Hi,

I have been looking at the way the game handles equipment distribution and how to improve it.

When you work with all addons and expansions out there, the market decks become huge piles of cards. The random factor for the heroes is immense. From that huge pile of cards you only draw 5. This sometimes leads to a lot of frustration, when the heroes play 7 or more quests but do not find anything useful for their chosen classes.

What are your experiences with the system? Any ideas how to improve the distribution but keep it random? I was thinking about making different "stacks" from which we pull. Another thought was to just increase the amount of cards drawn to 7 or 10.

Another idea I had was to allow heroes to trash cards that came up in the shopping phase, so they are gone for good and cannot come up again during a future shopping phase.

What do you think would have the best impact? Any ideas from your side that could help?

I think it's important to remember that in the campaign setting, there are two very different levels of shopping concern. During Act 1, there is certainly randomness for what comes up after each quest. However, heroes always will have the opportunity to buy any Act 1 cards they wish after the interlude. That is, the chance that Mana Weave comes up after any individual quest may be small, but the chance that Mana Weave will be available for purchase is 100%.

In contrast to that, Act 2 represents truly distinct possibilities. There is no (RAW) assurance that any particular card, or any particular TYPE of card will appear during the shopping step. As an example of this, I like to cite a particular Nerekhall campaign where I was playing as Orkell the Skirmisher, and we ALSO had Trenloe the Knight. We did not see a single melee weapon appear in the Act 2 shop until after the second quest in Act 2, which really affected our party strategy. We warriors had planned to be the heavy hitters, but ended up with me being a reliable ("Unstoppable") low damage dealer, and Trenloe focusing on defense.

On the one hand, I don't think the shopping step requires a house rule. While the probability for flipping a particular card certainly goes down with expansions, the probability for flipping "a 1 handed melee weapon" or "armor" or "a rune" stays relatively constant. That being said, I think a "stacks" shop approach is not a bad one at all if you want to regulate the probabilities a bit more. In fact, I think it's been shown that the RtL app does something like that. Each shopping step will have a certain number of melee weapons, armor, items, ranged weapons, etc.

If you're going to do that approach, you just have to ask how many stacks you want. One stack of "items", one stack of "armor", sure. But do you go so far as to separate "light armor" from "heavy armor"? (I wouldn't). As far as weapons, do you have a "1 handed" and a "2 handed" stack? do you have a "melee" and a "ranged" stack? a "magic" and a "non magic" stack? (I think the most natural way would be "melee" vs "ranged".) Then your shop step can be:

1 armor

1 ranged weapon

1 melee weapon

2 items

I don't like the idea of trashing cards forever. Rather, I think an interesting idea would be a partial or full redraw, at a fee. Just spitballing here, but what about:

"Once per shopping phase, the heroes can decide to pay 25 gold to set up to 5 shop cards aside and deal an equal number of replacement shop cards."

That is, after seeing the initial draw, the heroes can forego the opportunity to buy any number of those cards for the opportunity to look a little further in the shop deck (for 25 gold). I think the cost is important to not allow the heroes to essentially double the size of the shop step, but give some flexibility for really poor draws, or draws that don't fit the current needs of the party. My proposal has the cards that were set aside being shuffled back in at the end of the shop step (they're not gone forever, just for the current shop step).

Honestly I wouldn't implement Zaltyre's suggestion, as I think you´re a little bit naive on this one thinking the heroes wouldn't find ways to abuse this mechanism. What happens in practice is that there is exactly ZERO reason not to pay these 25 golds to draw new cards, even if you´ve drawn OK items, so you can dig for something top tier. Buying 1 top tier item every shopping phase can be considered a very succesful shopping phase. You don't need one armor and two trinkets on each hero, as long as you have the gear that YOU need to maximize your impact in the game.

So yeah, 25 gold is a bargain for getting new shop items from the shop. Obviously if you keep drawing poorly then you´re screwed anyway, but the statistics weight in too and certainly get in the heroes' favor if you can get multiple new draws as part of the same shopping phase.. The more you draw the best odds you have getting what you need, obviously.

Strictly speaking you could just stick to base weapons all Act I and not buy anything (and get smashed during that Act, but who cares), and cash in all some of your gold after the Interlude or (if you can wait) Act II. That's a lot of gold to spend, AND you can use some of it to draw many more cards.

