1 hour ago, Radish said:

Genesys (which is notable since it was basically quietly shelved before one of its resource books was even released), etc

Genesys is still going as far as I know with new product rumours- although surprise surprise look what gets top billing in both these places

https://edge-studio.net/

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/products/#/category/roleplaying-games

Hmm 2 thoughts from this announcement and some of the comments.

First, apps love them or hate them (really I get it, there are valid arguments on both sides). The issue is that we've learned these games sell a lot better if they include a solo experience. I think people underestimate how important that is for sales in this type of game. Say for example you have 2 groups representing your potential sales; group A is 80% of your audience and will play as friends, Group B are your solo players and make up the remaining 20% of your audience. While group A is much larger in terms of people(and forum posters with opinions), both groups represent similar sales. The solo players each need to buy a copy while the friends only need a single copy for 3-5 players, solo or small groups represent an out-sized amount of overall sales. Apps are one possible way to solve for this (while keeping complexity lower), love it or hate it it's a problem that has to be solved for major market games. FFG can sacrifice a vocal part of group A and easily make up the difference from group B. FFG seems more concerned with adding complexity in terms of the player experience, so Apps are winning out at the moment.

Second, the 3D aspect to the terrain just makes me very curious. There's a lot of extra cardboard and plastic dedicated to adding height for stairs, trees, wishing wells etc... I have to pay for all of those components. Am I supposed to be excited about buying multiple 3d set of stairs and trees versus more monsters minis? And then, why add all that cost to the game but settle on such bland art decisions for the terrain? Even Games Workshop has worked hard to avoid that error in recent decades, this really surprises me from FFG. Interestingly for a counter point example, Gloomhaven went the opposite direction, printing out their newer dungeons and just play on the page. Saves a ton of setup and organizational time, and feedback has been overwhelmingly positive. It begs the question; do people want to spend their time playing the game or setting up and putting stuff away?

14 minutes ago, CountBlah said:

Am I supposed to be excited about buying multiple 3d set of stairs and trees versus more monsters minis? And then, why add all that cost to the game but settle on such bland art decisions for the terrain? Even Games Workshop has worked hard to avoid that error in recent decades, this really surprises me from FFG.

Really? You think this (Necromunda: Underhive circa 2017)

was an improvement over this (Necromunda circa 1995) ?

I mean, if so, okay, but yeah, personally, I think the 3d cardboard bits and multiple levels are a pretty **** nice addition to Descent, and that GW went the wrong direction with their game. I mean, their models have gotten beautiful, but otherwise...

Here is a nice unboxing/critique where the author gives a breakdown about how the art design by GW has actually been getting worse with the newer edition of Necromunda

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TLWQSFWB2k

47 minutes ago, kris40k said:

Really? You think this (Necromunda: Underhive circa 2017)

was an improvement over this (Necromunda circa 1995) ?

I mean, if so, okay, but yeah, personally, I think the 3d cardboard bits and multiple levels are a pretty **** nice addition to Descent, and that GW went the wrong direction with their game. I mean, their models have gotten beautiful, but otherwise...

Here is a nice unboxing/critique where the author gives a breakdown about how the art design by GW has actually been getting worse with the newer edition of Necromunda

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TLWQSFWB2k

I am sorry but I think you are comparing apple to bananas. 3d environment is what they SHOULD have brought to star wars legion, not to a dungeon crawler... everything wrong FFG...

2 hours ago, Watercolour Dragon said:

Genesys is still going as far as I know with new product rumours- although surprise surprise look what gets top billing in both these places

https://edge-studio.net/

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/products/#/category/roleplaying-games

That's good to hear. I had assumed that when they shut down internal RPG development and news dried up it was done.

3 hours ago, Crusaderlord said:

I am quite surprised how many comments are on the negative side really.

To me there are so many good ideas, interactive storyline, 3 dimensional terrain you can interact with, weapons to upgrade and craft, heroes with different dice and ways they play using the dice, elements that true to 2nd edition with fatigue and surges, models that look great (surprised me). I can potentially see this as the dungeon crawl i have waited a long time for.

