i get to ignore all your defense die" he cannot be stopped because he is immune to immobilization. None of his amazing abilities cost any stamina, he can kill every act 1 lieutenant in a single turn from full health. On top of being literally the best combat machine of any character I've seen in this game, he also ensures his team gets tons of gold.

FFG does not test their heroes very well, or if they do, they have idiots test them. I mean the crossbow Logan uses was added in the expansion that he was added in, it's not like this was a surprise combination from earlier expansions that would be hard to forsee. I mean did it never occur to anyone at fantasy flight that having a treasure hunter who picks up the crossbow (which they added the exotic trait to) essentially getting an "ignore all defense die for the first act of the game" was perhaps a bad idea when there was not a single monster with ironskin in the game? And if they make a huge mistake like logan lashley, they certainly don't do anything to fix it until a reprint or an entire edition later. Logan Lashley has literally brought me to the cusp of selling Descent and never playing it again.

Crossbow is from base game, not Labyrinth of Ruin. Logan Lashley has to be the treasure hunter to get piercing 2 with exotic weapons, which is a class ability, not a hero ability. The hero ability is to move one space after attacking with an exotic weapon and immunity to immobilize.

Logan Lashley is fine, Treasure Hunter is fine. Plenty of ways to shut him down.

Crossbow is from base game, not Labyrinth of Ruin. Logan Lashley has to be the treasure hunter to get piercing 2 with exotic weapons, which is a class ability, not a hero ability. The hero ability is to move one space after attacking with an exotic weapon and immunity to immobilize.

Logan Lashley is fine, Treasure Hunter is fine. Plenty of ways to shut him down.

no he gets pierce 3 with the cross bow, 2 from the crossbow's base and one from the treasure hunter class. There is no way to shut him down if he ends the game before you get your first turn. You can't tripwire him, he has high enough stats to pass almost every trap. Like please tell me how to shut him down when he wins the quest before you get your first turn? How do you shut him down when he one shots every single monster he ever gets a hit on. How do you shut him down when he is literally the most mobile hero in the entire game?

Here let's do an expiriment. Start a new campaign, at the end of the second mission give Logan Lashley the crossbow. Don't use the Valyndra deck, the Ironbound or the new golems just the base game, and LoR and see who wins the campaign. Put your money where your mouth is.

Crossbow comes with piercing 1, his ability Sleight of Hand gives piercing 2 with exotic weapons.

And yeah, he can do high damage if he gets the crossbow, but I have a player regular who chooses Logan Lashley as the treasure hunter every single campaign and I still usually win. I've had him get the crossbow in a treasure chest in the first quest before and I've still won. You're overreacting. And I never use the Valyndra deck, if I feel like ensuring I win I use Baron Zachareth, followed by the Olliven Brothers or Skarn. Using Basic Deck 2 (I always use Basic Deck 2) makes a big difference as well. Imploding Rift does well, using swarms of high speed high damage monsters to blitz him when he steps away from the group does well (and if he doesn't split he's not collecting treasure), he's just a glass cannon.

And why wouldn't I use Ironbounds? They're one of the obvious counters, when I need a monster to hold a specific location on the map vs someone with lots of piercing they're the obvious choice. If you're going to shoot yourself in the foot then you deserve it.

Crossbow comes with piercing 1, his ability Sleight of Hand gives piercing 2 with exotic weapons.

And yeah, he can do high damage if he gets the crossbow, but I have a player regular who chooses Logan Lashley as the treasure hunter every single campaign and I still usually win. I've had him get the crossbow in a treasure chest in the first quest before and I've still won. You're overreacting. And I never use the Valyndra deck, if I feel like ensuring I win I use Baron Zachareth, followed by the Olliven Brothers or Skarn. Using Basic Deck 2 (I always use Basic Deck 2) makes a big difference as well. Imploding Rift does well, using swarms of high speed high damage monsters to blitz him when he steps away from the group does well (and if he doesn't split he's not collecting treasure), he's just a glass cannon.

And why wouldn't I use Ironbounds? They're one of the obvious counters, when I need a monster to hold a specific location on the map vs someone with lots of piercing they're the obvious choice. If you're going to shoot yourself in the foot then you deserve it.

You wouldn't use Ironbounds because they're part of shadows nerekhall which came out a good while after LoR if something isn't OP then you don't need to buy a whole new expansion specifically to deal with that OP thing. You're advice to someone wanting to defeat Logan shouldn't be "oh he is fine as long as you buy shadows of nerekhall, and the Baron Zachareth Lt, or the Olliven brothers, or skar LT packs, oh and also consider picking up crusade of the forgotten" if you gotta pick up that kind of stuff in order to deal with Logan, then he is textbook OP. That means that during the time before that stuff he was OP too. Also I highly suspect like other have said on here, that your hero play was probably suboptimal if logan got crossbow on the first quest and you still won the campaign.

What was the hero composition, what campaign was it, and what was the final mission loadout?