Don't forget the crow hags (love them so much) and I think some kind of minotaurs (don't have them yet) are new and found in H&M, so it's not entirely for the classic monsters.

Runebound universe has just been rebranded (sort of) Terrinoth universe ahead of the sourcebook for Genesys: https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/products/#/universe

I guess we may see that replace the Runebound mention on the boxes at some point

On 20/12/2017 at 9:35 AM, EpicBubbleSA said:

Given how successful the Legends App has been, do you think we will see a third edition of Descent Pop up soon? Imperial Assault had quality of life changes done to the system and the modelling process and quality has increased dramatically since its 2012 release. With a ton of expansions out, it is quite unwieldy

Is it time for a 3rd edition where the game is built with the app already in mind?

If we see a third edition, that third edition won't see my wallet...

4 hours ago, Julia said:

If we see a third edition, that third edition won't see my wallet...

2nd! On the 3rd edition non-purchase.

Sounds like we've mostly got 2 trains of thought on this.

1st group is ready to see a new edition to address what they see as obvious shortcomings. Whether it's a brand new edition or simply a rules update to the current game they just want the flaws smoothed over.

2nd group is made of people that have invested a lot into Descent, and probably only after the release of Road to Legend. Either way the money spent still feels like a large investment that they don't want to see wasted by an incompatible new edition release just yet.

I see only one realistic option here. My prediction is FFG going to let the game whither for a year or so before releasing a new 3rd edition. This will be incompatible with all existing 2nd edition content to justify the development investment. I don't think they are going to continue heavy investment in a game this old. I bet they would rather retool the line to favor a release schedule similar to Imperial Assault with lots of much smaller content packs instead of just expansions. Think more like if the Hero and Monster packs had been cut up into each hero and monster group being sold separately.

Now it's possible that they could just rerelease the base game with a brand new set of base rules. All the existing players would really need is the new rulebook. I'm not sure they could do this without breaking a few things in the existing expansions. Considering the amount of rules questions we've already generated under the existing rules I'm not sure FFG would want the headache a rules revamp of this kind could bring. Still it is an option.

12 hours ago, Proto Persona said:

Sounds like we've mostly got 2 trains of thought on this.

1st group is ready to see a new edition to address what they see as obvious shortcomings. Whether it's a brand new edition or simply a rules update to the current game they just want the flaws smoothed over.

2nd group is made of people that have invested a lot into Descent, and probably only after the release of Road to Legend. Either way the money spent still feels like a large investment that they don't want to see wasted by an incompatible new edition release just yet.

I see only one realistic option here. My prediction is FFG going to let the game whither for a year or so before releasing a new 3rd edition. This will be incompatible with all existing 2nd edition content to justify the development investment. I don't think they are going to continue heavy investment in a game this old. I bet they would rather retool the line to favor a release schedule similar to Imperial Assault with lots of much smaller content packs instead of just expansions. Think more like if the Hero and Monster packs had been cut up into each hero and monster group being sold separately.

Now it's possible that they could just rerelease the base game with a brand new set of base rules. All the existing players would really need is the new rulebook. I'm not sure they could do this without breaking a few things in the existing expansions. Considering the amount of rules questions we've already generated under the existing rules I'm not sure FFG would want the headache a rules revamp of this kind could bring. Still it is an option.

This is a good point. Beware, I'd not be against a 3rd edition IF all material released for 2nd would still be used. So, an unpdated rulebook or something like that would be fine. I'd also be fine with a 3rd edition if 2nd edition didn't have so many packs based on 1st edition material. What I'm really not interested in is a 3rd edition where we see a core set coming and then a series of "let's bring this cool item from 1st edition back in the game" so that the game becomes a clone of itself once more. Also, 2nd edition came with enough poor decisions towards their customer base (see the campaign book in the core set changed and no way to get a replacement or buy the new campaign book as stand alone; or starting a Heroes and Monster collection without ever finishing the line; or declaring at GenCon 2017 "there's something big coming in the future of the game" and 6 months later we just got a digital release which isn't exactly anything "big" in my opinion; and the list could go on and on) that honestly pissed me off quite a little so that I'm not exactly prone at welcoming a new edition: I'd rather see the company work towards something better with 2nd

As for my belonging to either 1st or 2nd group based on the investment: I bought everything as it was released, one piece at the time (so, no big investment after Road to Legend - I'm actually not playing with the app since I have a solid group to play pvp), but I still haven't played all the scenarios and campaigns, so, there's still room to explore and have fun (also a reason why I'd not feel compelled in getting a 3rd edition)

3 hours ago, Julia said:

As for my belonging to either 1st or 2nd group based on the investment: I bought everything as it was released, one piece at the time (so, no big investment after Road to Legend - I'm actually not playing with the app since I have a solid group to play pvp), but I still haven't played all the scenarios and campaigns, so, there's still room to explore and have fun (also a reason why I'd not feel compelled in getting a 3rd edition)

This is an important point; if you've bought everything, that's a lot of content. Like, hundreds of hours of content in the app alone, and thousands counting all the standard campaigns and side quests, especially if you are the sort of person who's willing to replay with different characters.

