13 hours ago, KronikAlkoholik said:

I feel also that the overlord has to do a lot more work to be competitive. Heroes just have to play tactically in combat while the overlord seems to have to plan everything before hand.

The Overlord is the evil scheming mastermind.

Quote

Also the overlord needs to go out and buy the "right" lieutenant packs while heroes get theirs out of the box.

Descent is a game that incentivizes both sides to buy more.

Quote

For plot cards you have to spend limited resource, for something like the aforementioned Raider Armory, just to get +1 surges for 1 round , while in SW:IA you might get a power that gives 2 health, for the duration of the combat . One is a top tier plot card, the other is a mid tier class card. One is a permanent power, the other you have to spend threat tokens to get.

So complaining about all the threat you need to spend is very much the splig plot deck experience. If you look at the guide I put up, despite having a number of cards that can be quite useful it gets a really low rating because they're so pricy that you can only afford to use them when the situation is just right.

Also your skipping half the card, wilderness trait monsters do an addition damage as well. That means 12 additional damage for a group like the cave spider.

Quote

Descent overlord just obviously is not for me.

I got that sense the moment you said you wanted to act more like a GM.

@KronikAlkoholik my experience is pretty much in line with yours. It is as if the human Overlord player were actually a surrogate for an artificiall intelligence that was never made. If you assume this, all the unbalances make sense .

I'd say shelve it, and play with the app on nights when one person can't make it for whatever reason. Whether or not 4 vs 1 play is going to work is really dependent on the psychology of your playgroup. Ours has had a lot more success playing it 4 v app co-op.

The only game materials you don't use when playing with the app are the Overlord cards and the threat tokens. I would suggest making sure you have a large screen available to play the app on -- it doesn't really work on a phone, for ease of play it's best to have a tablet or larger.

22 minutes ago, lucaster said:

@KronikAlkoholik my experience is pretty much in line with yours. It is as if the human Overlord player were actually a surrogate for an artificiall intelligence that was never made. If you assume this, all the unbalances make sense .

I think in most cases when the OL (or heroes) are having issues with imbalance, it is due to a basic misunderstanding of how one side (or the other) plays the game. In almost every case I have encountered, it is due to the player having a previous experience with D&D (or some other media) which either grants the heroes some kind of plot armor, or places some form of tactical paralysis on the OL).

Lets talk about the OL side first. By 'Tactical Paralysis' I am referring to the OL having a fixed idea of what the monsters 'should' do, and simply going along with that route. In most cases, either moving directly towards the heroes, going directly to the objective, or staying where they are. There are a number of times I have seen a new OL (friend usually), who simply keeps the Shadow Dragon in a room, behind a door, waiting for the heroes to open it. I asked why they did that, and the response was more or less 'cause that's the room with the shadow dragon'. That was it, the idea that this was an 'encounter' for the benefit of the heroes, and that there was some narrative where "the heroes open the door revealing a large dragon coiled around the remains of his treasure horde" was so ingrained that he simply left his most powerful game piece sitting around waiting to be slaughtered.

As the OL, you have to play the game like chess, sacrifice your pieces only when doing so achieves the maximum advantage to your goals. In Descent, you ARE the OL, your ever present power permeates everything. normally stupid, reckless monsters behave with coordination and purpose when under your watchful eye. A properly played OL can absolutely CRUSH heroes, to the point where they can sit wondering what they could have possibly done to achieve success.


Conversely, I have seen some very bad OL tactics completely CRUSH heroes who play be the same D&D tropes, heroes rushing in, thinking goblin archers are minor threats. Role playing a Barbarian and attacking a single monster in a large group after fully fatiguing just to get in range, when the rest of the party is too far back to be effective. These types of things a DM may support ("Goblins are so frightened of your attack they drop their weapons and retreat further into the cave"), but in descent, killing one goblin just means you take 4 arrows instead of 5 (although killing the master may be tactically valid to prevent surges from being used). Hero selection is also important, not just by class, but by synergistic ability, ability to recover fatigue, speed, and attributes. A strong party with a consistent low attribute (such as strength), will make itself very vulnerable to certain tactics (such as web trap).