I get the areas people are highlighting, overlord needed to go really to make this a co-op journey - keep that for another competitive Decent 3rd edition, tiles i get were so good in 2nd edition but i feel like they want the terrain to overlay and pop not the tiles (just my judgement) so i can see the disappointment a bit, i personally quite like the art and am very glad its not just a reprint of Runebound and Descent heroes once again - have we not had enough of those now ?

Ok price - yes high no doubt but then take a look at things - how much is Massive Darkness 1 lets say £120 core set (not kickstarter) - and that game has none of the impacting elements or storyline this one has and the gameplay is pretty bland as is treasure or being chucked the items you need, and the campaign was laughable. Massive Darkness 2 i backed it , but again i see more interesting things here than in that one which costs $145 plus $40+ postage to get any sort of campaign and a lot more if you want to add extra model sets - yes it has a lot of models but i pretty confident that Legends will provide me with a better gaming experience. I have seen other decent dungeon crawlers on kickstarter, and this one feels like it will beat most of them and the money is not coming up front.

Chronicles of Drunagor is an interesting KS to compare with - has a kind of 3d element and tries to do interactive areas using a book and is campaign - costs between $99 and $269 plus postage - i did not back that and i would take a punt on Legends over that one too given its app campaign.

Or you could buy heroquest remake for £150 from zatu - is that a better game than this ?

I spent £175 on sword and sorcery which is also a storyline led dungeon crawl adventure game - and actually this is one my favourite dungeon crawlers and was worth every penny lol

But it goes to show that not everyone is down on this - quite the opposite for me. I would likely sell other dungeon crawlers i own to get this one if i needed to raise the money. I really hope it is a major success line for them.

See while I think the app is going to bottle neck the game for groups of gamers terribly its not what makes this a hard pass... Its not the lost overlord either, which I'm super sad about as I love being the overlord but I knew it was coming and had kinda made peace with the fact.

Reason I've chosen your post btw is because you said you spend £175 on sword and sorcery.. one of my fav games, I'm all in the ancient chronicles as well and have even been doing proof reading on it, I'm big on that game. I'm also a collaborator on Middara which is another game in the same space and I love to bits... But this game isn't like those and this is where they lost me...

Six pre chosen characters, with predefined races/class combos. You can choose from a selection of skills and upgrades on those characters which they decided was fitting for those race class combos. This game is like the designers ran a roleplay session for a massive campaign and broke it down into encounters between the narrative... The narrative choices are those they made with there characters which they of course love, but they are THEIR characters not ours, then you handle the next encounter, everything that happens is limited to the scope and context of how they saw those characters, you can't even choose your own class/race. They come with pre selected load outs and you know there skills are going to have specific weapon builds in mind, you know the ones they choose... This could be great if the writing supports it which is a big if in itself, but you just need one situation where the narrative makes your character choose something different from how you imagined them and the whole story is ruined. Your playing there adventure, with there roleplay characters and choices they've chosen for how they imagine those characters... And unlike middara which shares some of those issues, there's no alternative way to play and Middara is completely classless, you can build any character anyway you like so aren't stuck with someone elses imagined character...

That combined with the bottle neck I predict on the APP, the loss of Overlord is why I'm never going to buy this game, which is a good achievement from them, it was a auto buy for me, I have all of 1e, all of 2e and I could have coped with app, fine with co-op but I'm not fun replaying someone elses campaign using identical characters and a preselected narrative, that's not fun its frustrating.

59 minutes ago, Tubb said:

I am sorry but I think you are comparing apple to bananas. 3d environment is what they SHOULD have brought to star wars legion, not to a dungeon crawler... everything wrong FFG...

