Previously, after reading many threads on the subject of how people chose their heroes, I created a thread asking just that.

Now, after reading many threads about how people play, and what information they share, I want to ask the following:

How do you play?

I am well aware that, for the most part with rare exceptions, all knowledge in the quest guide is public information. Both sides are free to read both encounters and plan accordingly.

Interestingly, this is not how we play, at least for the first go around. As I mentioned previously with how we choose our heroes, we like the randomness and excitement that comes with minimal knowledge. We like to be surprised. Quite frankly, this is why my group of friends tends to like D1e more than D2e.

So, when we acquire a new expansion, and have the opportunity of playing a new campaign, we only read Encounter 1. We never also read Encounter 2. This, obviously, creates a bit of a conundrum for both sides, as you don't know if there is a significant value to winning Encounter 1, as it applies to benefits that you receive or lose when moving into Encounter 2.

Thus, it causes the heroes (and the OL) to make decisions on limited and incomplete information. Since almost all of us have strong mathematics/analysis backgrounds, and are almost all professional poker players, we are used to making decisions with incomplete information.

This leads to some very interesting decisions as to how Encounter 1 is played ... i.e. do the heroes forgo the objective, at least initially, to make certain that they can maximize their searching and thus their gold? Can they learn any hints from the fluff about what the ultimate prize may be at the end of Encounter 2? As always, they also have to watch what the OL is doing (although I know no more information than they do). Is the OL stock piling cards for Encounter 2? Would it be better, based on their guesses, to simply achieve the objective as fast as possible?

Obviously, some of the decisions made are based on the map layout, the hero's heroic feats, their classes/skills, the overall objective and how it matches to their group, etc.

Now, I will be the first one to admit that this often leads to less than optimal play, but interestingly, it also has led to somewhat more balance as the overall campaign has played out.

So, I am just curious ... How do you play? Do you read everything in advance? Perhaps even the entire quest book to plan out the whole campaign if you are fortunate enough to win specific quests? With that knowledge, do you target specific allies, relics, etc.?

Or do you prefer a campaign like us ... one that holds more surprises?

We play with the RAW regarding public information- the heroes and the OL each take their time reading over the quest guide, thinking about how to best win the quest (as opposed to just the encounter.) That being said, I enjoy quests that have a little bit of mystery written into them- whether that's the location of hidden tokens, or variable spawns of monsters, or the "influence" mechanic in Nerekhall. Those mechanics provide enough uncertainty to keep the heroes (and sometimes both parties) on their feet, but I enjoy knowing the objectives/victory conditions as designed.

My previous gamer group were pretty good about asking to read the quest book to look over the encounters and see what is carrying over to the second half. I was always OL, but they didn't see that as me being the game master. They were also good about reading the rules on their own via the support page to make sure they know what is going on when we play without having to keep asking to be reminded of rules. These guys were veteran gamers so they spent time analyzing each hero and class, calculating which they felt were the best. This unfortunately caused them to keep going back to the same heroes and classes because of their notions of damage output being better with a set combo of heroes and classes. So we agreed on a rule that they will roll dice to randomly select their heroes and classes. After some groaning they really liked it.

My new gamer group (I moved to the other side of the US for school) is much more hands off. I understand part of it is I introduced them to the game, so they see me as an authority but it does slow the game down as I have to stop them in the middle of their turns to tell them they cant do something or remind them what their objective is and point to the quest guide. We only just started playing Descent so I am fine with this for the time being.

@modernman55 ...

You bring up an excellent point. I have almost always been OL, and while I certainly do know the ins and outs of the game (flow, rules, etc.) the best, my fellow gamers (heroes) are well versed as well.

I also had an opportunity to introduce a new set of gamers to Descent, and it was very frustrating at first, because I actually spent more time paying attention to what they were planning on doing, so that I could correct the endless little things that they weren't actually allowed to do. It took me a while to realize that I had to alter my expectations of this group, and what I was going to get out of playing, so that I could once again enjoy playing.

Now, we actually stop and take time to analyze things, give them my thoughts on better approaches and why, etc. What has happened as a result is that I see things I may have missed in the past, and they learn the game far quicker.

In our group. we have a reader who reads the quest set-up, special rules, objectives and win/lose objectives to everyone at the same time.

If any of the rules seem unclear, we debate them at that time. If there are any questions, such as "do these X tokens carryover in the next stage" we answer them as well before beginning play. If someone doesn't ask a question, but it affects gameplay, it's usually too bad, so sad but sometime, for fairness sake, we'll allow a change, or mention it. For example, the OL choosing an open group in a quest that would prevent him from winning. You need "cursed" monsters to win Heart of the Wild and one of your groups is Goblin witchers (which are 'cursed" types) but you won't have enough of them to win, unless your open group is also cursed because, although the witchers do reinforce, any that are sacrified are removed from play.

We like winning as much as any group, but it seems unsporting to do all the quest set-up and once the pieces are on the game board say "Hey, OL, you need 6 fatigue tokens to win, but with the group you've chosen, you can only get 3, max, so, looks like we win by default, no matter how long we play."

Personally, I can't overcome the temptation to voraciously scour the campaign books when I acquire new expansions to Descent, so I already know the quests intimately before I start a game with people... Given that I feel it only fair that since I have perfect knowledge of the campaign that I give the heroes perfect knowledge as well. I also provide them with strategic suggestions and advice, as I am much more experienced with the game than most of the people I play with.

I also encourage them to read through the campaign book during downtime and even read ahead if they like. Since they rarely take me up on this offer, I'm instead willing to answer any questions they have like, "Will this ability be useful during the next quest?" or "Are there lots of 'race' quests in this campaign?" or "Is there a relic I can get which would be better than this weapon I could buy from the store?" or "Does winning the first encounter of this quest convey a significant advantage in the second?"

This seems to work for the most part. It would be interesting to play through a campaign where neither the heroes nor the overlord know whats coming next, but it seems to me like it might also slow down the game. There have been a few quests in the game which I've had to read many times over and even play out a little bit just to grasp what the heck is going on. The "dragging the chain" quest Encounter 1 + 2 in Labyrinth of Ruin springs to mind in particular as there are quite a few unique rules.

By preparing the quests the night before I make sure I clear up any rules questions I have personally and understand how all the components work together. This ensures that heroes and overlord understand how to correctly progress towards their objective without any 'gotchas' down the line.

I would be curious to hear how you fare with your approach though!

I would be curious to hear how you fare with your approach though!

As I said, we enjoy the surprise of things ... the excitement to find out if the decisions we made in Encounter 1 help or hinder us in Encounter 2. With neither side having knowledge of what is to come, I have also found that some quests that may have been lopsided one way or the other suddenly become more balanced, as you don't know the necessity of winning Encounter 1.

It certainly makes it interesting.

It's been interesting reading how people play the game

I refuse to let them read the campaign book at all. I treat it like I am a dungeon master, sometimes I wil get a monster do something not tactactilly correct, but something that seems to fit the action, like a beast being over focused on who is hurting them rather than the objective of the scenario. If they get too cocky - "that was easy" - I get so tactical on them they start to sweat. Everyone seems to have a great time. It's just how we play.

I could never let them read the book!

The game is best when you play it the way it was intended to be played, so I let the players see everything there is to see. The only things the players don't get to look at is the overlord deck and influence token selections. They get to know which overlord card I purchased, but not the deck itself.

Anything else puts the heroes at a significant tactical disadvantage.

I find my players just expect me to know the quest and read it out. I think it'd annoy them if they had to read through them all.

I guess it's similar to the person above who mentioned that their group is newer - mine aren't really gamers.