Descent is a fairly balanced game, but only if both sides know their roll and are playing to maximize their effectiveness. If one side or the other misunderstands the game, then it will appear imbalanced.

@lucaster and @KronikAlkoholik ,

I would suggest playing the RTL app and having fun as the heroes in the campaigns there. When you do decide to try out the main game, do some test runs in beginner or epic play mode (in the book) to play a single quest as a one night game. This will help you try out different combinations of heroes and or OL tactics. I would also recommend breaking down the gameplay afterwards as a group, and then playing the same quest again, either with different strategies, monster groups, or hero selection, depending on who won/lost the previous one. Basically give each side a chance to find the weakness in the other sides approach.

On 10/19/2017 at 3:21 PM, KronikAlkoholik said:

This is not my experience, but maybe I'm just bad. [...]

Descent overlord just obviously is not for me.

Hey I noticed something in your many posts: you say you play as DM for the fun and narrative and dont mind loosing along the way. But the whole motivation behind all you write is that you do want to win (if at least something) as OL. Isn't that a conflict?

I've become some sort of expert in Descent because of how invested im in it. I can conclude these general points regarding balance:

- Descent is not a balanced game by any means. there's a loose "gain X by loosing Y" but generally scenarios are not polished, plus the amount of content in the games makes it so that some situations are just impossible for heroes or OL
- When playing casually for the first times not doing the math, heroes have a natural advantage: OL mistakes in building deck are harsh and definitive and the always present rule debate goes mostly in favor of the heroes because.. well they are more people than the OL

But then:

- If you are familiar with the game, and specially if there is extra content like Lieutenant packs, SoN, etc: The OL has an absolute advantage : he has flexibility through the whole campaign, so he can crunch all the probabilities and to his favor. Also the number of quests that are "unwinnable" for the heroes is higher than the opposite. Just play SoN after Shadowrune and you'll see. Or use Zachareth plot deck + warlord class: Total party kills every scenario is more likely than not (and makes players quit)

But the real interesting bit is:

- Most groups (And I imagine this figure to be 90%+) face serious balance issues because they play with wrong rules. It is just crazy to read in web how the audience interprets rules, or simply ignore things: you have groups that never know that exhaustion can be traded for movement, groups that don't check the FAQs, groups where the heroes and familiars interrupt each other's activations.. it's all in here and BGG forums..

You sure this last point is not hapening in your group? Whatever you discuss here, I'd be more happy if you stick around with descent :). If you're in Warsaw Poland then play with me !

As much as I don't want to see a D3e right now because of my investment in 2e and the likelihood of it being RtL style, I would welcome a third edition with open arms as long as it has an overlord and a fully consistent ruleset . Errata are one thing- abilities or quests need to be changed after printing- but so many points in the FAQ are interpretations. I'm glad for the clarification, but the amount of grey area is staggeringly high, and the result of poor wording across the board.

To the developers' credit, the language of recent expansions has improved significantly. The ubderlying system is still deeply flawed, and cannot be corrected without a major overhaul.

On 10/22/2017 at 8:19 AM, Zaltyre said:

As much as I don't want to see a D3e right now because of my investment in 2e and the likelihood of it being RtL style, I would welcome a third edition with open arms as long as it has an overlord and a fully consistent ruleset . Errata are one thing- abilities or quests need to be changed after printing- but so many points in the FAQ are interpretations. I'm glad for the clarification, but the amount of grey area is staggeringly high, and the result of poor wording across the board.

To the developers' credit, the language of recent expansions has improved significantly. The ubderlying system is still deeply flawed, and cannot be corrected without a major overhaul.

I would be all good with a 3rd edition... as long as there is a conversion kit. 3 years in and I have only half my models painted.

Quote

Hey I noticed something in your many posts: you say you play as DM for the fun and narrative and dont mind loosing along the way. But the whole motivation behind all you write is that you do want to win (if at least something) as OL. Isn't that a conflict?

No my main grip was that the Overlord isn't as interesting to play as the heroes. The heroes get to level up, get cool equipment etc. The overlord only gets to suffer.

The discussion focused mostly on the imbalance I perceive and as such is what is mostly discussed here, but that was more of a addendum problem for me. Not only is the Overlord not as interesting to play, it doesn't even get to put up a good fight.

