They're not getting my $ either, if it is as faulty as you're saying.

Let's just wait for a second edition.

This is really dissapointing to hear about all these errors. I was going to buy this next because I just have JiTD so far!

Frog said:

You would be unable to play quite a few of the quests anyway without other expansions. Best to go with something tried and true like WoD or AoD.

Yeah, I was quite surprised when the game store owner called me to say that it was in. And despite the errors its still a great collection of quests. We should all know by now that Descent is a game that requires an FAQ for everything that gets released

Considering how long you might have to wait for a second printing to happen, its probably best to just get it now and finagle your way through the errors. That's what I am going to do.

Jonny WS said:

Descent seems to hit the table less and less often these days. We've only made it 1/2 through WOD and I've played in one of the TOI quests. One completed RTL campaign and 1 currently in limbo.... I think I can afford to just wait and see on this one. Need to get Descent to the table more often though.

This is such a disapointment. I was very much looking forward to this product and I couldn't wait to buy it. I saw it in my local (Toronto) store yesterday and was about to pick it up, but had to leave so I decided to come back later. Then I came to these forums. Guess what I won't be buying now?

Honestly, I'd love to assume people are just being sticklers and that they're overexaggerating, but after the obvious and blatant flaws in Road To Legend and after the general lack of support and/or proof-reading I've seen in FFG products, I can't help by think the worst. That all of the above is true. That several quests are buggy if not impossible to play.

Really, FFG, what is going on? You have an entire legion of people here on the forums who would have been happy to proof read this thing and play test it FOR FREE (and sign wavers, I'm sure). As far as I understand there should be no excuse for releasing such a buggy and incomplete product.

I'd love to buy it. But I won't until I hear that there's a significant errata that fixes what should have been a complete product.

Lastly, guess how this makes me feel about Sea of Blood?

Jonny WS said:

I 100% disagree with this sentiment. Descent product always requires an FAQ post release, therefore it's acceptable to put out incomplete, erroneous, and useless product and charge for it? Absolutely not. It would take some time for a second, corrected printing to appear, so we should all reward poor performance by immediately spending money on it and accept that we will have to actually design/redesign the contents ourselves after doing so? Completely unaccptable. It's disgusting that FFG hasn't even addressed the issues and is instead hoping people won't notice until after they've already spent money on it.

I played my first game using the book last night. A buddy of mine and myself were the only players, I was the Overlord. It ran pretty smooth and he was able to complete the quest due to poor drawing on my part and little spawn cards. My complaint is that an essential rule for the quest was put near the end of the quest rules and wasn't noticed until half way through the final room. The second complaint was from my friend who stated that there was very little treasure from the chests in the quest, Only one of each class actually had a treasure item in it. I agree it was fun to see the quest being completed on basic town items more or less, but you need to have more items being tossed out.

I do believe that these quests were submitted to FFG and then just tossed in with little to no play testing. Lets all hope and pray that volume 2 isn't a players-based book, that would be a nightmare.

All in all, I am happy with the book, a few errors are there and I am sure FFG is aware of this...They are probably working on a FAQ now. I know FFG shines as a company that has great customer service, I would lose a lot of faith in them should they not post ANYTHING regarding the flaws in the book.

l was going to purchase Descent base game plus a couple opf expanses at the end of this month, but on reading this forum l for one will not be spending any money on Descent if this is the way they are going with the product.

alboy said:

Descent RTL unbalanced, Descent rules and its expansions are poorly written. And this new book has gotten a bad reputation.

That being said, this is still a wonderful game, many hours of enjoyment. If you'd like to play out a dungeon crawl as a skilled game of chess and beautiful innovations this is THE game to play.

I can recommend it, though you may want to stay away from this particular book.

alboy said:

They can write gobeledygook in the rulebooks, I would still get the base game and expansions (though not the Quest Compendium) for the minis, and map pieces. Great game. Bad documentation.

NoNamium said:

I agree- alboy, don't base your decision to purchase the base game and some of the expansions on the reaction to this compendium. Really all the compendium does is give you a hodgepodge of extra quests you can play once you've played the ones actually designed for the game. The quests in the base game and expansions have plenty of replayability too. Buy the base, WOD, TOI and maybe AOD and just ignore this compendium until you've exhausted the fun you're having (which will be a looooong time).

Jonny WS said:

Why wouldn't you read through all of the quest rules before starting it? As the Overlord I read through everything before beginning a quest. That said, I will not be purchasing this book anytime soon...

Titeman said:

It was an error on my part, I was a little tired that night and figured they would have put that rule sooner into the area description. Wont do that again.

Titeman said:

If the other players are ready to start the game, I usually only read about 1 area ahead before starting, so as not to unnecessarily delay the game. If they put a rule that affected the entire quest anywhere in the text for the last area, that's inexcusable. If it was merely an important rule for that area and they put it at the end of the area text, rather than at the beginning of that area's text, then I have much less sympathy for Jonny.

On the chaos cube, I think the reason they say that you can spawn non-master versions of the monster already in the given cube is so that you don't spawn another master to get mixed up with the named one already there.

Painter said:

Then it is misleading and extraneous. It either shouldn't be mentioned or explicitly place a limit on the OL if that is the intent. As it is, it sounds like its granting a permission, not imposing a limit.

pinkymadigan said:

I agree with Painter on this one. The whole paragragh where this mentioned is referring to limitations not permissions. I believe the intent is that you can spawn master monsters but you can not place them in cubes where the named master monster of that type exists. The text quote:

"You may spawn non-Master versions of the placed monster in each of the cubes. There can never be more than three monsters of any specific type, however, and no more than one giant."

Regarding the Throne of Sky Giant quest I plan to use the 4x4 corrupted rooms and just ignore the corruption effects. Not a big deal if you have AoD. I would have liked to get a clearer explanation on how the roads work though.

Callistan said:

The first line is a permission, the second line is a limitation, but because the first line is already inherent to the game, it isn't worth mentioning unless it relates to a new rule, which is missing (or the whole thing is written poorly).

How come this does not surprise me? Almost ordered it, being the enthusiastic fool I am.

Truth be said, I'm having too much fun with Dominion, Pandemic, Alhambra or Carcassone to even consider buying this

Until FFG publishes revised rules for RtL and handles the games with more care, I'm going just to use my figures for RPGs and the likes.

Blarg. This Xandria is not pleased.

Dominion rocks, incidentally.

Thundercles said:

+1

avianfoo said:

Not to stay completely off subject, but the Columbus Area Board Game Society mentioned in the back of the book? Yeah, I'm a part of that. They are playtesting the second expansion for Dominion currently. Don't know if that's supposed to be a secret or not, but I haven't signed anything, so there ya go.

Thundercles said:

Race for the Galaxy pulverizes the Dominion Rock

Pinkymadigan, you're playtesting Seaside? Cool!

See, Dominion is a game that has seen tons of playtest. Te rules are clear, the cards are clear, the interactions are... clear? At first, I thought it was possible to build an infinity combo, before I read the rule that played action cards get reshuffled only at the end of the turn.

So. You might try to convince FFG to playtest more

Thumbs up for Seaside!