Because I own almost all expansions of Descent 2nd Edition and that means a lot of miniatures and components.

Because I spent hours painting and reading.

Because there's a huge potential here for another game.

I would like to create a brainstorm working group to create and make cards and scenarios for a Skirmish system using Descent 2nd Edition.

This group would have these main goals:

1) To alter each character ability/feat to be useful in a skirmish system.

2) To balance heroes and lieutenants so that they can be used the same way.

3) To simplify and systematize the classes cards so that each Hero/Lieutenant can use them.

4) To streamline monsters.

5) To create a point system that can be used to buy a warband.

6) To create scenarios and scenario generators specific for skirmishes.

7) To create the skirmish cards for the miniatures.

We can create a workforce to do this, creating 5 main groups if we have enough people:

1) 1 Pivot - who collects all the work and creates an index of what was done and needs to be done.

2) Stats group - that define all the stats that must be changed and change them for use with Descent Skirmish Game

3) Scenario Group - That creates scenarios for skirmishes. With objectives, victory points, symmetrical or asymmetrical.

4) Point Rating Group - This might be also done by the Stats group at a later stage

5) Card Creator Group - Creating the skirmish cards and scenario PDF's for the skirmish game.

I can be the Pivot and also belong to the stats group.

We could create a thread for each of the expansions with the name:

Descent Skirmish Game - Core

Descent Skirmish Game - Lair of the Wyrm

Etc.

In each of these boxes/expansions we would systematize all changes that we need to make so that minis (heroes/lieutenants/monsters), feats, abilities and rules would work in the skirmish game.

We can start with the core box and see how it goes from there.

Any thoughts?

Any volunteers?

I'd like to concentrate my efforts in create another thing starting from descent, like you, but not a skirmish, more focused in exploration - a true rpg. Lack of time and lot of problems in real life are forcing me to give up, at least for now, but I wish you good luck. For sure someone will pop up here sooner or alter

I'd like to concentrate my efforts in create another thing starting from descent, like you, but not a skirmish, more focused in exploration - a true rpg. Lack of time and lot of problems in real life are forcing me to give up, at least for now, but I wish you good luck. For sure someone will pop up here sooner or alter

Thanks.

I hope things work fine for you.

Keep strong.

I hope you like reading

I loved the idea of a Skirmish Mode for Descent since I saw Imperial Assault’s Skirmish Mode. I wanted that mode but neither do I like Star Wars theme (in games) nor does my gaming group, so it was going to be difficult to play it. After some thinking, a friend and I decided to adapt such mode into Descent. Since then, we have been creating/testing a way to implement this mode. So far, we have made it using some of the components but also starting to create some custom things in order to fit the variant correctly and make it smoothly for a gameplay.

First, there are some things to take into consideration:

1) Conditions : This was the first thing that popped when creating this variant, because most of the conditions are thought for the traditional system, in other words, mechanics for the Overlord to use on heroes (not for an equal figure-figure battle). For instance, Plague Worms could become a threat to Shadow Dragons if they stay close to them; or, Goblin Witchers could turn Elementals into garbage with one attack. In the beginning, we decided to change those three conditions based on attribute testing (Poison, Disease and Curse) so a Skirmish battle could take place without problems. However, further in the development we encountered another problem relate to this problem…

2) Attribute Testing : Later as we were testing some battle tactics, we found out that there are certain monster that force a target to make an attribute test, such as Grab . Then we found that combos, such as Master Zombe-Iroundbound could potentially lock important targets (like lieutenants or other monsters), without giving the opponent a chance to respond to it. That would force the player to focus those two units and lose time and resources, unbalancing (from my point of view) the battle. After some thinking, we arrived with the idea that modifying monsters and assigning them attributes could solve this and many other problems. However, this obviously leads to an enormous work due to changing every single monster out there, still, my friend and I consider it is worth the cost.

3) Deployment Zone : one thing that differentiate Imperial Assault from Descent is the fact that Descent features many large miniatures. This leads to set up problems, because if your "army" is based on large monsters there will not be enough space when placing them on the deploy zone at the beginning of each game (and elevating the cost or restricting the use of them will then be banning around 40% of this game miniatures). I remember one time I had Wendigos, Elementals, Crypt Dragons and Golems, and they just didn’t fit . We solve this through a reinforcement system (which seem to be a good option).

4) Command deck : there were many ideas of what to include in this, because (as I mentioned before) overlord and plot cards are meant to use in the traditional game. Moreover, several cards (mostly traps) also rely on attribute testing, so we had two options, to either a) eradicate those cards from the variant, or, b) to modify monsters in order to make them able to make such tests. As you can read from point 2, we opted for option b) in order to make command decks more versatile and strategical.