I agree with Indalecio that 25 gold would be WAY to cheap. Maybe 100 if you really feel the need of a re-draw. Better not messing with this part of the game. I just finished a campaign with my playgroup using the base game and 2 small expansions and we didn't experience this problem. The heroes even possessed gear they couldn't use anymore. But ok we included 2 rumors in act 1 and act 2, so lots of gold and 4 additional shopping steps.

I think this is one of mechanisms there to enforce party balance. If you have all 4 archetypes, you'll be finding something useful almost every time

I agree with Indalecio that 25 gold would be WAY to cheap. Maybe 100 if you really feel the need of a re-draw. Better not messing with this part of the game. I just finished a campaign with my playgroup using the base game and 2 small expansions and we didn't experience this problem. The heroes even possessed gear they couldn't use anymore. But ok we included 2 rumors in act 1 and act 2, so lots of gold and 4 additional shopping steps.

But that is the entire point. Randomness. Sometimes it works super well. Sometimes it is balanced. Sometimes the heroes only get non usable crap (for their particular setup) and stand no chance. It is exactly this fluctuation that I want to get rid off. It frustrated my group, and since I want them to have fun while playing (so they keep playing) I want to fix that.

I'd just like to pop in and reiterate 2 points:

1) I don't think shopping needs a house rule. The examples I gave are merely suggestions for if you really do want to house rule.

2) The 25 gold figure I put out was purely a placeholder. You could make it 25 gold per card redrawn, if you want (limit once per shop step, still). No "One. Ok, one more. No, that's still bad, let's do it again."

Bonus #3) If your group doesn't enjoy a bit of randomness, you might want to rethink the game you picked. It doesn't just show up in shopping. Searching for treasure, rolling dice for attacks, drawing OL cards, location of "mystery" quest objectives, rolling dice for attribute tests...

My point is that there is quite a bit of room for the situation to swing on the whim of fate. You all need to be OK with that, or at least prepared for it.

I'd just like to pop in and reiterate 2 points:

1) I don't think shopping needs a house rule. The examples I gave are merely suggestions for if you really do want to house rule.

2) The 25 gold figure I put out was purely a placeholder. You could make it 25 gold per card redrawn, if you want (limit once per shop step, still). No "One. Ok, one more. No, that's still bad, let's do it again."

Bonus #3) If your group doesn't enjoy a bit of randomness, you might want to rethink the game you picked. It doesn't just show up in shopping. Searching for treasure, rolling dice for attacks, drawing OL cards, location of "mystery" quest objectives, rolling dice for attribute tests...

My point is that there is quite a bit of room for the situation to swing on the whim of fate. You all need to be OK with that, or at least prepared for it.

Why are you trying to lecture me and the way I want to enjoy the product, instead of just offering help for the request given? Is there some absolute truth about how this game is supposed to be played, some holy codex that must not be touched as else the wrath of the gamer god will come down and strike me for my sins?

Jeez, I do not undertand people sometimes. I buy a set of man made rules, written on paper and illustrated with cardboard and plastic. Neither Kevin Wilson nor Adam Sadler and the rest of the guys are doing anything super innovative here. It is your standard game design, with health, armor, movement points etc. and to be frank there are many things that just plain suck. Many things are not streamlined (at least its better than D1) and generally the whole rules book is a methodical mess.

It all is a very "top down" and "gut feeling" game design (in the rules design at least, the number crunching and math behind the balancing seems to be quite well done). Howerver, it is ages away from the methodical approach to design that a "Klaus Teuber" does. And that is also the reason why it needs so much FAQ, and has so many ambigious situations (still a lot better than D1, admitted).

So to be frank, I see no reason whatsoever to not mod this game, especially since I am also working in the field of computer games design for some years now. And sorry in advance if I sound harsh, I just am a bit tired of people always going for the "purist" argument that a game "is not for you" if you "dont play it as intended" etc. I hear that so often... and it is just not true. A game is a tool for enjoyment. And that tool can be shaped by anyone using it, not just the creator. It is about spending your free time, and not about judging someones guilt and sending him to prison. It is a good of no relevance other than luxury.

Someone woke needing a hug today .... or a cookie.

