10 hours ago, rugal said:

100 % Fully agree. I hate fully coop games with app based system. I hope this stupid idea of apps will never work, die soon, and never see thoses anymore.

that's a bit harsh. it's been working fine so far. it's also just a game. no reason to get so worked up over it.

I don't understand why people **** on companion apps. just accept the fact that some people prefer coop and playing with an app while others prefer no app/overlord games. nothing wrong with either side. if you don't like it, don't play it and move on. if the game supports both, perfect. the Road to Legend app is awesome and the campaigns are great. I also love playing with an overlord.

that said, I do understand the disappointment from people who prefer playing as the overlord and feel left out. I always play on the heroes side, so there is no difference for me personally.

On 10/23/2020 at 8:51 AM, Hendolph said:

that's a bit harsh. it's been working fine so far. it's also just a game. no reason to get so worked up over it.

I don't understand why people **** on companion apps. just accept the fact that some people prefer coop and playing with an app while others prefer no app/overlord games. nothing wrong with either side. if you don't like it, don't play it and move on. if the game supports both, perfect. the Road to Legend app is awesome and the campaigns are great. I also love playing with an overlord.

that said, I do understand the disappointment from people who prefer playing as the overlord and feel left out. I always play on the heroes side, so there is no difference for me personally.

The app is not the real problem : the real problem is how is the app used.

If the app was a real IA, knowing all figures position, all heroes status (health, stamina, conditions stuff etc ...) and was able to adapt its tactics depending of the situation, then, yes, I would indeed go straight on the app.

But it is far from being this, it is no more but a randomized event system calculating from time. Then, either you have luck on dice and you win, either you have not and you lose. All other solutions are only illusions to give to the player the wrong idea. So, at least, cards are more fun to manipulate, avoid burning eyes on small sized screens, can be played without electricity, etc ...

Once a real app with a real IA would be created to give real fun and feedback when playing, then, I'll consider. As long as it will not, I will never stop to shout out my angryness !

I can see your point rugal, but an app that would be this tightly integrated would require so many inputs, that it would hamper the game flow massively. And if you have to interact with the app non stop, then there is really no point in having a board game any more. I think RTL strikes a good middle point, even if you do not like the randomes of the monster activations. While you have to use the app, it doesn't take away too much from the game itself.

But regarding LotD, I'm really puzzled about the combat integration. This looks a lot like an extended system of what is used in mansions of madness 2nd edition, and I always found combat to be the most clunky aspect about that game. I hope this doesn't go too far in that regard, but I have to see it in action to judge that.

9 hours ago, Tubb said:

Of course, what we try to explain with sentences like that is that board games that heavily rely on apps, let's say, board games that remove some rules or mechanics from the board and a lot of content is exclusively managed by the app are, in fact, very similar to a video game that must be played with a board.

Some mechanics managed by the app seems fine. For example, the AI after the monsters in MoM follow some guidelines such as "if monster X then Y", and you just move the minis. Seems nice to me, because the end result is a mini moving physically through the board and you know the logic behind the movement... But having the process of crafting an object, develop your character, or shopping completely built in the app... seems too much to me.

The line between both concepts seems really thin here, and in fact, one can think it is better to play online a video game as you don't need to place all that stuff on the table, and you can play with your friends anyway!

Due to corona my gaming group has needed to remain separated, but as we played a lot of D&D, we have switched to a digital platform, Roll20. It is fun to play with them through the internet, and in fact we don't miss the beautiful battle maps or the beautifully painted minis because now I use beautiful digital landscapes, beautiful digital battle maps and beautiful tokens on the screen... because we still play a role playing game, we still see each other and we still joke and laugh a lot. So NO, the difference between a video game and a board game is NOT the presence of the players around the table, the difference is the way the abstract rules are managed by actual persons, not an app.

As a long-time DM, I’m gonna hard-disagree here. Playing with a group at a table is way better and more satisfying than playing online. I play plenty of TTS right now with the pandemic, and no session is as good as playing in person across a table. Until digital solutions become less clunky, a physical table will always win, hands down.

1 hour ago, DerDelphi said:

I can see your point rugal, but an app that would be this tightly integrated would require so many inputs, that it would hamper the game flow massively. And if you have to interact with the app non stop, then there is really no point in having a board game any more. I think RTL strikes a good middle point, even if you do not like the randomes of the monster activations. While you have to use the app, it doesn't take away too much from the game itself.

