For the 3rd **** time this year, X-Wing has a completely new, updated, well done, well thought out FAQ ... Full disclosure, I am an X-Wing player so I am happy that this team seems capable of doing this.

Why ... why ... why ... is it not possible to get the Descent team to generate a competent, updated FAQ for Descent?

Especially seeing as their digital content in theory has TRIPLED their sales? It has gotten to the point that this is absolutely absurd, and NOT acceptable.

I am sick of the excuses. I am sick of the apologists.

I have been here since the very beginning ...

I am 75 years old.

I seriously doubt I will see such an FAQ before I die.

That is very, very, sad.

It makes me want to use a term from Monday Night Football Pre-Game Show and say ...

COME ON, MAN !!!

It can suck for sure. This game can't support any competitive scene, so I guess there's less inclination to support the FAQ.

Keep it calm, buddy

As my grandmother used to say when I was enraged by something: "War is far worse than this."

Yeah, it's a thing to wonder

Considering the time and number of erratas, FFG should provide a guide for free for everyone that shows proof of purchase. That would make us happy.

But anyway, I play the way I want... "My house, my rules"

I feel you. I like this game but the fact that literally every session results in an argument because something is either unclear or massively unbalanced (usually against the overlord) means that the rest of my group doesn't so I don't get to play. The issue with house-ruling a rules discrepancy is you have to make decisions on the fly and in a competitive game it means that one side is going to have to concede and in Descent that often means losing the entire map. Something like "where does this model go in this situation" where the result is a totally binary win/lose scenario for either side. It's left a bad taste in my group's collective mouth enough that people just don't want to try it anymore which is sad.

The game doesn't just need an updated faq it needs another rulebook that updates it with probably some of the things they've learned and incorporated into Imperial Assault, such as the better line of sight system, removing the X on the blue dice entirely, and also balancing the ridiculously uneven hero classes.

I disagree about the need for actual rule changes- whether or not there is an X on the attack die is not the issue, rather what's important is that whether an attack is a "miss" or a hit" is clear in every case.

I don't think it's a a stretch to say that I've spent more time/effort thinking about Descent rules than a large majority of the people here. I still encounter situations where I'm stumped and have to ask rules questions of FFG. That's not good. I'm not saying that all rulesets have to be simple, but all rulesets should be clear. S ituations where the rulebook doesn't give a definitive answer (that is, even after taking the time to break out the rulebook, it's not there) should be rare. Having dissected this game's rulebooks and cards, I'm still finding some.

This is not to say that the FFG Descent team isn't helpful when I do submit rules questions. I've found there responses to generally be carefully thought out and clear. That is, they're definitely putting forth the effort to answer rules questions. However, I am of the opinion that at some level they might be "working harder, not smarter." While a comprehensive FAQ of the style any2cards is referencing (such as exists for X-Wing) might be a huge initial time investment, I'd wager it would cut down on the volume of questions they receive. Unfortunately, it's not a simple matter to know if such a time investment is possible/allowed/approved. Maybe they've been spending they're time making the Delve, instead.

I think the miss dice result being removed from Imperial Assault is a really good change. Rolling the X feels bad every time and has resulted in people's plans being screwed immensely by bad luck which creates a salty environment. Additionally there's no way to minimize that risk so a master swordsman and a goblin have the same chance of not hitting. There's still a chance for no damage without the miss if you roll very badly and the target rolls well, but you have some agency over that with choosing lightly armored (or avoiding figures with the white defense dice) and getting better gear. Descent is typically a race against the clock for both sides so missing out on a turn because of a constant 1/6 chance can be huge. When one character is the skirmisher and takes the talent to remove the miss dice face it's a huge deal. The miss dice I think is more of a legacy from Descent 1 than anything integral to the game experience.

It's basically one of the things that I think would make Descent more fun for everyone playing but isn't ruining the game or anything. In our group at least people are much more accepting when they do no damage because they only rolled two damage and a stun and the Imperial Player got three defenses than if they got a great roll but the blue dice was the X. Second edition is getting kind of old (especially when Imperial Assault is more or less Descent 3rd edition with a Star Wars theme) and I think it could do with some updates from what they've learned in the last few years.

I am trying to do such an FAQ on the wiki.

This was my initial goal when i started working there and quickly found that i kind of need to rewrite the whole wiki.

My inspiration comes from the Netrunner wiki ( http://ancur.wikia.com ) which serves as a central point to gather rulings regarding the different cards.

(e.g: http://ancur.wikia.com/wiki/Business_First_UFAQ )

I've added since then the infobox card template, but this work there is not complete yet.

It's missing support for monsters, lieutenants and heroes; At least with the heroes kind of a key point missing for a central FAQ.

