How many cards should be in the OL deck in rtl? It seems odd that deck cycling is used as a balance tool (forced ejection from dungeons and CT) if the total number of cards in the deck fluctuate based on how many expansions you own.
OL deck in rtl
I agree that it' odd, but that's how it works. The more expansions you choose to include, the harder it is to get conquest and eject players by going through your deck. On the flip side though, the players get more options as well, in terms of heroes and treasures available. I'm not sure if that's a perfect balancer, but it may help ease your mind.
Also, each new set comes with things that will help the Overlord get more conquest, so not need as many cycles to keep the same pace. AOD has animate Weapons, Dark Priests, an extra Trapmaster, and more. Urgency especially helps cope with players not wanting to hurry. The others add more stuff as well (though TOI's addition to the OL deck seems kinda slight in this regard).
It's my understanding that the ejection rule is not so much for balance as to prevent the heroes from sitting in town and forcing the overlord to accumulate hundreds of conquest to force the final battle sooner. Apparently it's possible for the heroes to have enough of a lead late-game to make that an effective strategy without the ejection rule, especially considering that the overlord is limited in the rate at which he can spend XP.
Antistone said:
It's my understanding that the ejection rule is not so much for balance as to prevent the heroes from sitting in town and forcing the overlord to accumulate hundreds of conquest to force the final battle sooner. Apparently it's possible for the heroes to have enough of a lead late-game to make that an effective strategy without the ejection rule, especially considering that the overlord is limited in the rate at which he can spend XP.
+1
How does sitting in town help the heros?
In RTL, as soon as the conquest total hits 600, then after whatever dungeon the heroes are currently in, they get to teleport to the Avatar's keep to take him down. If the heroes are pretty good on items and skills in gold level of the campaign, they may not want the overlord to buy any new upgrades/finish a plot line and instead want to force the OL into the final confrontation. Without the rule that they would get ejected after 2 deck cycles in the same dungeon level, they could sit indefinitely in town as the OL cycles his deck over and over again, until the campaign hits 600 XP. As it is now, the heroes can do the same thing by just killing each other repeatedly.
Ah, I'd forgotten about the conquest for burning through the deck. Yeah, that would be a pretty bad thing. Though I see it more as a signal to stop playing with someone then as a reason for errata.
No, I think the rule is necessary. Asking people to deliberately play badly (i.e. not using their best legal strategy) in order to make the game more fun, is not on, as I see it.
That's one way to look at it. IMO people expressly going out of their way to make a game unfun for others is bad form and should be responded to with social sanctions, not rules. Rules only fix that game, not the underlying problem.
SamVimes said:
In RTL, as soon as the conquest total hits 600, then after whatever dungeon the heroes are currently in, they get to teleport to the Avatar's keep to take him down. If the heroes are pretty good on items and skills in gold level of the campaign, they may not want the overlord to buy any new upgrades/finish a plot line and instead want to force the OL into the final confrontation. Without the rule that they would get ejected after 2 deck cycles in the same dungeon level, they could sit indefinitely in town as the OL cycles his deck over and over again, until the campaign hits 600 XP. As it is now, the heroes can do the same thing by just killing each other repeatedly.
This RtL rule I find a bit silly... I was considering houseruling it so that, once theCT total hits 600, the heroes will still need to travel to the Overlord's Keep, but no CTs are gained during this travel... basically, it means the OL will have a bit more time to spend his XPs and to raze Tamalir, and the Heroes can try to get a bit more treasure/better equipment or train.
I agree with that as well. I don't understand why it's an "instant transportation" to the OL's keep. I always thought it would have been better to allow the keep to just be open at that point, and the Heroes can now go to the keep, or even continue adventuring, but the OL should have an easier time ending the game (i.e. highly encouraging the heroes to hit the keep)...
-shnar
Yeah, we are playing that the heroes get to slog it over to the OL keep, but they get to upgrade if they want. However, as it stands, they are trying desperately to keep me from finishing my plot, and I don't think we are going to make it to 600 XP either way.
James McMurray said:
That's one way to look at it. IMO people expressly going out of their way to make a game unfun for others is bad form and should be responded to with social sanctions, not rules. Rules only fix that game, not the underlying problem.
If players decide to make it their goal to ruin the game for others, then no rule can stop them, and the solution is not to play with them.
However, if players are just trying to win , and the rules are set up in such a way that the best available strategy causes the game to no longer be fun, that's a problem with the game, not the players. It's the players' job to understand and follow the rules, and try to achieve the game's stated goals; it is not the players' job to rewrite the rules on the fly to make sure that the game remains fun.
The players will still sometimes succeed in patching over that sort of problem, and more power to them, but it's still a flaw in the game.
Antistone said:
James McMurray said:
That's one way to look at it. IMO people expressly going out of their way to make a game unfun for others is bad form and should be responded to with social sanctions, not rules. Rules only fix that game, not the underlying problem.
If players decide to make it their goal to ruin the game for others, then no rule can stop them, and the solution is not to play with them.
However, if players are just trying to win , and the rules are set up in such a way that the best available strategy causes the game to no longer be fun, that's a problem with the game, not the players. It's the players' job to understand and follow the rules, and try to achieve the game's stated goals; it is not the players' job to rewrite the rules on the fly to make sure that the game remains fun.
The players will still sometimes succeed in patching over that sort of problem, and more power to them, but it's still a flaw in the game.
+1. Emphatically even.