But regarding LotD, I'm really puzzled about the combat integration. This looks a lot like an extended system of what is used in mansions of madness 2nd edition, and I always found combat to be the most clunky aspect about that game. I hope this doesn't go too far in that regard, but I have to see it in action to judge that.

The new app is the one you interract with all the time for ... nothing fun at all

42 minutes ago, rugal said:

The new app is the one you interract with all the time for ... nothing fun at all

I'm not able to judge how fun it will be yet, but from the looks it seems to be a lot more intrusive than Road to Legend. If it is for narrative reasons, I'll be somewhat ok with it. But from the looks combat seems to be driven completely in the app, and that might indeed become a bit overbearing. I still have to wait and see.

1 hour ago, Inksplat said:

As a long-time DM, I’m gonna hard-disagree here. Playing with a group at a table is way better and more satisfying than playing online. I play plenty of TTS right now with the pandemic, and no session is as good as playing in person across a table. Until digital solutions become less clunky, a physical table will always win, hands down.

Well, it is a matter of tastes. Of course, it is better to have them home, (not an option right now) but the main point of a board game, specially a rpg, is to unfold and share adventures with those friends that enjoy them, and playing online, seeing their faces, their laughs, enjoying the jokes and keeping the atmosphere is still possible through the internet. It has its cons, but we have found also some advantages... like not having to paint a dozen minis before the session, or not having to print a hundred stats...

That's what I meant, you can be in the other side of the planet and still FEEL ENGAGED, or in reverse...

Anyway, what I was trying to explain is that even rpg have the option to play with digital support or NOT. This game has had mechanics ripped off the board game experience and you will never enjoy them, the app will sure like to add a +1 to your sword each time you use it.. What is the purpose of being toghether in the same room if it is just me the one seeing the screen when I upgrade my weapons and half the effort is autorun?

I don't mind app driven games, but this time the part of the game that is app controlled is something I would have liked to make myself!

Well i am really excited about the new game.

I do not feel they have to try and replicate everything that was in the 2nd edition - they want to make an app based dungeon crawl which is built from ground up unlike road to legend. There is so much in 2nd edition anyway that if you want to play overlord, keep playing that one. I am really looking forward to a new adventure game with surprise app generated content and future expandability.

And what they have shown looks very cool to me, i think this could be the best dungeon crawl around but we have to wait and see. I am much more excited for this than Frosthaven for instance which just looks more like a lot more Gloomhaven really with a few minor tweaks and additions.

Should add that the weapon crafting idea feels excellent and builds on what sword & sorcery did a little bit of - how much more interesting is having to search and find things to help craft a next level sword - compare that to the ridiculous loot drop extravaganza of Massive Darkness where you do not have to earn anything just pick up 700 items in each room and change it into whatever you want (i exaggerated of course but you get the point).

my friends, everyone knows that the second edition exists to be played as the Overlord, but it is practically discontinued. in my country for example it is practically out of print, when someone sells it is only used when it is at exorbitant prices. Obviously, as the fans we wanted a maybe third edition, but it doesn't have to be a third edition, obviously things must change and evolve, both mechanically in design, but the mechanics of the Overlord is something that can be put as optional as well as I've already said. whoever played Overlord knows how much fun it is. And like every fan we want news.

A reprint of the 2nd edition would solve a lot of people's issues with the 3rd. It's okay that this is fully co-op, we have D2e for the overlord one. Just please print D2e, if this is truly "not 3rd edition".

20 hours ago, Rodrigo Schena said:

The best mechanic that is to play and be a dungeon master (Overlord) has been removed. We need options and alternatives for the application.

being fully integrated with the app took away the best thing I thought of the series. FF needs to think about the dungeon masters out there that love to play with villainy, and hinder the success of the heroes.

( Art by Guilherme Freitas)

to be done entirely by cards, or implemented in conjunction with the application, but it is necessary!

don't make that mistake.

Sincerely, someone who loves the franchise.