Well, the post you quoted me from was mostly talking about GW's game design decisions, but as far as my comment that 3d environments are a good thing, here is a shot of something that can be done now in Legends (please forgive the grainy screengrab)

This is a shot from GMGs playthrough of Rangers of Shadowdeep Incinerator Scenario ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohUwW1sx7yg )

Basically, you have to make you way across the field from the right hand side and fight your way up the stairs while the floor falls away behind you into a pit of lava.

Honestly, I was hoping that they would have gone this route with Legends ( 3d terrain on an open board) but I get that the dungeon tiles are kind of baked into Descent's DNA, so seeing how they did a bit of both was a nice touch for me.

As someone who loved playing Mordheim back in the day and these days plays solo/coop dungeon crawlers, seeing Legends go this route with multiple levels is a welcome change.

4 hours ago, kris40k said:

Well, the post you quoted me from was mostly talking about GW's game design decisions, but as far as my comment that 3d environments are a good thing, here is a shot of something that can be done now in Legends (please forgive the grainy screengrab)

This is a shot from GMGs playthrough of Rangers of Shadowdeep Incinerator Scenario ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohUwW1sx7yg )

Basically, you have to make you way across the field from the right hand side and fight your way up the stairs while the floor falls away behind you into a pit of lava.

Honestly, I was hoping that they would have gone this route with Legends ( 3d terrain on an open board) but I get that the dungeon tiles are kind of baked into Descent's DNA, so seeing how they did a bit of both was a nice touch for me.

As someone who loved playing Mordheim back in the day and these days plays solo/coop dungeon crawlers, seeing Legends go this route with multiple levels is a welcome change.

I agree that 3d environment is always welcome... (Necromunda has always been a multilevel experience) But only if you don"t have to invest more than 10 minutes placing unnecesary tiles. When you play bolt action, 40k, or any other miniature wargaming game, 3d environment is usually a must. You place that wonderful diorama-like pieces of terrain, and make a realistic scene with your hobby skills shining over everything... it doesn't matter if you need 30 minutes before the game, because YOU WILL NOT CHANGE THE TERRAIN while you play. OR you play a boardgame, with abstract rules and abstract leveling. In between you have FFG, with a miniature wargame that sure is the worst miniature wargame ever that is SW: Legion, where 3d is just an abstraction that has not been very well implemented (and they don't consider seriously, or they wouldn't have offered in first place these ugly 2d matts with everything drawn). And then we got... this. This is a 2d boardgame with some stairs and some furniment here and there. Again no idea where are we going with it. On a dungeon crawler, most of the time you are developing ONE level, then proceed to next one. You don't go upstairs or downstairs or have two levels simultaneously. And this game is no exception as the "second level" doesn't allow you to move under, it is just a cosmetic decision. In my opinion, the (unnecesary) 3d environment has just been glued on a 2D boardgame just because. It doesn't add nothing, and only serves the purpose of justifying a higher price for some extra cardboard sheets.

Wow. Any enthusiasm I might have had after the sneak peak just evaporated.

The character art is ugly with a capital U. I don't care for this style at all.

App mandatory. No. The great thing about a board game is that it is should be playable straight off the shelf. No power? Light some candles and play. No internet? Cardboard don't need it. Can't find a device that has that specific app, or it needs to update, or just isn't supported anymore? Shouldn't matter with a straight analog game.

$175. One Hundred Seventy Five BUCKS?!?! What are they smoking? No Fraking way

3 hours ago, Tubb said:

And this game is no exception as the "second level" doesn't allow you to move under, it is just a cosmetic decision.

Well, it allows you to throw enemies down the lava or jump down a level to flee from overwhelming enemy forces. You're right, it is a cosmetic decision. A decision I'll take every day over just a print and a frame on a 2d tile.

32 minutes ago, FoolECK said:

Well, it allows you to throw enemies down the lava or jump down a level to flee from overwhelming enemy forces. You're right, it is a cosmetic decision. A decision I'll take every day over just a print and a frame on a 2d tile.

