Note before you post I'm not asking whether you like one or the other. I just want to know what descent's got that doom doesn't, and what doom's got that descent doesn't.

Descent is basically Version 2.0 of Doom.

There are lots of little improvements:

* More individualised heroes

* The Overlord has to save and expend a resource to use their powers

* A much larger variety of weapons and equipment

* Expansions which had interesting new facets like treachery, feats etc

I have both but if you only want to buy one definitely go for Descent

As you can see from my list of games, I own Doom already. I don't feel like another Doom-like game, just wondering how Descent has more fans than Doom (a lot more fans, I think too much more fans)

Knuckles Eki said:

A. I think the setting is more endearing to fans of strategy board games.

B. The system are SO much better. They really worked out a lot of the kinks in Doom. Which is kind of odd to say, since the rules are a mess.

Ok I admit Descent looks interesting... but I still prefer futuristic Doom.

Knuckles Eki said:

Well, if you're a long-time fan of dungeon crawls, straight up D&D style, this game scratches that itch and then some. For my group, we're hard-core RPG fans, and we probably will never touch D&D again, because in earnest, as sloppy as the rules are, the rules for D&D are sloppier due to the sheer quantity of the rules and how they interact. We have other games (ahem like Dark Heresy) to get our roleplay chops in, but sometimes we just want a straight hack & slash dungeon crawl, and this game does it in spades.

Also, if you used to play Hero Quest, the nostalgia of this game alone will rock your world.

Hey Knuckles...I play both Descent and Doom. I too like the futureistic quality of Doom, but Descent and Doom are quite different. To say Descent has cleared-up some of the "kinks" in Doom is not accurate in my opinion. Doom is simpler by the simple fact isdoes not have so many expasions and rules (nor vast amount of pieces and cards to manage). Descent, though fun, has simply gotten too big to effectively manage. I'm done buying Descent expansions...there has become so much to manage, you spend more time looking for pieces and cards, and it really interrupts the flow of play. The marines in Doom are much easier to manage than the heroes in Descent for this simple reason. Each marine gets like three skill cards, and you're set to play. During play you just have to manage wounds and armor, and you're off and running through haunted corridors on Mars base, blasting some really cool looking monsters. What I like about Descent is that you don't have to manage ammo. That is one big drawback to Doom. Also, Descent has Road to Legend, a campaign version of the game, which is pretty sweet. However, Doom has rules covering campaign play as well, and it actually works quite well and is not nearly as complex.

Alright, interceptor.

D&D is pretty cool, I still got edition 3.5. I create my own monsters, such as:

I doubt one can do the same in Descent, can I?

You could homebrew your own monsters for Descent if you really want to. Me, I like Descent much better than D&D and l like D&D 3.5 better than 4. Descent does a much better job at an interactive game than D&D 4.

Knuckles Eki said:

Jakews said:

I've been playing a D&D 4.0 campaign for about a year (a few sessions/month) and I'd much rather be playing Descent RTL 4.0 isn't very good imho

Oboewan said:

I could homebrew my own monsters into Descent. I wouldn't have figs for them, but that's the same thing for D&D.

D&D4 isn't D&D. It's World of Warcraft tabletop style.

Fair enough about D&D 4.0. I was so excited about that game but now that it's come out, I don't like it at all compared to 3.5. Descent though is very good on its own. I can hardly wait to see what the Campaign book brings to the system.