5) Monster cost : This mechanic was also very difficult because my friend said that using HP as the monster value could be the thing. However, for me that was not enough because the HP does not reflect the cost of a unit (or even more, a group). For example, if you took Giants compared to Shadow Dragons, Giants would have to cots more than the Shadow Dragons (or even some lieutenants, like Splig or Eliza). As a side note, unit cost also depends on people’s opinion of which monster is stronger and useful than other. Forgetting that last part, I then created some sort of formula that assigned a value to some key characteristics I considered important for a battle (sust as attack type [range-melee], monster size, group numbers, attack/defense pool, etc.). I have an Excel document which summaries this and shows a more objective value.

6) Maps : Well, this is easy; you can even use maps from campaigns, such as LoR intro Quest, or, Nerekhall’s maps for a small monster fight.

7) Objectives and victory conditions : We made it simply; there are two (at the moment) victory conditions: Conquer and Eradication . Conquer is similar to holding objectives A, B and C on the map, allowing players to think of strategies of holding ground such as Golems-Dark Priest, the player that wins is the one that reaches certain points by holding those objectives; meanwhile, Eradication focuses more in pure combat, allowing players to use aggressive monsters to burst units fast and winning by killing every unit your opponent has.

Some other things we haven't do yet:

a) Act I/II : I have not yet touch this mechanic but I will think it will be same as in Imperial Assault (differentiating between normal [Act I] and elite [Act II] units). We are playing at the moment with only Act I monsters.

b) Hero customization : We haven’t get that far too, as we though focusing in monsters because they are more of them. Otherwise, you could use a Varian in Quest Vault meant for (PvP-Heroes Variant). However, we have thought about converting heroes too into this variant (as Imperial Assault Allies) by using the same mechanic of LoR Allies cards.

c) Lieutenants/Agents : Although they are easier to implement, we have not use them yet in the variant, as we fear it may unbalance some things...and because I haven’t yet assigned a value to them.

So…as you can see these are my points of view about this variant.

Thanks for your amazing input.

All your ideas and concerns are completely valid.

But my take on this is a bit different.

I don't pretend to mirror the skirmish rules for SW-IA.

My idea is to streamline first the stats of the miniatures so that the concepts that work with Descent game can be used in a skirmish.

The attribute testing and conditions are in fact very easy to work with.

I also think that the point system is easy to create by rating everything.

I like the command deck idea but I would want something more in theme with Descent (I think that can come after having the miniatures re-rated).

Let me give you an example of my idea.

Lieutenants are ranked as anti-heroes. They cannot join heroes teams but they are treated as heroes.

They can equip, have fatigue, Ability and Heroic feat.

Ardus Ix'erebus

Move 4 / Live 17 / Fatigue 4 / defense grey die

Might 5 / Knowledge 2 / Willpower 1 / Awareness 4

Hability: Flanking

Heroic feat: When performing an attack, after rolling dice, Ardus Ix'erebus can test might: If he passes he can add 1 surge and one red power die to the result. If he fails count it as a normal attack and the feat doesn't count as used.

Monsters could be grouped in ways that not all monsters would fight together and not all monsters would band with certain heroes and anti-heroes.

What do you think?

I see.

Well, my friend and I we are trying to mirror SW:IA Skrimish into Descent that's why all the stuff I mentioned.

Now, if I understand correctly, what you want is a PvP (Figure vs Figure) system in which Heroes participate as normal and lieutenants join too (with some hero type of system); using monsters as kind of familiars and so on...Am I correct? If yes, I think BJZSN has the most developed variant out there. I mean, he has several maps and objetives to use. The first one is call: Team vs Team (PvP) .

I like it too much, I have play it a couple of times, but when he recently published (now that I am looking at it, he has improved it since then haha I might test it again).

I've seen the Team vs Team and I like the idea.

What I find is that some abilities and feats do not work in a skirmish without changes.

But it's a gigantic workload for just one person.

That's why I'm asking for help.

My suggestion would be to download teh Imperial Assault skirmish rules and go from there. They are almost the same game, (campaign wise), so, you should be able to use the IA skirmish rules to base the Descent Skirmish rules on.

I've already done that.

I'll take another look at it.

Thanks.

5) Monster cost : This mechanic was also very difficult because my friend said that using HP as the monster value could be the thing. However, for me that was not enough because the HP does not reflect the cost of a unit (or even more, a group). For example, if you took Giants compared to Shadow Dragons, Giants would have to cots more than the Shadow Dragons (or even some lieutenants, like Splig or Eliza). As a side note, unit cost also depends on people’s opinion of which monster is stronger and useful than other. Forgetting that last part, I then created some sort of formula that assigned a value to some key characteristics I considered important for a battle (sust as attack type [range-melee], monster size, group numbers, attack/defense pool, etc.). I have an Excel document which summaries this and shows a more objective value.

I think this might be the most important aspect of the skirmish design. Not asking for your spreadsheet Volkren, but after you built it and considered statistics/abilities/attack dice, did you find the various monster groups were balanced?

Striking an accurate and justified balance with the monster groups, classes and heroes has to be the first step imo.

Cursain