I'd just like to pop in and reiterate 2 points:

1) I don't think shopping needs a house rule. The examples I gave are merely suggestions for if you really do want to house rule.

2) The 25 gold figure I put out was purely a placeholder. You could make it 25 gold per card redrawn, if you want (limit once per shop step, still). No "One. Ok, one more. No, that's still bad, let's do it again."

Bonus #3) If your group doesn't enjoy a bit of randomness, you might want to rethink the game you picked. It doesn't just show up in shopping. Searching for treasure, rolling dice for attacks, drawing OL cards, location of "mystery" quest objectives, rolling dice for attribute tests...

My point is that there is quite a bit of room for the situation to swing on the whim of fate. You all need to be OK with that, or at least prepared for it.

Why are you trying to lecture me and the way I want to enjoy the product, instead of just offering help for the request given? Is there some absolute truth about how this game is supposed to be played, some holy codex that must not be touched as else the wrath of the gamer god will come down and strike me for my sins?

Jeez, I do not undertand people sometimes. I buy a set of man made rules, written on paper and illustrated with cardboard and plastic. Neither Kevin Wilson nor Adam Sadler and the rest of the guys are doing anything super innovative here. It is your standard game design, with health, armor, movement points etc. and to be frank there are many things that just plain suck. Many things are not streamlined (at least its better than D1) and generally the whole rules book is a methodical mess.

It all is a very "top down" and "gut feeling" game design (in the rules design at least, the number crunching and math behind the balancing seems to be quite well done). Howerver, it is ages away from the methodical approach to design that a "Klaus Teuber" does. And that is also the reason why it needs so much FAQ, and has so many ambigious situations (still a lot better than D1, admitted).

So to be frank, I see no reason whatsoever to not mod this game, especially since I am also working in the field of computer games design for some years now. And sorry in advance if I sound harsh, I just am a bit tired of people always going for the "purist" argument that a game "is not for you" if you "dont play it as intended" etc. I hear that so often... and it is just not true. A game is a tool for enjoyment. And that tool can be shaped by anyone using it, not just the creator. It is about spending your free time, and not about judging someones guilt and sending him to prison. It is a good of no relevance other than luxury.

You specifically asked for experiences with the system. However the hell you play the game is entirely up to you and your table, but if you pop into a forum full of fans, asking for opinions, don't act all "Jeez I do not understand people sometimes herp derp" when said fans happen to give you their opinion on the topic.

He's entirely correct in everything he said. It's not about purism or looking for reasons not to mod the game, it's about the fact that it's very fundamentally not chess, nor intended to be. If you specifically do not enjoy randomness, you either picked the wrong game, or you're going to have to mod a hell of a lot more than just the shop, to the point where it's really not about modding Descent anymore, but about making your own **** game.

Someone woke needing a hug today .... or a cookie.

Or a beating.

I did not intend to lecture. My point was, as Luckmann said- if randomness is not something your group enjoys, you will need to house rule much more than the shop step. Some of it (placement of objective tokens/unique search tokens) will be very difficult to mod.

I certainly see your problem. The larger the deck becomes, the bigger the (unfortunate) possibility that you draw subpar stuff every shopping step.

If you don't play in a very competitive group and the heroes truly lack in strength, I would offer them to discard the drawn shop cards before they buy items and draw new shop cards. If you want to make it a little more thematic you can make a rule that they can try once to bargain with the shop each shopping step (test knowledge or strength, if you succeed you may suffer 1 fatigue or how much you find fair that stays until the next quest) to redraw the shop deck.

If you play in a competitive group you can give them 2 redraws for the entire campaign or 1 for each act. You can also let them "bargain" and/or suffer a certain number of fatigue to redraw.

I've used the first method quite some times in campaigns, when I was playing the OL to keep the game exciting and the heroes motivated. Part of the motivation resulted from the fact that they were thinking more about what's good about the shop draw than what's bad and they didn't found themselves entirely at the mercy of luck. I found it to work very well and it made the games closer, but maybe it worked so well, because the hero-party wasn't so fond of this "bending the rules"-thing and only used it once or twice out of free will.

Also If you let them redraw, I would in any case make them redraw before buying any card (to keep it an interesting decision) and I would rather let them suffer fatigue than make them pay money, because if you are behind, have no items and maybe waste money on another very average item draw, it won't really help them in the long run. Suffering fatigue on the other hand lets you take a hit for the next scenario which is not hurting you so much in the long run if you remain unlucky, while there still is a tradeoff.