Unless you're playing Descent 24/7, if you've purchased all of 2nd edition, you're not going to run out of content for a loooong time.

16 hours ago, Proto Persona said:

Sounds like we've mostly got 2 trains of thought on this.

1st group is ready to see a new edition to address what they see as obvious shortcomings. Whether it's a brand new edition or simply a rules update to the current game they just want the flaws smoothed over.

2nd group is made of people that have invested a lot into Descent, and probably only after the release of Road to Legend. Either way the money spent still feels like a large investment that they don't want to see wasted by an incompatible new edition release just yet.

I see only one realistic option here. My prediction is FFG going to let the game whither for a year or so before releasing a new 3rd edition. This will be incompatible with all existing 2nd edition content to justify the development investment. I don't think they are going to continue heavy investment in a game this old. I bet they would rather retool the line to favor a release schedule similar to Imperial Assault with lots of much smaller content packs instead of just expansions. Think more like if the Hero and Monster packs had been cut up into each hero and monster group being sold separately.

Now it's possible that they could just rerelease the base game with a brand new set of base rules. All the existing players would really need is the new rulebook. I'm not sure they could do this without breaking a few things in the existing expansions. Considering the amount of rules questions we've already generated under the existing rules I'm not sure FFG would want the headache a rules revamp of this kind could bring. Still it is an option.

I think it'll be longer than a year. Thing is, I strongly suspect that Imperial Assault uses the same "development team" and same production lines that Descent does. So I doubt they're going to bother with Descent 3rd until they've finished their run on IA, and that's not gonna happen for a while yet.

My guess is that in three to five years -- giving IA time to run its course and Descent to get remaindered in most folk's collections -- they'll re-issue a new Descent with more streamlined rules (how exactly do effects propagate from Blast, again?) and maybe slightly more modernized, euro-style mechanics, probably lifting some ideas from Gloomhaven and whatever other dungeon crawlers have come out in the meanwhile (say, hex tiles instead of squares, better overall app integration, etc..)

In an ideal world, they'd release a backwards-compatibility kit like they did previously, along with a couple of Big New Features that would give people a reason to play a new edition instead. Mere rules streamlining wouldn't be enough -- it would need something fairly big to get me to reinvest, something like allowing for a party of up to six adventurers (which is hard to do given how much longer the game takes with each additional player). Without some sort of big new feature, there's no reason to re-invest when I can just keep playing and replaying as-yet-unexplored 2nd Ed. content for the foreseeable future.

7 hours ago, 10355ts said:

This is an important point; if you've bought everything, that's a lot of content. Like, hundreds of hours of content in the app alone, and thousands counting all the standard campaigns and side quests, especially if you are the sort of person who's willing to replay with different characters.

Unless you're playing Descent 24/7, if you've purchased all of 2nd edition, you're not going to run out of content for a loooong time.

Indeed, I'm not running out of content for the next decade, and I'm not complaining about it. That's also why I'd love to see more content for 2nd edition, so that the game expands both vertically (in terms of progression of different campaigns) and horizontally (in terms of how many options can be incorporated in said campaigns). I'd also be ok if the game stopped here; I'm just saying that for me 2nd edition is a wrap, I won't start a 3rd edition. And also I'd love some clarity from the company: when their CEO announces there's something big ready to be revealed for Descent and 6 months passes, I don't feel exactly respected. Say you're wrapping it up, and you'll have my thumb. Say you wanna wait one year and see how sales go, and you'll still have my thumb. Just be honest and clear with your customer base: I'm not a teen complaining about her fave toy going out of production, but tell me so that I can grab what I sill miss (if any) or at least I have some ideas on what's to come.

My thoughts are:

- agreed, if it kills second edition (a huge financial commitment for many of us) and doesn't work with 2e or does so poorly that will be a negative for me

- likewise if it renders some of 2e unavailable (we're still missing content from 1e, updating content but making the original collection still available, perhaps in better form (see next point) is better, OK that seafaring addition didn't work too well for many people but it was still a beautiful set in terms of what came with it and the new enemies/ encounters it had, all the 2e players have had no offerings to continue this being available to them or fix the issues with it, and trust me it is also really frustrating if you were going to get a popular expansion for a popular game (the 1e content I'm missing) that disappears forever and doesn't feature at all or much in the new version, it seems foolish to ditch a product line option already on a lot of peoples' wishlists, such as all the 1e lieutenants that never came out again.