Every 2d tile allows you to do exactly the same. Or perhaps you think they will implement rules for real line of sight on elevated tiles?

No, they will do an abstract ruling IF they ever do some distinction between different levels. Exactly the same as other board games that have abstract rules for different levels. In Imperial Assault there were ladders, stairs, balconies, etc. They were drawn, yep, but they were there and there were rules for them. I mean... of course I like miniatures and terrain and 3d environments, but if it means 175€ instead of 100€ and wasting ten minutes each time I discover a new room you can keep your ridiculous (and flat colored) tiles. Give me good designed 2d tiles, that will make a beautiful board game wit a great art. It is way more immersive if it has got a great lightning and wonderful shadows than if it is one inch over the rest of tiles. How many times will you use exactly THE SAME 3d stair and exactly THE SAME 3d tree? I prefer variety... Look at Mansions of madness tiles, or Imperial Assault ones, or Gloomhaven... or Conan battle maps, or how beautiful and immersive is Scythe board, or even Brass: Birmingham board... they are BEAUTIFUL, and still you can do a mechanic that allow you to move "up and down" exactly the same as the leveled tiles. For example the vehicles in the parade in Mansions of Madness, or the stairs in the manors... you still could go upstairs and downstairs to that mysterious loft or that mysterious basement... still felt like going down/up there, and there was no need to place the tile one inch over the others to represent it. In fact, I wonder what would have meant to have to place the tile over some cardboard pieces to place it over the others while in the middle of an immersive story...

On 10/22/2020 at 1:45 PM, tomkat364 said:

My biggest issue is the app. It's one thing to have an app that serves to expand a playable game, but to have the game entirely dependent on the app is not cool in my mind. Am I the only one concerned that the game will be unplayable after Armageddon? What am I supposed to do with this game when I'm sitting on a pile of ashes with no electricity??? (and yes, I am serious)

How about prioritizing staying alive after Armageddon instead of worrying about a board game. You didn't see Viggo Mortensen playing Gloomhaven with his son in The Road when they were splitting bugs for food, did you?

6 hours ago, GrandAdmiralCrunch said:

App mandatory. No. The great thing about a board game is that it is should be playable straight off the shelf. No power? Light some candles and play. No internet? Cardboard don't need it. Can't find a device that has that specific app, or it needs to update, or just isn't supported anymore? Shouldn't matter with a straight analog game.

I don't get this logic or way of thinking. Technology is everywhere and becoming more ubiquitous every day. Of course board games will have technology to enhance them and remove tedium from them. There's nothing wrong with app driven games. Ppl who ***** about this remind me of the horse and buggy guys shaking their fists and Ford for coming up with cars. They went the way of the dodo by the way.

If you don't have power, perhaps open the app on your tablet, phone etc? I'm sure you have one of those? If not, god forbid you play ANOTHER game. Most people who buy board games that cost $175 usually have more than one. They tend to have many.

And unless you live in a 3rd world country, how often do you realistically lose power? And when it rarely does, how long?

I'm not sure what makes this a terrinoth game.

Apart from them using the word uthuk it seems they've taken a generic fantasy setting and made it more generic.

Not every family has Ipads and 175 bucks for the first act of a board game. ”Don’t you guys have phones” has not been an argument for some time now.

The art reminds me of the board game King of Tokyo which is a bit more cartoonish than we are used to in this fantasy genre. Personally I’m really excited to see a closer integration with the app because I felt a disconnect with the narrative because of all the time spent on complicated mechanics (LOS anyone?). With the app handling roll calculations as well as temporary % bonuses the game won’t get bogged down and will keep moving. It seemed to me as I watched the Live event that they made conscious decisions to keep the things that make the game fun in the hands of the players and pushed things that weren’t as fun to the app. Again, they really tried to balance the physical with the digital.

I would advise people who are skeptical to not make a decision until they have more information. It’s like buying a car that needs to be test driven before making a decision to buy.