(Art by Robson Michel)


I think everyone already knows that this is not a 3rd edition, but a completely different game and blablabla etc,

what I talk about. It is a suggestion and not a complaint. A request for something that can be bigger until it gets better if they think it's worth it. I'm not behind the game, but if I'm sure I would listen to the community for something that can be an addition and not an impediment. After all who makes the game sell is the fans.

As I said, one thing does not need to exclude the other. they can exist together very well.

Talk for yourself.

Most people I ever know to play this game didn't want to be the Overlord. Someone always ends it to be just to play the game.

Also, Overlord mechanic was totally unbalanced. It's much easier to balance a game where the enemy is an IA who can be configured to behave as you want.

I'm glad they make this full co-op.

I feel the same way, I really had my hopes up for an overlord, since I really like playing as one and against one, it's not the same to play against an AI than against a real human and friend, I'll check reviews when this comes out but it's really not what I was hoping for.

Also, I work on computers all day long, it really makes a HUGE difference to me when a board games needs an app like this, I love MoM, but I wasn't looking for something like that on my Descent too, at least not mandatory.

12 hours ago, Raizox said:

Talk for yourself.

Most people I ever know to play this game didn't want to be the Overlord. Someone always ends it to be just to play the game.

Also, Overlord mechanic was totally unbalanced. It's much easier to balance a game where the enemy is an IA who can be configured to behave as you want.

I'm glad they make this full co-op.

13 hours ago, Rodrigo Schena said:

my friends, everyone knows that the second edition exists to be played as the Overlord, but it is practically discontinued. in my country for example it is practically out of print, when someone sells it is only used when it is at exorbitant prices. Obviously, as the fans we wanted a maybe third edition, but it doesn't have to be a third edition, obviously things must change and evolve, both mechanically in design, but the mechanics of the Overlord is something that can be put as optional as well as I've already said. whoever played Overlord knows how much fun it is. And like every fan we want news.

and your opinion is just as important and in the same category as mine. just as you speak for yourself, i speak for myself lol. but one thing is for sure, I'm not alone haha

The thing that really bums me out is not that they created a game without an overlord in the same universe, I'm all in on them creating different and cool games that follow the story of the same place, what bums me is that Descent was THE game for Overlord play, I have other Dungeon Crawlers to play 100% co-op, and I also love them, but when they teased Descent it got my hopes up for a new and improved game with an Overlord, and they just let us build our hopes up and then broke them. If they had announced all at once that they were creating a game in the same Universe but fully co-op and app integrated then the shock would have been way less I think.

I completely disagree with the thread title.

There's a reason they saw a huge uptick in sales when they introduced the coop app. One vs Many games are going out of style and most games that had that found some way to integrate coop or came out with a new edition that ditched 1vsMany (mansions 2e, etc)

16 hours ago, Alcovitch said:

I completely disagree with the thread title.

There's a reason they saw a huge uptick in sales when they introduced the coop app. One vs Many games are going out of style and most games that had that found some way to integrate coop or came out with a new edition that ditched 1vsMany (mansions 2e, etc)

In video games, they usually states that beat them all was useless in comparison with vs fighting.

Seeing how well Streets of rage 4 sold, this was wrong

18 hours ago, Alcovitch said:

I completely disagree with the thread title.

There's a reason they saw a huge uptick in sales when they introduced the coop app. One vs Many games are going out of style and most games that had that found some way to integrate coop or came out with a new edition that ditched 1vsMany (mansions 2e, etc)

I also don't think get rid of the overlord is a bad idea, I use to be the overlord and sometimes I'd like to play with them and not against them... BUT it is not mandatory to have an app for coop games. There's a ton of coop games that uses cards to simulate IA, or even bots to play solo just using cards and charts.

Scythe, for example, allows the use of bots even when you play with two persons just in case you want to add another player. Gloomhaven is also competitive... STRONGLY competitive (you must guess what other players are doing when choosing your actions) and still doesn't need an app.

You're not wrong, and both your examples Scythe and Gloomhaven do a good job of creating that type of scripted behavior. But it also adds substantial complexity to those games. That added complexity focuses the games to the more hardcore board game audience willing to learn those rule sets. FFG has always tried to manage the complexity of their games (successfully or not) to make them more accessible to a broader audience. The expectation that they would go that route seems unwarranted based on their history, though obviously just my opinion.