I also think that my idea about being more of a GM are somewhat misunderstood. I try to win and I want to win. I just don't mind losing barely as long as I'm having fun. But I wasn't having fun. Its more of an idea I would choose a monster group that sounds cool for the scene, or try different monster groups so we aren't fighting the same thing all the time. I don't want to super-optimize every decision, buy only this specific lieutenant pack to get the best plot deck just so I have some minor chance of succeeding, use the same monster groups every time because they are demonstrably the best. I didn't know this was Magic the Gathering : the Dungeon Crawler, if you get what I mean.

6 hours ago, KronikAlkoholik said:

No my main grip was that the Overlord isn't as interesting to play as the heroes. The heroes get to level up, get cool equipment etc. The overlord only gets to suffer.

This is not the case, it's entirely possible for you to crush the heroes but you need to play it like a game of chess.

Quote

Its more of an idea I would choose a monster group that sounds cool for the scene, or try different monster groups so we aren't fighting the same thing all the time. I don't want to super-optimize every decision...

Just like chess you do REALLY have to think through your moves in this game. If in chess you were to pick the horsey for your turn because it sounds cool for the scene...just think about how that would turn out. The game's going the same way for you here for the same reason.

The things you're complaining about are entirely solvable but you certainly don't need to solve them if you are not inclined. There are plenty of other dungeon crawls out there, the D&D adventure system games for instance would accommodate your whole group without anyone playing overlord.

And a bunch of Descent's components are between printings at the moment so this would be a good time to sell. Valyndra which should be $10-14 is going new on amazon for $45: https://www.amazon.com/Descent-Second-Valyndra-Lieutenant-Pack/dp/1616616547/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1508798755&sr=8-2-fkmr0&keywords=descent+splig

I can't even find Splig on amazon

And the base set is even up a bit compared to what I usually see it going for on amazon. So if you've decided to sell (which is what it sounds like) do it before the boat hits shore because prices will drop.

Right now I expect you can get your money back out of the game and it will go to somebody who really wants it, everybody wins!

On 20/10/2017 at 4:33 PM, Silidus said:

he simply left his most powerful game piece sitting around waiting to be slaughtered.

This reminds me of that quest from Shadow of Nerekhall where Mirklace must be placed on the board during one of the heroes' activations, only to be slayed by them in two hero turns, without the OL even having the chance to activate him once. Let alone playing chess.

I'd say still try to get someone else to give overlord a shot, at least once, just to see how it goes that way. It doesn't have to be a flawless execution. Just a single quest for curiosity's sake.

This happened not too long ago for me, where I offered up someone else to try overlord, not because I didn't want to be, but we were all new to the game and experimenting. Their response was "Wow this is really different than I thought it would be, even after seeing you play it", in a positive manner. They enjoyed the fact they had several mini groups to manage. I think some just fear the responsibility of being "in charge" as the overlord and don't want to mess up, so if you do it as a relaxed experiment just for fun (cause that's what games are about after all), then they might find that they enjoy it.

Secondly, you mention 4 brains vs 1 brain. This varies I guess based on the individuals and the way their minds work and their experience, but it could also be an advantage. Having 4 brains also means they may not always be on the same page. There is some room for you to sow seeds of chaos and really drive a wedge in their tactics. That power isn't in the monsters, it isn't in any special card, that's all YOU. It may take some mind games to unravel their cohesiveness, but once you do, you will have an invisible force on your side that isn't included in the game.

I had an absolute blast messing with my group psychologically. It was mostly just subtle things to make them second guess themselves. Though I didn't push it so heavy that anyone got angry, just more of "aww man I should have done X instead of Y". In the first quest of the core game, I made the victory/loss conditions very clear, several times, but I hyped up the killing of the barghests a bit more compared to holding off the goblins (I am the evil plotting overlord after all). So 3 out of the 4 heroes immediately charged over there. Leaving just a lone necromancer and her skeleton to hold off the invading goblins. She tried to get them to come back over to help, but by the time they let go of their tunnel vision, it was too late. In the end we all had fun and are looking forward to more of it. Keep in mind, everyone was (and still are) new at this point, so the results may vary, but I'm sure you get the idea.