8 hours ago, Alcovitch said:

I don't get this logic or way of thinking. Technology is everywhere and becoming more ubiquitous every day. Of course board games will have technology to enhance them and remove tedium from them. There's nothing wrong with app driven games. Ppl who ***** about this remind me of the horse and buggy guys shaking their fists and Ford for coming up with cars. They went the way of the dodo by the way.

If you don't have power, perhaps open the app on your tablet, phone etc? I'm sure you have one of those? If not, god forbid you play ANOTHER game. Most people who buy board games that cost $175 usually have more than one. They tend to have many.

And unless you live in a 3rd world country, how often do you realistically lose power? And when it rarely does, how long?

No power? Ask California and thier power outages. It happens. And those phones and tablets still require power. They don't run on air; Eventually they will have to recharge.

But power is secondary. My number one objection is needing the app years from now. I cant tell you the number of apps I've had that were deleted from the appstore years down the road. Or that hadn't been updated and no longer worked with the current OS. Or I had loaded on one device and couldn't get on a newer one. Crap happens way to often. This has been a bad years for business. What if FFG goes under, or is sold out to some new outfit? I'm not going to count on those odds to make sure I can still play a $175 game.

I have plenty of video games on multiple devices. I don't need my cardboard to be wifi enabled. One of the joys of boardgaming is getting away from the electronic leash for awhile.

'

23 hours ago, kris40k said:

Really? You think this (Necromunda: Underhive circa 2017)

was an improvement over this (Necromunda circa 1995) ?

I mean, if so, okay, but yeah, personally, I think the 3d cardboard bits and multiple levels are a pretty **** nice addition to Descent, and that GW went the wrong direction with their game. I mean, their models have gotten beautiful, but otherwise...

Here is a nice unboxing/critique where the author gives a breakdown about how the art design by GW has actually been getting worse with the newer edition of Necromunda

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TLWQSFWB2k

I actually own both version of Necromunda, but let me clarify on a couple points.

1) i was primarily talking in terms of art style in regards to GW product (i.e., what the tiles look like). And in those terms yes, I feel the art design is far more colorful and interesting than Descent. Descent is monotone and bland in comparison.

2) While I can understand your preferences, my group actually preferred the 2D version. We've historically preferred GW's older board games (Blood Bowl and Space Hulk) to their war games. We found it faster to get on the table and less fiddly in terms of movement and line of sight. Another thing my friends joked about was that storage didn't require giant bins like the old Necromunda version we had. The 2D board game version was easier to take over to a friend's house and play, versus having a large dedicated space. Groups and opinions vary, some are into the hobby to build large tables of scenery, others less so.

You also can't ignore that one of the reasons that GW made that move was to reduce the cost of the game, it simply would have been more expensive to continue the 3d terrain. Which is why Descent will now cost 175 dollars. As I posted, I look at a design like this and I just see added cost to the game. If people want to go 3D cardboard print outs, for stair and trees or whatever, they have options on the internet now. Putting it in the box makes your audience pay for it.

22 hours ago, crimsonsun said:

Reason I've chosen your post btw is because you said you spend £175 on sword and sorcery.. one of my fav games, I'm all in the ancient chronicles as well and have even been doing proof reading on it, I'm big on that game. I'm also a collaborator on Middara which is another game in the same space and I love to bits... But this game isn't like those and this is where they lost me...

Six pre chosen characters, with predefined races/class combos. You can choose from a selection of skills and upgrades on those characters which they decided was fitting for those race class combos. This game is like the designers ran a roleplay session for a massive campaign and broke it down into encounters between the narrative... The narrative choices are those they made with there characters which they of course love, but they are THEIR characters not ours, then you handle the next encounter, everything that happens is limited to the scope and context of how they saw those characters, you can't even choose your own class/race. They come with pre selected load outs and you know there skills are going to have specific weapon builds in mind, you know the ones they choose... This could be great if the writing supports it which is a big if in itself, but you just need one situation where the narrative makes your character choose something different from how you imagined them and the whole story is ruined. Your playing there adventure, with there roleplay characters and choices they've chosen for how they imagine those characters... And unlike middara which shares some of those issues, there's no alternative way to play and Middara is completely classless, you can build any character anyway you like so aren't stuck with someone elses imagined character...

