No, this game is not an LCG. One of the graphic designers just happened to have "LCG" in a filename. They can name files whatever they want when they are working on them.

So, what sort of card game is this going to be exactly if it is not a an LCG?

I am not speaking of mechanics.

I am speaking as to card acquisition.

Will this game be one that is exact in what you buy each time or are they random like MtG, Yu-Gi-Oh, Pokemon, etc?

I really have no idea folks.

The only FFG games I am somewhat familiar with are Talisman 4th and WF-RPG 2nd/3rd.

So I really have no idea how the card games of FFG are set up.

Your help is appreciated.

There will be no card acquisition in the sense of those games you mention. It is a normal board game, not a collectible or living card game, it just happens that the components are mainly cards. You don't have to buy tons of expansion packs and to build decks to play. Think about games like 7 wonders or Space Hulk Death Angel: the components are basically only cards, but still they are a "standard" board game.

There will probably be expansions if the game turns out to be successful, but they will probably be fewer in number when compared to an LCG, more like the number you can see for standard FFG board games. Definitely there will not be any randomness in the component you get.

I think it was clearly stated by people from FFG in the interviews or in the forums, if I am not imagining this, that this is not an LCG, so I guess that puts a nail on it. The name of a temporary file doesn't mean anything. Hell, LCG in this context might even be an acronym for something totally different.

I think it was clearly stated by people from FFG in the interviews or in the forums, if I am not imagining this, that this is not an LCG, so I guess that puts a nail on it. The name of a temporary file doesn't mean anything. Hell, LCG in this context might even be an acronym for something totally different.

The author of the game (Sorenthion) just said it's not an LCG (check reply 24), so, we have more than one nail on this.

Horseman: nothing random. All FFG card games have the very same cards in each set. And each copy of each expansion has the very same cards in it. This means that this game could have 50 expansions, and if you pick 1 copy of expansion # 27, then you'll find inside the same cards I'll find when I buy the same expansion.

As per the number of expansions coming: again, this is not an LCG. LCGs come with one pack / month (more or less); other games are expanded at a slower pace (1 max 2 expansions / year). So, I'd not be worried about the game being a cash cow, nor anything else.

Also, this appears to be designed as a standalone game, so ocd/completeness aside (which I do have somewhat) nobody will NEED to buy every expansion that comes out, only buy if you want it and ofcourse can afford it, but enjoy the game either way.

Its only ourselves that push us to buy everything when its not strictly necessary

I know this thread is about a month old, but the OP should really check out this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOTapD1aivc

It's an interview by Board Game Geek with an FFG employee. They look at some of the cards and talk about how the game progresses.

Anton Torres (the FFG employee) says clearly that there is ZERO deck-building in this game. You have cards, but all the cards sit out in front of you. Now, there are decks, but you don't customize them in the base game. Whether expansions require some deck customization has not been commented on.

Mechanically, this game plays more like a card game, though, in the way certain cards and abilities interact and synergize to give the heroes a chance to succeed.

Man, I'm surprised there was still arguing about whether this is an LCG or not

P.S.: Shame it's not. I have dreamt of a Co-Op LCG based on Old World of Warhammer

Man, I'm surprised there was still arguing about whether this is an LCG or not

P.S.: Shame it's not. I have dreamt of a Co-Op LCG based on Old World of Warhammer

Word. That would be pretty awesome.

Is it just me or does it seem like this is basically going to be FFG's version of the Pathfinder ACG? I mean, they're even calling it an Adventure Card Game in the title. My hope is they've managed to address the many core gameplay issues that the Pathfinder ACGs have so that it will be a better game. Like, a cooperative game that requires actual cooperation which I found was required very little in the Pathfinder ACG.

I think it is just you. I see 0 resemblance to PACG.

Haha. Yes, my mention of PACG is definitely the first time it has come up in these forums or on the BGG forums for WHQ. My apologies for being such an outlier.

I really think the comparison is being drawn on the genre classification name that was chosen by fantasy flight (Adventure Card Game). Lets keep in mind, they did not call it Warhammer Quest the pathfinder card game. Forgetting the obvious legal issues that would be an outright mention that this is what they wanted the card game to be. Labeling a game an FPS does not make a game DOOM, Labeling a game RPG does not make it baldur's gate, Etc etc etc.

Further more when talking about genre classifications...Adventure card game has only been use by one other company and only by that company. This classification has not been out that long either, so the game community and review community dont really have anything to use as a point of comparison but PACG. That's it. Its an undefined genre. But to say its like PACG does not make a lot of sense. To compare it to PACG is understandable as its the only other game with that genre classification. But its a poor comparison.

Since we are keen on sarcasm and mentions of other sites and sources of info.....

" It has quite a bit of differences from Pathfinder Adventure Card Game. I've played a lot of PACG (I own Rise of the Runelords and Wrath of the Righteous), and the only real similarities are that they both have cards, dice, and a fantasy theme. Some of the differences are:

In WHQACG, you don't have a deck of cards. You have four actions that you must exhaust when you use them. Other effects refresh exhausted actions, but you can't use them while the are exhausted. This also means that your deck of cards doesn't represent your health.