Another way to handle your problem could be to increase the reselling price of equipment. This way, your heroes wouldn't try so hard to get the best equipment in the game, but be more happy to by items which are suboptimal because they could sell them for more than half the amount of gold. I think it is also fun to try winning with a suboptimal equipment, or items a certain hero wouldn't use normally. Having all heroes equipped with high end-gear is not so fun for the Overlord either (but I see that your group is far from being equipped like that). However, be careful with the increasing reselling price. You could gift your heroes an enormous amount of gold.

In any case: If you have expansions which allow you to add rumor-quests, I would simply introduce one of them. This way, your heroes get more gold (so they could waste a little to by subpar stuff), get 1 shopping step and they have to do something for it. This way, it wouldn't fell like a miraculous gift from heaven. Plus: the overlord may win a card for his deck as well, which is a motivation for him. This solution lengthens your campaign though.

I've allowed my players to redraw when the shopping step was really terrible, like not even 1 usable item.

But I could see a system where you allow a redraw, but each time they do this during the campaign, the redrawn items cost an additional 25 gold. (+25 first time, +50 second time,..)

I'd just like to pop in and reiterate 2 points:

1) I don't think shopping needs a house rule. The examples I gave are merely suggestions for if you really do want to house rule.

2) The 25 gold figure I put out was purely a placeholder. You could make it 25 gold per card redrawn, if you want (limit once per shop step, still). No "One. Ok, one more. No, that's still bad, let's do it again."

Bonus #3) If your group doesn't enjoy a bit of randomness, you might want to rethink the game you picked. It doesn't just show up in shopping. Searching for treasure, rolling dice for attacks, drawing OL cards, location of "mystery" quest objectives, rolling dice for attribute tests...

My point is that there is quite a bit of room for the situation to swing on the whim of fate. You all need to be OK with that, or at least prepared for it.

Why are you trying to lecture me and the way I want to enjoy the product, instead of just offering help for the request given? Is there some absolute truth about how this game is supposed to be played, some holy codex that must not be touched as else the wrath of the gamer god will come down and strike me for my sins?

Jeez, I do not undertand people sometimes. I buy a set of man made rules, written on paper and illustrated with cardboard and plastic. Neither Kevin Wilson nor Adam Sadler and the rest of the guys are doing anything super innovative here. It is your standard game design, with health, armor, movement points etc. and to be frank there are many things that just plain suck. Many things are not streamlined (at least its better than D1) and generally the whole rules book is a methodical mess.

It all is a very "top down" and "gut feeling" game design (in the rules design at least, the number crunching and math behind the balancing seems to be quite well done). Howerver, it is ages away from the methodical approach to design that a "Klaus Teuber" does. And that is also the reason why it needs so much FAQ, and has so many ambigious situations (still a lot better than D1, admitted).

So to be frank, I see no reason whatsoever to not mod this game, especially since I am also working in the field of computer games design for some years now. And sorry in advance if I sound harsh, I just am a bit tired of people always going for the "purist" argument that a game "is not for you" if you "dont play it as intended" etc. I hear that so often... and it is just not true. A game is a tool for enjoyment. And that tool can be shaped by anyone using it, not just the creator. It is about spending your free time, and not about judging someones guilt and sending him to prison. It is a good of no relevance other than luxury.

You specifically asked for experiences with the system. However the hell you play the game is entirely up to you and your table, but if you pop into a forum full of fans, asking for opinions, don't act all "Jeez I do not understand people sometimes herp derp" when said fans happen to give you their opinion on the topic.

He's entirely correct in everything he said. It's not about purism or looking for reasons not to mod the game, it's about the fact that it's very fundamentally not chess, nor intended to be. If you specifically do not enjoy randomness, you either picked the wrong game, or you're going to have to mod a hell of a lot more than just the shop, to the point where it's really not about modding Descent anymore, but about making your own **** game.

Someone woke needing a hug today .... or a cookie.

Or a beating.

How about we meet and you show me in person, though guy? Big words on a forum...