I already started adding some FAQ on skills (e.g. http://descent2e.wikia.com/wiki/Runic_Knowledge or http://descent2e.wikia.com/wiki/Break_the_Rune list of currently added FAQs here: http://descent2e.wikia.com/wiki/Category:FAQ ) but i will have to rewrite the FAQ template. In it's current form it's kind of unusable. (And it doesn't look as nice as the ancur one)

My vision is one day to be able to have a question pop up during a quest and just have to open the relevant pages on the wiki and have my answers.

Keep it calm, buddy

As my grandmother used to say when I was enraged by something: "War is far worse than this."

As someone who was a Navy Seal for 25 years, I think I am well versed with your grandmother's thoughts.

As for the FAQ issue, it is one that has existed since this game existed. I have begged, pleaded, and even offered my own time and efforts to create such an FAQ, to no avail.

They last "updated" the FAQ in February of this year, and it was a year before that for the last "update". Both "updates" were pathetic efforts. It was almost as if someone said, "ok, I added two sentences to the FAQ, that should satisfy them". The amount of information, rulings, expansions, etc. that is missing from the FAQ is STAGGERING.

If you want to see what a true effort for an FAQ looks like, download the one on this site for X-Wing. Then compare that to Descent. And realize that Descent has existed for a longer amount of time. Then try not to cry.

This community, and the one on BGG, has created more extensive support documents in several days, than FFG has created in YEARS of time. Individuals such as myself and Zaltyre have put forth more effort supporting this community than anything produced by FFG.

That is what is both remarkable, and sad.

I realize that my two posts within this thread display alot of anger and frustration; but enough is enough. Somebody has to be willing to say something, and stand up for this community.

Keep it calm, buddy

As my grandmother used to say when I was enraged by something: "War is far worse than this."

As someone who was a Navy Seal for 25 years, I think I am well versed with your grandmother's thoughts.

As for the FAQ issue, it is one that has existed since this game existed. I have begged, pleaded, and even offered my own time and efforts to create such an FAQ, to no avail.

They last "updated" the FAQ in February of this year, and it was a year before that for the last "update". Both "updates" were pathetic efforts. It was almost as if someone said, "ok, I added two sentences to the FAQ, that should satisfy them". The amount of information, rulings, expansions, etc. that is missing from the FAQ is STAGGERING.

If you want to see what a true effort for an FAQ looks like, download the one on this site for X-Wing. Then compare that to Descent. And realize that Descent has existed for a longer amount of time. Then try not to cry.

This community, and the one on BGG, has created more extensive support documents in several days, than FFG has created in YEARS of time. Individuals such as myself and Zaltyre have put forth more effort supporting this community than anything produced by FFG.

That is what is both remarkable, and sad.

I realize that my two posts within this thread display alot of anger and frustration; but enough is enough. Somebody has to be willing to say something, and stand up for this community.

I love this guy

I thought this topic would have been about pirates

The reason X-wing gets more frequent FAQ updates probably has to do with the fact that it's a competitive game (as in there are tournaments and such). Organized events with entry fees and cash prizes need clear rules. Descent is a game that you play at home. It's easy enough to make a call that works for you and your friends and move on from there.

I thought this topic would have been about pirates

I would surely like to make FFG walk the plank !!!

The reason X-wing gets more frequent FAQ updates probably has to do with the fact that it's a competitive game (as in there are tournaments and such). Organized events with entry fees and cash prizes need clear rules. Descent is a game that you play at home. It's easy enough to make a call that works for you and your friends and move on from there.

There are quite a few people who have taken this position ... while there certainly is validity to the statement, it does not absolve FFG from a complete lack of effort when it comes to supporting Descent.

It would be one thing if they said, "Ok, here's the game, and we wash our hands of it." But this isn't the approach they have taken. They have continued to develop the game, and as a result, there is a significant amount of complexity to it. Not to mention the fact that anyone who even remotely approaches my investment in this game (i.e. those who own everything), have made a substantial investment in the game.

I think with that investment, both in terms of money, as well as on-going support of this community, results in a reasonable expectation that FFG will support the game - which in turn means providing clear, concise rules for how it is played, and clear, concise rulings when there are conflicts. In other words, a functional, up to date, competent FAQ.

FAQ documents are called FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS for a reason. It would seem to me, as Zaltyre pointed out earlier, that it would be in the best interest of FFG to create such a document, as it would reduce the amount of e-mail they get asking the same things over and over again.

It is not as if we are asking for some insurmountable goal ...

While I feel your pain (ok not quite as much as I am slightly younger), I suspect it still comes down to $. Even with descent sales at 3X it is safe to say they make a lot more $ off X wing. Just take a look at the forum post count. While there is some business reason to grow in house IP that FFG fully owns, they probably still make more off the star wars IP even with expensive licensing costs.

Descent

• 3,296 topics
• 33,632 replies

X wing

• 43,724 topics
• 796,739 replies

Imperial Assault. //Just for comparison

• 4,076 topics
• 43,823 replies

We are talking about the time it takes to generate a PDF document. I am not asking for the world here. I am talking about collating all of the e-mail questions they have received, any rulings they have made, and put them into a PDF. This is not a 1,000 man hour job. Nor will it take a significant amount of money.