The quest objective is always different. There is no standard "hunt and corner the villain" quest structure. Every quest is structured by the quest sheet, which lists your objective. There are also specific events that trigger during each quest, as listed on the quest sheet.

Combat is much more tactical. Enemies can stay engaged with you and harass you during your actions. Many times there are a number of enemies in play at once and heroes have to figure out how to deal with them.

The whole party travels together. You don't split up and go to different locations. All heroes are at the same location and fighting the same enemies. Imagine a more "zoomed in" PACG in this regard.

I hope some of these differences give you a better idea of how the game plays!"

~~ Adam Sadler (He's one of the guys who has his name on the box. This was posted on the BGG forums)

If we are really keen about making the pathfinder comparison I think it might be wise to make sure we are calling out in what ways you feel its similar and then why those similarities are good and bad. Most adventures involve traveling after all. Most adventures involve defeating foes. Most adventures involve travel...I am failing to see, outside of the classification of adventure card game, how it is similar. Its Fantasy? how many of these do we have? Its fantasy and has cards? I could keep going but a lot of games had these features and were out long before Pathfinder ACG.

To help ease up the burden of finding games that came out before pathfinder or that have similar elements but owe nothing too it I have compiled a search list on BGG.

https://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeksearch.php?action=search&advsearch=1&objecttype=boardgame&q=&include%5Bdesignerid%5D=&geekitemname=&include%5Bpublisherid%5D=&geekitemname=&range%5Byearpublished%5D%5Bmin%5D=&range%5Byearpublished%5D%5Bmax%5D=&range%5Bminage%5D%5Bmax%5D=&floatrange%5Bavgrating%5D%5Bmin%5D=&floatrange%5Bavgrating%5D%5Bmax%5D=&range%5Bnumvoters%5D%5Bmin%5D=&floatrange%5Bavgweight%5D%5Bmin%5D=&floatrange%5Bavgweight%5D%5Bmax%5D=&range%5Bnumweights%5D%5Bmin%5D=&colfiltertype=&searchuser=ReaveraMori&range%5Bminplayers%5D%5Bmax%5D=&range%5Bmaxplayers%5D%5Bmin%5D=&playerrangetype=normal&range%5Bleastplaytime%5D%5Bmin%5D=&range%5Bplaytime%5D%5Bmax%5D=&propertyids%5B%5D=1002&propertyids%5B%5D=1010&propertyids%5B%5D=2023&B1=Submit

This is not going to be fantasy flights version of PACG.

This is fantasy flights version of what an Adventure card game is set in the warhammer universe. THATS IT.

" Is it just me or does it seem like this is basically going to be FFG's version of the Pathfinder ACG? I mean, they're even calling it an Adventure Card Game in the title. My hope is they've managed to address the many core gameplay issues that the Pathfinder ACGs have so that it will be a better game. Like, a cooperative game that requires actual cooperation which I found was required very little in the Pathfinder ACG."

No its not just you, but since you are, as I said before, so keen show sarcasm and rip on this community. Why not do some research on the very sites you have mentioned before you do so? You might not have to worry about having to do so in the future. Just takes a little time and effort. Your question was already answered on BBG. Its not like warhammer quest has a ton of threads there or here.

Sorry, I just take issue with someone ripping into the community without any just cause that I can find. Especially when they are at fault of their own sarcasm.

Exactly what I meant but was too lazy to describe in detail. All that this game and PACG have in common are cards, dice, and "Adventure Card Game" in the title. If a person assumes that one is extremely like the other, then that person is poorly informed about how one of these games is played (or both).

I wouldn't normally exert the effort either, but when I see someone going after another person like that when its unwarranted I get a bit defensive. Thus the motivation. Glad I am not alone in my viewpoint.

Ugh. Here I go taking the bait. I apologize for using light sarcasm in response to a reply that could easily be seen as unnecessarily dismissive.

Yes, I have already seen that description from Adam Sadler on BGG. I understand that there are a lot of differences between PACG and this. That's exactly why I'm excited about it. I (along with many other people who have written about it) thought PACG had a lot of problems in it. I still played it and got a lot of enjoyment out of it despite those flaws. Hence my being excited for a game that seems to have similarities to that game while at the same time improving on it. I believe the issue might be that you're interpreting my using the word "version" as meaning "exact copy". Here's a correct definition of the word: a particular form of something differing in certain respects from an earlier form or other forms of the same type of thing (this definition is just from the dictionary app on my computer). Obviously it's not a copy but it's also not wholly different. This isn't apples and oranges, it's red delicious and granny smith.

I'm not sure at all why you say multiple times that I'm "ripping into the community." The question for the forum is "is this game an LCG?" My response was merely positing that it's not an LCG, it's an ACG, (hence them putting ACG in the title) and hoping that it's an overall better game than the only other game with ACG in it's title. Hoping for an improved experience seems like the only logical response. When would someone ever say "I hope this upcoming game is a worse experience than another game I've played"? That seems like it would be trolling.