- however, just issuing a better quality make of the game and maybe a few minimal rules updates to fix some of the problems could be a way to go- so it's more of an improved reprint continuing/ expanding/ improving 2e rather than a radical rework - a lot of people have already commented on how mini quality is far better in a lot of games now - even some of the later Descent minis are better quality than earlier ones, this is especially beneficial for people wanting to paint them as it's better for details,, and wanting to mix up mini use across Terrinoth games and so on, the new RPG adds that as a very realistic option too. As myself and others have said elsewhere some of the minis from Runebound Miniatures would be nice to use in Descent but there are scale/ mismatch issues. Maybe there's a way a third edition could just be better quality to reflect modern improvements (not that the original 2e isn't already really good) but that doesn't wipe out 2e in the same way 2e kind of killed off 1e. Just don't stop great current content being available for any new version, the biggest mistake of how 2e was implemented. The 2e content's really good but a lot of good 1e content was just abandoned.

- bringing the kind-of-abandoned-by-FFG Quest Vault and RTL app together (as well as ironing out the bits I think are possibly still missing from these? - I'm not sure on that fact) would be a good idea so that Quest Vault designed quests are playable in the app too, but only as an option as these could be harder to create.

- finally for D3e/D2e just in case maybe complete the release of missing 1e content for 2e first - not sure how 'The Sea of Blood' would be handled but it's a shame the toolkit of content from it isn't available for 2e for players who don't own it, there's just that problem with the fact not everyone liked its playability, still has massive potential if they could fix that. I think 2e is still doing well enough, and still has people wanting to complete their 2e collections, that it's still too early for a 3e at the moment though

- for all Terrinoth games- make better use of them being part of the same universe (FFG does seem to be going more in this direction which is a good sign), again it's been said before but there is that possibility of mixing the games up a bit so your favourite aspects of them are in your favourite games, such as my bringing the banshee figure from Battlelore into my Descent and Genesys campaign, some smart design choices could make this easier (there's a lot of having to accept some limitations if you're doing this at the moment, such as slight figure mismatches, where it works maybe some packs could be Terrinoth packs that suit different games or conversion cards to port figures such as the banshee over, although you can do this as a DIY thing without too much hassle it can be trickier if it would need specific cards in a deck- an easier solution could be customisable cards if it was too much to make cards for all the possibilities. This kind of integration is probably too much wishful thinking but Terrinoth's such a rich world it sparks loads of ideas for games customisation which is why I'm so excited about quest-building for Genesys and Descent- anything that helps fans do that where specific pieces may not be in the game they're creating for would be awesome.

Why hex tiles??? I prefer squares and don't understand why you should prefer hex :-) Can you explain why your preference? Thank you.

3 hours ago, tibia said:

Why hex tiles??? I prefer squares and don't understand why you should prefer hex :-) Can you explain why your preference? Thank you.

Mostly because it's easier to figure out diagonal movement and diagonal line of sight rules; also it's harder for any one figure to get swarmed, and blast-type "all adjacent tiles" effects are slightly less powerful because they hit fewer tiles.

It's not a big issue either way, I was just trying to spitball possible major rules revisions in a 3rd edition. Honestly the only thing I can think of that would make me want to rebuy everything would be a 6 player cap; that's three couples instead of two which is a big difference. It's really hard to fit six player turns and six player figures into a tabletop design though (which is why most crawler games stick with four).

7 hours ago, tibia said:

Why hex tiles??? I prefer squares and don't understand why you should prefer hex :-) Can you explain why your preference? Thank you.

I like the map tiles of Descent and wasn't sure about the hex tiles idea but they do have some benefits such as not having to fudge tiles that don't connect when you want them as adjacent on a map layout (such as going from outdoor to indoor), being easy to have a random drawpile if you want to play random exploration (as an option not a fixed rule), plus the advantages 10355ts points out above (although aren't there six adjacent tiles rather than four so more?)

Although I'm not sure if hex tiles might change the feel of Descent too much, somehow the map tiles as they are seem to feel right (and with now using Descent for RPG'ing mapping purposes, hex tiles might make that trickier, the current Descent tiles work well for a GM reference point for maps - hexes could be trickier for a GM to use as a reference point if they've not got the tiles but then that's just me and my love of re-purposing useful game bits!) I guess my concern is hex tiles are great for outdoor games in woods and so on but they could be rather odd and awkward for buildings and dungeons and the like as rooms are mostly square or rectangular, and walls surely don't work so well on hexes- you could have some odd tiles or rooms surely? I think that's the main reason I have some doubts about if hexes would feel right for Descent.)