I am in on Sword & Sorcery Ancient Chronicles as well. I am not in on Middara as the theme and art is not really my cup of tea (and also my friend backed it so i will get to play it anyway). I really like Sword & Sorcery, it is my current number one dungeon crawler > http://crusadersgames.co.uk/fantasy-board-games/

And i do get what you saying about the characters - there has to be an element of scripted choice going on if there is a story path in the app, however i am not sure it is clear how much scope there is to tweak the character to your own preference, but selecting the character you most like is going to be important. However on a counter arguement, could you not say that each of the Sword & Sorcery characters are scripted in terms of you are chosing upgrade cards from a limited pool - although you can choose between lawful or chaotic to bend it a bit. Most dungeon crawl board games tend to have some limitations on the character and how they develop. Massive Darkness is a clear exception where you can pick a barbarian and make him a sorceror or thief - i actually do not like this at all as my own personal preference is to stick to some guidelines on character type - in fact for MD2 they have chucked this approach away as most feedback wasnt overly positive that i saw. Middara is a more choose your own build i agree, but i cannot say that i prefer this - to me it is just a different style of game.

I really enjoy debating dungeon crawlers, there is no right or wrong just different designs or interpretations - you will like some and really not like others depending on your personal preferance. In this case i am lucky that Legends is playing more to the hand i wanted dealt, but clearly its not for everyone. Hopefully 3rd edition one day will be better for you - however we both seem to like Sword & Sorcery which is great.

I think my point is the forum here feels so negative but i guess that is because negative or disappointed = vocal but happy and interested people are generally not the ones who bother posting. There is a general desire within dungeon crawlers being released now to have something new or different to stand out and i think this is natural otherwise a game can get lost in the crowd very easily. Descent has a good well known brand name which is why they used it, they have chosen to push the app side and 3d terrain and while I can see this may not be for everyone, it is something to market it with and it may become one that does quite well - i hope so anyway so that it develops and continues.

So this game is not for me, an avid lover of Descent 2E with all expansions (except mists) and Road to Legend. That's OK - I hope this finds an audience and is successful! The new gameplay mechanics of two sided weapon cards and readying player/weapon abilities are great ideas, and the ability to upgrade weapons and craft equipment is really exciting. As a lover of video games, board games, and app-enhanced board games (XCOM, Mansions 2E), I thought I would be the target audience, but this is a miss for me. It's SO app dependent that it feels like the physical components are an afterthought; they just track positioning and player abilities. Everything else, from the enemy attacks, to interacting with the terrain on the board, to crafting and upgrading, is handled in the app. The app isn't just adding/enhancing and/or removing "fiddlyness" (like RTL, XCOM, other companion apps), it's replacing components that make board games FUN .

What I LOVE about RTL is the way the app integrates with the physical merchandise you buy. Want to play this campaign? It requires physical components from this $40 expansion. Own this Character/Monster pack? The app will include them! The real bummer with LotD to me is I see the DNA of "my new favorite game" here, but elements are misaligned just enough so that it doesn't appeal to me at all. I think if elements of this game design were split up a little differently, there could be two separate products that integrate together; what I'd imagine as "Descent Digital" and "Descent Analog":

Descent Analog is mostly Descent LotD, with a few elements from Descent 2E to remove the absolute dependency on the app (it could still be app enhanced, or even app required, but the app should just do less ). IE a "scenario book" and an "upgrade book", a deck of cards for random/scripted events, etc. I love that the app can manage enemy health so I don't have a bunch of cardboard tokens floating around with my monsters, but I want to thumb through the upgrade recipes, or a deck of monster cards to know elements of how a monster works. (Sidenote: Mansions struggles here too; the miniature I place on the board is completely arbitrary. The app controls every aspect, so it might as well be a token that says "monster A". Great for surprise and changing properties on the fly; bad for player decision because I have absolutely no information) Retail $80-$100.