And I actually have done a lot of research about this game. That's why I put up this post on BGG earlier today. At this point I don't think I'd fall under the category of being poorly informed.

So, I'm sorry if I hurt some feelings by comparing this game to another game. I'll try to remember that each game is a beautiful snowflake that is completely unique and special so that I don't get in trouble again.

I shall now return to being increasingly excited and impatient about the arrival of this game. FFG, just take my **** money already!

" Ugh. Here I go taking the bait. I apologize for using light sarcasm in response to a reply that could easily be seen as unnecessarily dismissive. "

Fair Enough. I could see how one would perceive that as a dismissive statement. And had I read it that way, perhaps I wouldn't be having this forum conversation. I guess I read a bit past the initial reaction/statement and took a leap. But I could have been wrong and that would have been embarrassing, still is honestly as I should have caught that angle.

" I (along with many other people who have written about it) thought PACG had a lot of problems in it. I still played it and got a lot of enjoyment out of it despite those flaws. "

I couldn't agree more. Flawed but still enjoyable and still on my shelf. Cant wait till my kids are old enough to share it with them despite its flaws.

" Hence my being excited for a game that seems to have similarities to that game while at the same time improving on it. "

What similarities? I don't mean that sarcastically...I am serious. It's fantasy and it has cards, dice and is co-op. But I can think of a few others that are this way and involve going on adventures. Usually when someone says a board game is similar it is because there are similar mechanics but I cannot see anything about these two that are similar.

" So, I'm sorry if I hurt some feelings by comparing this game to another game. "

I don't know if I would say my feelings were hurt or anyone else's. It just hit a pet peeve of mine. That's my problem and my issue to overcome. For me it was less about any game or object and more an issue of the bit back, or the slight that was indicated against someone else when it seemed to be undeserved. But I can see where you are coming from, especially if you thought they were slighting you with a dismissive "whatever, your wrong, deal with it" kind of an attitude. Maybe I should take the time to empathetic a bit more instead of jumping the gun.

" I'll try to remember that each game is a beautiful snowflake that is completely unique and special so that I don't get in trouble again."

I wouldn't go that far, but I know that this is a purposeful overstatement on your part. I know you wont do that because I know you know better as we all do. My issue with any comparison is just that I don't see it. I really would (outside of the dice, cards, fantasy and co-op components) like to know how these games can be compared and why we are not comparing to other titles. I really don't know if calling it an adventure card game was wise on their part. ITS NOT A DEFINED GENRE. because its not defined it is bound to be compared (deservedly or not) against the game that first used that naming convention. Now to be fair to the adventure card game genre I think we need to ask what makes it an adventure card game. What made others that came before adventure card games? I don't know. I really don't think anyone does outside of their own personal opinions. To me, it literally means nothing. To me its nothing more than a marketing decision.

" I shall now return to being increasingly excited and impatient about the arrival of this game. FFG, just take my **** money already!"

Absolutely! They already took mine through a pre-order.

When you guys copy from BGG and other sites, you should clear formatting before posting. Otherwise your post has tons of white boxes around the words and in some cases you have white text on white boxes. It's a bit difficult to read white on white.

That's really odd. I am not seeing any of those formatting issues at all.

lawnwrangler83, you described it as a FFG's version of PACG and also expressed hopes that they would improve it (by the way, if we're going to cling to terms - a "version" is something built on top of a basis, in this case PACG, which is not true). But those games have even different core mechanics. PACG - characters health is his deck(+hand), WACG - character has actual health. PACG - you roll numbers and strive to roll equal to or higher to succeed, WACG - you roll various symbols and there are stuff aside from success you can roll. There is no stats like Strength or Wisdom on WACG character sheets either, unlike PACG. Simply put - games have absolutely nothing in common gameplay-wise. And that's what I meant when I said "I see 0 resemblance", because I actually do. It's not dismissive, it's the truth.

reaveramori, here is how your posts looks for me:

A piece of advice: If you want to paste from other sites on FFG forum, open a notebook, paste it there, then copy it from the notebook directly here.

I will keep that in mind, thanks for the tip.

Nevermind, I didn't see this was covered on page 3, and you can't delete posts (biggest problem of these boards)

That's really odd. I am not seeing any of those formatting issues at all.

It's because you're using the new layout gor FFG's forum. The default is black text on white backgrounds. However, it wasn't always like that. It used to be white text on a dark grey background. Fortunately, FFG gave us the option of using the old aesthetics when they updated the forum software. I find the old way much rasier on my eyes, so I still use that. But when you copy from different places, it keeps some of the formatting. I think it keeps the background but lets the text be default color. Since my text is white and the background of the site people are copying from is white, I see white-on-white. Clearing the formatting after you paste something solves this issue.

That makes sense now. Thank you.