The group that loved the Overlord role has a point and an easily identified reason for their passion. This type of game fit their specific groups, and there just are not many options out there for them. Coop games are generally moving in a different direction as has already been discussed. From that standpoint, and a key reason these forums are rather emotional at the moment, Descent is abandoning one of the key features that made them love this game. A passionate segment of the Descent community is, understandably, not happy with this direction as the companion app doesn't actually replace what they liked about the game.

While I personally thought the companion app improved something like Mansions of Madness, I still recognize the limitations of the design. If you're going to design a game that needs an opponent making intelligent decisions shouldn't there be some space for a human player? The old FFG designs clearly said yes, the new ones seem to say the opposite. I can't help but feel that today's apps are the futures Dark Tower, something does get lost in the translation.

I always will prefer the overlord role (or playing as a hero against someone who enjoys being the overlord). Being an overlord takes discipline, but you develop skill. You become familiar with the ins and outs of your entire game. You pit your tactics against not just one mind, but up to four others. On top of that, you also develop game-teaching and RPG-style narrative techniques. As an overlord, I have learned so much that I would never have learned playing co-op.

Forget the idea to have an Overlord in this game, there will not. Maybe in another "real" Descent V3, if few years, maybe ...

Support Hasbro’s re-release of HeroQuest! If it does well, it might swing things in we board game purists favor! I’m sure ffg and ares games are paying attention!

1 hour ago, Sir Auron said:

Support Hasbro’s re-release of HeroQuest! If it does well, it might swing things in we board game purists favor! I’m sure ffg and ares games are paying attention!

You are talking about this false kickstarting for a game so old that is unplayable today and with no even a new rule to update the gameplay ? LoL ... ! And they even don't want to see it outside of the USA ... another bad joke !

I just hope that all the app based games will be useable after support stops. Obsolescence is my biggest fear as a board game collector in the app driven age.

I don't mind an app for co-op, and additional modes would be welcome, in my opinion, for short one-off adventures or when you've beat the campaign and revealed the surprises of the main story.

+1 for workshop support! My D2e got so many more miles on it thanks to other's creativity.

Wondering if the next volumes/chapters will be the same price, or if the hefty investment of chapter 1 will cover most of the basic components and we'll see some savings with later releases. (A completionist can dream, right?)

Is it also possible that the app development costs got rolled into the game price? Just a thought.

All in all, I'm excited for more Terrinoth, disappointed it's not 3rd edition, happy I can play solo or with others and can't wait to explore and discover while I get my mind off of the crap going on all around us this year.

Happy gaming, everyone!

On 10/22/2020 at 10:26 PM, HisEpicness said:

100% disagree. I love fully coop games and app based games I have no gripes with. Still not sure I'll even get the game since its so expensive, but I am glad there's no overlord.

If you want an overlord, go play second edition.

Dont you have enough with Forsthaven, Gloomhaven, etherfields, Tainted Grail, Darkest Dungeon, Middara.. wait, what about Every single major game in this genre for the last 5 years!!!
To make things worse you say you are happy it's puzzle mode only, but you are not buying it? Hm. Reasonable.

Descent should remain the competitive one.

1 hour ago, GralQ said:

Dont you have enough with Forsthaven, Gloomhaven, etherfields, Tainted Grail, Darkest Dungeon, Middara.. wait, what about Every single major game in this genre for the last 5 years!!!
To make things worse you say you are happy it's puzzle mode only, but you are not buying it? Hm. Reasonable.

Descent should remain the competitive one.

Descent: Journeys is the competitive one.

Descent: Legends is the cooperative one.

The developers hammered that point in during their stream and in the articles posted up so far, Descent: Legends is not the next edition of Descent: Journeys , and that their intention is that Journeys will keep its focus on competitive play. Therefore, Legends does not need an Overlord. If you want to play competitive, you play Journeys , and hopefully if/when a new edition of Journeys does come out, they can strip the coop play out and focus an a more pure competitive ruleset so that hero/class abilities do not have to be balanced against an AI resulting in a better game for both Legends and Journeys .

As far as "To make things worse you say you are happy it's puzzle mode only, but you are not buying it? Hm. Reasonable.", he clearly said it was because of the price. I mean, I would love to own a Ferrari, but I'm not going to buy one because of its price. It is in fact reasonable to like something, but not buy it because its cost.