Descent Digital is ALL Descent LotD, but no physical components, ie a video game. It's a virtual representation of the board game in it's entirety, and would include player movement, abilities, and rule enforcement. This retains the look and feel from the existing app (no "attack animations" required; just the 3d models of the minis on the board). Multiplayer is a plus, but not a requirement. Retail $20-60

The must-have feature here is that these two separate products integrate. Say 90% of each are the exact same game: same campaign, same gameplay mechanics. But each has a unique piece not found in the other; maybe an enemy type, or a specific character. BUT if you own both, you can unlock that piece in the other game. Descent Analog comes with a code that unlocks the character/enemy in Descent Digital. Descent Digital comes with images to Print and Play on the table (maybe even an STL to 3D print a miniature!). Now you have two products that appeal to different markets, and many customers will buy BOTH products.

TLDR; The app does too much and replaces components of board game FUN. Either scale back the app and give me more control on the tabletop, or make the game 100% digital. Or both!

PS: I'm not suggesting "Descent Digital" is easy, by any stretch of the imagination. It would require more programmers, more developers, and a lot of hard work and time. Likewise, adjusting gameplay mechanics to remove app dependency would also require a lot of work on the tabletop side (and many, many hours of playtesting). I'm just describing a dream scenario here... or Descent 3E if Fantasy Flight is reading this. 😉

3 hours ago, GrandAdmiralCrunch said:

No power? Ask California and thier power outages. It happens. And those phones and tablets still require power. They don't run on air; Eventually they will have to recharge.

But power is secondary. My number one objection is needing the app years from now. I cant tell you the number of apps I've had that were deleted from the appstore years down the road. Or that hadn't been updated and no longer worked with the current OS. Or I had loaded on one device and couldn't get on a newer one. Crap happens way to often. This has been a bad years for business. What if FFG goes under, or is sold out to some new outfit? I'm not going to count on those odds to make sure I can still play a $175 game.

I have plenty of video games on multiple devices. I don't need my cardboard to be wifi enabled. One of the joys of boardgaming is getting away from the electronic leash for awhile.

'

Yeah yeah, the tired old "board games are to get away from technology" excuse. Board games are for social interaction. Has nothing to do with screens or apps or banning devices. This old school mindset is what stifles innovation and progress. Games will have apps, more of them will have apps in the future. Live with it. That being said, there's a literal MOUNTAIN of board games that don't require an app. Play one of those?

And if you lose power, how do you play your non-connected board games in the dark?

Also, FFG apps are on Steam. The app isn't going anywhere any time soon. This is a non issue. Worrying about if you can play the game in 30 years is pointless. I can still play old school PC games from the 1980's on my PC.

I bought (and then sold) Mansions and LOTR which require an app and it's just not for me. I don't want any board game that requires an app.

I'm also not a fan of the artwork. The artist did good work but I don't feel it fits Descent.

If the characters and physical components of this edition could be used in Descent 2nd I might have considered it just for that.

I was excited in that first moment when I saw the announcement for this game... but I'm not now. I have really enjoyed supporting FFG and I'm sorry that I'm not into this. It's really disappointing.

2 hours ago, CountBlah said:

I actually own both version of Necromunda, but let me clarify on a couple points.

<snip>

You bring up some really good points. When you are dealing with storage, 3d terrain becomes a whole nother problem besides just having too many game boxes on the shelf. I know with Mordheim's buildings, I ran into the same issue back then. You ended up dedicating multiple shelves to just one game.

I think the appeal of Legends foray into 3d terrain is going to depend on if someone has a history with games that use 3d terrain, such as wargames, for their response to it. Some folks may already have storage solutions in place, while others who don't are looking at this like "am I supposed to tear this down every time, what do I do with this stuff"?