Quite frankly, a FAQ should be a living document. If they simply kept it updated day by day, as they answered the same questions over and over again, it would not take much over all effort.

I do, however, agree that now that they have let 2+ years go by without any significant effort, it will take time to make this happen.

I am trying to do such an FAQ on the wiki.

This was my initial goal when i started working there and quickly found that i kind of need to rewrite the whole wiki.

My inspiration comes from the Netrunner wiki ( http://ancur.wikia.com ) which serves as a central point to gather rulings regarding the different cards.

(e.g: http://ancur.wikia.com/wiki/Business_First_UFAQ )

I've added since then the infobox card template, but this work there is not complete yet.

It's missing support for monsters, lieutenants and heroes; At least with the heroes kind of a key point missing for a central FAQ.

I already started adding some FAQ on skills (e.g. http://descent2e.wikia.com/wiki/Runic_Knowledge or http://descent2e.wikia.com/wiki/Break_the_Rune list of currently added FAQs here: http://descent2e.wikia.com/wiki/Category:FAQ ) but i will have to rewrite the FAQ template. In it's current form it's kind of unusable. (And it doesn't look as nice as the ancur one)

My vision is one day to be able to have a question pop up during a quest and just have to open the relevant pages on the wiki and have my answers.

Great idea. Keep in mind that you have to diffentiate between the official FAQs and the unofficial FAQs (consisting of the collected answers from FGG on specific questions asked by players). Some groups might want to go with the offical FAQ only. I have been working to collect/update the uFAQ here.

I added/modifyed more than 100 FAQs during the last several months. It still is far from complete. I think the wiki is great, however the all-on-one-page approach also has its benefits, because searching might be a little bit easier here.

I encourage everybody to participate and add to the Wiki and/or the corresponding thread at BGG. Actually, these (and other) community efforts would make FFGs work a lot easier. Most of the stuff is already there and referenced to the original emails (in most cases). So it would be quite easy to put it all together and put it into a single official pdf or "living" webpage. Come on, FFG!

double post

I am trying to do such an FAQ on the wiki.

This was my initial goal when i started working there and quickly found that i kind of need to rewrite the whole wiki.

My inspiration comes from the Netrunner wiki ( http://ancur.wikia.com ) which serves as a central point to gather rulings regarding the different cards.

(e.g: http://ancur.wikia.com/wiki/Business_First_UFAQ )

I've added since then the infobox card template, but this work there is not complete yet.

It's missing support for monsters, lieutenants and heroes; At least with the heroes kind of a key point missing for a central FAQ.

I already started adding some FAQ on skills (e.g. http://descent2e.wikia.com/wiki/Runic_Knowledge or http://descent2e.wikia.com/wiki/Break_the_Rune list of currently added FAQs here: http://descent2e.wikia.com/wiki/Category:FAQ ) but i will have to rewrite the FAQ template. In it's current form it's kind of unusable. (And it doesn't look as nice as the ancur one)

My vision is one day to be able to have a question pop up during a quest and just have to open the relevant pages on the wiki and have my answers.

Great idea. Keep in mind that you have to diffentiate between the official FAQs and the unofficial FAQs (consisting of the collected answers from FGG on specific questions asked by players). Some groups might want to go with the offical FAQ only. I have been working to collect/update the uFAQ here.

I added/modifyed more than 100 FAQs during the last several months. It still is far from complete. I think the wiki is great, however the all-on-one-page approach also has its benefits, because searching might be a little bit easier here.

I encourage everybody to participate and add to the Wiki and/or the corresponding thread at BGG. Actually, these (and other) community efforts would make FFGs work a lot easier. Most of the stuff is already there and referenced to the original emails (in most cases). So it would be quite easy to put it all together and put it into a single official pdf or "living" webpage. Come on, FFG!

I hope the wikia wiki contains one day all the entries from the BGG uFAQ.

One nice thing about mediawiki is, that it is very easy to automatically generate tables based on content from already existing pages.

See the source for http://descent2e.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Tainted_Cards?action=edit

A similar dpl to generate a table from all existing uFAQ entries on the page is can be pretty much copied, with some changes to the layout of the table.

I think the miss dice result being removed from Imperial Assault is a really good change. Rolling the X feels bad every time and has resulted in people's plans being screwed immensely by bad luck which creates a salty environment. Additionally there's no way to minimize that risk so a master swordsman and a goblin have the same chance of not hitting.

That's a thing I'm always thinking about. Descent could use different dice, like D8, D10, or D12 depending on wich character is attacking, keeping the 'x' on one face. The main problem is amount of data in each face of the dice, they need to be greater in size than the ordinary rpg version.

Until now, I prefer to think that the master swordsman can miss as the goblin, cause they are in the heat of the battle. Not much convincing, but this is what we have for today