The way the deviation is calculated when you exit the catacombs is problematic. For example, you could move 1 space and exit the catacombs. Then you roll a 6 for deviation which makes you move 6 space in a direction. So you deviate more that you actually move.

The variant below that I am suggesting tries to reproduce the deviation concept of the original game. It is pretty simple and requires no table.

When it's time to calculate the deviation, you roll a die. if you roll is equal or higher the number of space you moved, you do not deviate. Else, the deviation value is equal to the die roll.

If you want larger deviation, you can change it for "if your die roll is only greater than the number of space you moved, you will not deviate". So in this case, you can deviate up to your movement range.

What do you thik?

I'm just going to wait and see how it pans out when its played.

Catacombs are kind of the "unknown" part of the game you enter - (I also haven't deeply read the rules fully yet) - but why couldn't you enter a catacomb that just all willy-nilly exits far away from where you entered? They are kind of secret caves kinda right?

I'm not sure I see deviation as a "bug." The idea is that the Catacombs are unpredictable and lead you someplace you didn't fully expect (even if you headed in the direction you wanted to go). So why isn't it acceptable to end up one space down and six to the right? Isn't this like you stumbled around in a dark catacombs down a long passageway?

Also, you only leave the Catacombs if you get a "leave the catacombs" card, so the chances are you are going to get more than just 1 card (cards represent movement in the direction you set upon entering the catacombs).

With quite a bit of this game based on random factors, why shouldn't the catacombs be?

But that is the beauty of how DungeonQuest seems to be set up - plenty of room for variants and house rules if you want a different experience!

sincerely I agree with larienna, the 1d6 roll without conditions is too much IMO. I liked the old sistem, 1d10 and see the result on the old version's chart, but at least even with a 10 the maximum lateral shifting with 12 or 11 catacombs cards was 4, not 6. come on, you exit after 2 catacomb cards, you roll 6: movemnt of 8 in 3 turns?? I don't like it at all.

if you haven't played the old catacombs, try it. i post the link of the old game's rulebook about exiting catacombs:

http://yfrog.com/nccatacombj

if you need clarification ask me!

see ya!

Sobody else suggested on board game geek to roll 2 dice, one after another, and you substract die B from die A. If the result is negative, you deviate to the left, if the result is positive, you deviate to the right. The advantage is that the player does not have to chose on which side he deviate but there is still the problem that you could move 1 space and deviate 5 space.

So I added the suggestion that the value of each die roll cannot exceed your movement value which gives a maximum deviation of move-1. I'll have to check the odd distribution to see if there is no weird probability distribution.

larienna said:

The two dice rule seems like a lot of extra work to avoid making a simple binary choice. I suppose if you want the extra randomness it might be worthwhile. If you want the same randomness without having to do subtraction, you could roll two dice (or one die twice) and say the first roll is high/low for left/right and the second roll is how far you go. That would also allow for 6 space deviations as originally permitted in the rules.

Also, if I were to combine that rule with yours, I think I'd rather roll normally and cap the result at how far I moved in either direction. Not a big difference but still less thinking. Anything that limits how much math I have to do will make the game run faster =)

Doing it that way would also allow more deviation. Capping each die and then subtracting means that any time both dice roll higher than your movement the result will be zero deviation. This also means that if you only move 1 space it is impossible to deviate. Doing the two die thing and then capping the total will always allow for at least one space of deviation.

Baelthazar said:

Spot on!

Baelthazar said:

Complete agreement. It's not a "bug" at all.

we've got to try it before taking conclusions. but what about this scenario: I enter catacombs, I exit after drawning 3 cards, I roll 5: so i move 8 space, 3 straight and 5 to the left or right (I choose direction).

now, that means I moved 8 spaces in 3 turns...entering catacombs means that I obtain super-speed? I accept that I can choose the direction but not the distance, but IMO that's a bug, a big bug!

I'll try few times new rules, but I'm quite sure I'll use the older GW catacomb's chart. And I'm quite sure that they decided to apply this change only to simplify the game and not because the old system didn't work. It works well, and is more "realistic" that the new one.

As usuak, IMO!

First off, I don't see this as a real bug at all, and I can see at least some people agree with me.

It's supposed to be random, and the only reason you might not want to allow a player to move 6 spaces is imo the free choice of direction (as this could pretty much win you the game in like 4 turns with some clever/lucky play). I don't however understand the argument about "realism" in regards to movement at all. This is a short, random and last but not least _fantasy_ board game. It's kinda like saying the hat in monopoly should only roll one die for movement as it has no wheels or feet. Who the heck are you to decide the catacombs don't have all sorts of magical portals and 6-space slip'n slides in it

Anyway, apart from my objection to the whole argumentum ad how-stuff-works-in-the-real-world , I agree that it might be cleverly solved in some other manner so I'm happy to see the discussion take place. My biggest irk is however the choice of direction at the exit. Unless the catacomb deck is stacked with "you are confused, roll a die: on 1-3 your direction indicator turns left, on 4-6 you turn right" cards or something of that sort I'm going to make a house rule that somehow randomizes exit direction.