As far as GW's art direction The Bard even points out with the digital art used in the board us cut and pasted repeatedly in N:U , and also Silvertower. He even points out where they flipped a graphic and didn't bother to change the numbers/letters, so they were all backwards. It may be more colorful, sure, but I don't think its something to be raving about.

Cost is certainly a valid criticism of the new game. While $175 isn't the $290 of other GW games that include 3d terrain, its more than many are used to paying for Descent core boxes. I personally like some of the games that are terrain and mini agnostic where you just have to buy a rulebook and use what you already own (Elder Scrolls, ), but not everyone has a collection of miniatures, 3d terrain, and dice already. I personally think $175 is a decent price point for a game with the number of models plus usable 3d terrain. I think the original Descent was like $80(?) which would be over $100 in 2020 cash, so its still a significant jump up with the better minis and terrain.

I kind of think that there are people that agreeing and disagreeing with it probably means they did a decent job of finding that economic equilibrium with it, but only sales generated in the end will really determine that.

1 hour ago, Alcovitch said:

Yeah yeah, the tired old "board games are to get away from technology" excuse. Board games are for social interaction. Has nothing to do with screens or apps or banning devices. This old school mindset is what stifles innovation and progress. Games will have apps, more of them will have apps in the future. Live with it. That being said, there's a literal MOUNTAIN of board games that don't require an app. Play one of those?

And if you lose power, how do you play your non-connected board games in the dark?

Also, FFG apps are on Steam. The app isn't going anywhere any time soon. This is a non issue. Worrying about if you can play the game in 30 years is pointless. I can still play old school PC games from the 1980's on my PC.

Board Games are for Entertainment, not social Interaction. Solo games are huge right now and solo options are becoming increasingly common. Don't get a whole lot of Social Interaction by your lonesome.

Apps are a gimmick that FFG is desperately trying to push. I think apps are to boardgames what 3D is to movies.

Never heard of candles? And if it's daytime there is this giant glowing orb in the sky called "the Sun". It appears in the sky every morning and cast golden rays down upon the earth, including gaming tables.

I've had games disappear off steam. Its not an impossibility. I'm not interested in buying something that could easily become an $175 paperweight. If the App was supplemental, but the game still was playable without it, I wouldn't have a problem with it. However, I will not risk my hard earned cash on garbage that could so very easily be rendered useless.

1 hour ago, Alcovitch said:

Yeah yeah, the tired old "board games are to get away from technology" excuse. Board games are for social interaction. Has nothing to do with screens or apps or banning devices. This old school mindset is what stifles innovation and progress. Games will have apps, more of them will have apps in the future. Live with it. That being said, there's a literal MOUNTAIN of board games that don't require an app. Play one of those?

Expanding on this, apps allow you to do a lot more than you can do without one, when dealing with hidden information and back-end record keeping. One of my favorite digital boardgames is Armello . Fans of the game are always screaming that there should be a physical copy of the game made, but the developers have repeatedly shot that idea down due to it not working. As I've played the game over the years, I've picked up on the little things that happen behind the scenes and though, "how would you do that at the table" and the amount of bookkeeping that game would have is ridiculous. From things such as tracking certain combinations of what hero is holding what magic items, or has what follower when they step on a stone circle or forest tile, and if its day or night, and if that triggers a special event or not without telling the players (psst...the druids are actually hiding here this game), determining where the King drops random perils every night, without giving away what the peril is and if its appropriate combination for that peril to be on that tile, where Banes randomly spawn every night, resolving combat between King's Guard and Banes, etc., etc. There is a mountain of fiddly bits that happen without the players having to handle it. It really would break down if you took the computer out of the game.

Mansions of Madness is also a decent example of what you can do when you have the app handling hidden information. From the interview, it sounds like Kara took what expertise she developed with MoM one-off stories, took the self-contained limitations off and ran with it for Legends' campaign. I look forward to seeing the results.