I did not threaten anyone. I came to the forum to look for house rules, and I got smart ass comments telling me to reconsider if I want to play the game. I played D1, with all addon, played D2 with all addon available in my language, I play Twilight Imperium with session up to 12h. So if you say "he is correct in everything he said" that obviously does not apply. I LOVE random elements in games.

We have fun playing the game, and all I want to do is work on something that my players don't like. If I were to follow through with that logic, any game that uses a dice would be not suitable for me. Those "arguments from authority" are a plague on discussion boards. That is why I also clearly stated: " sorry in advance if I sound harsh... "

Nevertheless, thanks for the proposals made so far. I think I will use the re-draw option. What DAMaz brought up is also VERY interesting. I have not considered using the attributes to solve that problem. Especially given the fact that with my current set up of expansions the game has a distinct lack in checks for wisdom/knowledge. So maybe in order to spend gold to redraw, a bargain check needs to be made first, against that attribute. Very interesting idea!

The thing about spending fatigue instead of gold... I don't know. My first reaction would be: It's really strong! Fatigue is a regenerating resource, gold is not.

We also still have those destiny/threat tokens. They seem to be saved for re-rolls mostly. They could be expanded to act as jokers in the meta game phase.

About the rumors: They already played 3... Basically those are the only quests they won, except for the very first act I quest. I won all other... Sometimes stomping them in a way that was really frustrating for them. And all of them are old school gamers, that know how to play. We are all in our late 30's and come from the RPG pen&paper age. So it is not about their skill. They just have really weak equipment.

How about we meet and you show me in person, though guy? Big words on a forum...

Did.. did he just go "Y u don't fight me IRL!?" over criticism?

That's it. I'm done. This is either a troll or a 12yo. I refuse to take this seriously.

I did not threaten anyone. I came to the forum to look for house rules, and I got smart ass comments telling me to reconsider if I want to play the game. I played D1, with all addon, played D2 with all addon available in my language, I play Twilight Imperium with session up to 12h. So if you say "he is correct in everything he said" that obviously does not apply. I LOVE random elements in games.

We have fun playing the game, and all I want to do is work on something that my players don't like. If I were to follow through with that logic, any game that uses a dice would be not suitable for me. Those "arguments from authority" are a plague on discussion boards. That is why I also clearly stated: " sorry in advance if I sound harsh... "

In his first post he mentions multiple useful solutions/house rules. You then mention that randomness is something "I want to get rid off. It frustrated my group, and since I want them to have fun while playing (so they keep playing) I want to fix that.", and Zaltyre just mentions in a (in my opinion) non lecturing, non smartass way that Descent contains a lot of randomness, and if your group doesn't like that, you're gonna have a bad time. You just took that comment the wrong way.

A lot of people are new to Descent because of the app, and we don't know that you have every expansion that ever came out for 1st and 2nd edition. We just got your "my group doesn't like randomness" statement to go on.

Or a beating.

This on the other hand was completely unnecessary..

How about we meet and you show me in person, though guy? Big words on a forum...

Did.. did he just go "Y u don't fight me IRL!?" over criticism?

That's it. I'm done. This is either a troll or a 12yo. I refuse to take this seriously.

Because you consider "a beating" to be valid criticism.

People are so fast with words, but it is only because they hide behind a computer screen. And again, I only responded harsh to something unnecessary in the first place.

I did not threaten anyone. I came to the forum to look for house rules, and I got smart ass comments telling me to reconsider if I want to play the game. I played D1, with all addon, played D2 with all addon available in my language, I play Twilight Imperium with session up to 12h. So if you say "he is correct in everything he said" that obviously does not apply. I LOVE random elements in games.

We have fun playing the game, and all I want to do is work on something that my players don't like. If I were to follow through with that logic, any game that uses a dice would be not suitable for me. Those "arguments from authority" are a plague on discussion boards. That is why I also clearly stated: " sorry in advance if I sound harsh... "

In his first post he mentions multiple useful solutions/house rules. You then mention that randomness is something "I want to get rid off. It frustrated my group, and since I want them to have fun while playing (so they keep playing) I want to fix that.", and Zaltyre just mentions in a (in my opinion) non lecturing, non smartass way that Descent contains a lot of randomness, and if your group doesn't like that, you're gonna have a bad time. You just took that comment the wrong way.

A lot of people are new to Descent because of the app, and we don't know that you have every expansion that ever came out for 1st and 2nd edition. We just got your "my group doesn't like randomness" statement to go on.

I admit to being overly aggressive. And I apologize. I take the hug and the cookie though.

I admit to being overly aggressive. And I apologize. I take the hug and the cookie though.

Great! I agree with Atom4geVampire though that Luckman's statement was unnecessary. I would guess it was intended as a joke but is easily misinterpreted. Maybe we could all behave like grown ups again?

And of course the rules of Descent are by no means holy, and you are welcome to suggest and try any modifications. Many people in the forum do so. Sometimes it takes a grateful OL to give the heroes a bit of an advantage if they have a steak of bad luck. Descent has this snowbally tendency after all. (The heroes might want to be grateful at times as well)

A general modification of a rule is nevertheless something very different because it would apply to all games, every shopping step etc. This way one could create an unintended advantage for the heroes based on a single game with unlucky and thus unhappy heroes. This is what we who argued agains a modification meant (I guess). Its not necessarily wrong in any way, but needs testing. Please go on modding as much as you like and do come back to report on your groups experience with these mods.

I admit to being overly aggressive. And I apologize. I take the hug and the cookie though.

Great! I agree with Atom4geVampire though that Luckman's statement was unnecessary. I would guess it was intended as a joke but is easily misinterpreted. Maybe we could all behave like grown ups again?

And of course the rules of Descent are by no means holy, and you are welcome to suggest and try any modifications. Many people in the forum do so. Sometimes it takes a grateful OL to give the heroes a bit of an advantage if they have a steak of bad luck. Descent has this snowbally tendency after all. (The heroes might want to be grateful at times as well)

A general modification of a rule is nevertheless something very different because it would apply to all games, every shopping step etc. This way one could create an unintended advantage for the heroes based on a single game with unlucky and thus unhappy heroes. This is what we who argued agains a modification meant (I guess). Its not necessarily wrong in any way, but needs testing. Please go on modding as much as you like and do come back to report on your groups experience with these mods.

I would really like to go that route. When I first bought Descent 1, I was still in the "Game Master" mode, feeling like it was my responsibility to create an atmosphere of adventuring and enjoyment for the players. It wasn't until I got my butt handed to me, that I realized this is not really the way the game will work, since the players do not grant the OL the power to be a typical dungeon master. When I figured out that it is really about them VS. me all the number cruncher and rule lawyers came to rise. Which is okay, when you fully embrace it. However, it also means that rules and the balancing needs to be super tight, as no player in our group really goes that "let's be grateful" route... Quite the opposite: In order to have as few unclear situation as possible we abide to the rules as strict as possible, which seems to be the best way for everyone to feel treated fair and equal. The game has a definite winner after all. So that requires very clear upfront definitions of unclear rules and the modded house-rules. The nature of the game is competitive and you sometimes can really feel it at the table when stakes are high and people get all heated up.

That is when clear rules shine most, they solve the situation and let people have more fun within the game, while spending less time on heated up debates that just make everyone upset.

It has often been discussed in this forum whether the OL should be a more of a game master or the heroes worst nightmare. The latter seems to be the consensus. Since heroes get gold and XP every quest, they grow stronger with every game and the amount of gold they gather will determine the steepness of this curve. The OL evolution is more step like as the game progresses to Akt II. So as you say, a nice Game Master OL will end up deep fried and there's no fun in that. I agree, you have to play competitive, you need crystal clear rules and that leads to this rule-lawyering (more or less the whole forum is dedicated to that). I wouldn't say that the rules of Descent are badly written, but every expansion adds stuff which increases the possibility of unclear situations. Also, these nasty heroes are always trying to bend the rules to their advantage

Nevertheless I feel one must make a distinction between:

- true imbalances or badly written rules which can/should be house-ruled (there is a whole thread to that topic)

and

- a chain of bad luck (on either side) which may look as an imbalance but really isn't. House rules are not required in this case.

Your group's bad luck with the item draws seems to fall in the latter case. And I would break such a chain of bad luck by granting the heroes a single advantage (only once) instead of house-ruling the whole thing.

And maybe your heroes are also too picky. After all, every hero can use every weapon (in principle). Sometimes it makes sense to have a bow or a rune for a fighter for one or two quests. If you get more dice or good surge abilities why not.