For example: Roll 1 die, on 1-3 left , 4-6 right . The spaces you move are decided by the amount of catacomb cards + or - the die roll (if it's right in this example, 4=1, 5=2, 6=3 for this calculation) in that direction. You might want to limit movement to a max of 6-8 or if you choose to add them together. Maybe even let the player decide whether the dieroll should be added or subtracted from catacomb cards for a bit less randomization. I dunno, just thought this up, hehe.

Araqiel said:

I agree completely with this. It is a board game, so these so-called "in-character" reasonings should be made to match the rules rather than vice versa. That said, I do enjoy playing around with house rules, too.

Whatever house rules I may include regarding this catacombs issue, I would want to keep it simple above all things. I can see myself adding a coin toss for direction and not much else. Limiting sideways movement to a maximum of how far "forward" you went is a fine idea for those who prefer it. I do like some of the ideas presented here to that end and it's nice to know there's a resource for such if I decide to implement such a restriction myself.

I don't understand the problem with moving a bunch of spaces in a few turns. According to the rules, you keep moving if you get a corridor tile or a blackened room tile. So if you keep drawing those two tiles and get to the treasure room on your first turn, are you going to say "sorry, I moved way too much on my first turn, I'm starting over"? How many spaces have you decided is too many?

DoomTurtle said:

The OP's issue wasn't with moving forward X spaces and thinking "X is too far", it was with moving forward one space, coming up after the first tile and then wandering sideways 6 spaces. He didn't feel it made sense that your character could move the equivalent of one space forward and somehow end up 6 times as far to the left or right.

There are plenty of thematic excuses for how that could happen - stepping through a magic portal that teleports you way off to one side, sliding down a rocky tunnel before landing over there, etc. The purpose of this thread though was to discuss house rule ideas for "fixing" what he sees as a logical conundrum. I think everyone's entitled to play their own way, as long as everyone at the table agrees to proposed house rules.

air show said:

Sorry, I meant to quote this, which is what I was replying to. 8 spaces in 3 turns is too many in the catacombs, but could conceivably happen through the tiles too with the corridors and darkened rooms. I'm just saying that there really is no set time that a turn takes. It only takes an instant for one character to come across a pit and jump over it and the turn ends. In that same turn, another player can enter a room, come across a skeleton, and fight it for 8 rounds of combat. And another player could move 1 space in a catacomb and deviate 5 spaces and come out for 6 tiles worth of movement.

Was each turn equal time-wise? Clearly not. But catacomb movement is not the only thing that is uneven about a players turn. If you need to house rule to keep catacomb movement from going too many spaces in too few turns, then wouldn't a house rule be needed against drawing to many corridors in a row? Would there need to be a house rule for how many rounds of combat can occur in one turn?

My point is that how can the catacombs be singled out for too much happening in too few turns, when it can also happen elsewhere? Why would just the catacombs be house ruled?

If there is a problem with deviation vs. forward movement, then that is another thing. In reality, it is very difficult to walk in a straight path through a forest without a compass, because you have nothing to base your straight movement on. It would be very difficult to rationalize moving forward two yards and then realize you've deviated to the right from your starting point 12 yards. However, as others have mentioned, these are catacombs in a world where magic exists. A portal could have moved you over, a landslide could have forced your path to change, any number of things. If you were supposed to see exactly what was going on, there would be a separate set of catacomb tiles to use. But you're not, so it's hard for me to rationalize a house rule for what you think should happen when you don't have a bearing on exactly what was happening down there in the first place.

I'm not against house rules, what people do doesn't effect my game at all. But this being a discussion thread, I'm just saying why I don't think a house rule is needed here, based off of how the game is presented in both the catacombs and its other areas.

We've had a great time with the rules as written (8 games and counting) and in each someone tried to get into the catacombs. We haven't found any issue with the deviation rules so far other than what to do when the character pops up outside of the dungeon walls. We simply house ruled that they come up at the square connecting to where they would have left.

They're not going to get out that easy...

keltheos said:

They actually address that in the rules

"While in the Catacombs, Heroes never pass further than the outer walls of Dragonfire Dungeon. The Hero still accumulates Catacomb cards as normal, but when he resurfaces in the dungeon, if the Hero has drawn so many cards that he would pass outside the dungeon, he only counts as many Catacomb cards as will take him to the outer wall. For example, if a Hero has seven cards but his travel marker is only five spaces from the dungeon wall, he determines where he resurfaces as if he has only five cards. Similarly, if the die roll would place the Hero outside the dungeon, he stops at the dungeon wall instead." P. 21

Ah. Some of the rules organization needs help, we glossed totally over that but still worked out the rule.

keltheos said:

Yeah I usually always miss a rule here and there the first few plays. Like the first few times we played runewars I missed the part where it explained that a round in a battle was considered all the initiative 1 figures, then round 2 is the 2nd tier and so on, instead the first few games we thought a round was 1-5 and you did it 5 times. Needless to say not many armies survived to retreat in those first few games lol.

Any how, back on topic, I don't so much mind the deviation, the whole game is based on randomness and the fact that you have to pick your deviation before you roll helps a bit. Also you have no control on when you will get the option of exiting the catacombs, so sure there could be the people who take two turns, gets a lucky roll and ends up 8 spaces closer to the middle, but just as likely you'll have a poor soul stuck in there for 6+ turns waiting to get out while hounded by all kinds of nasty things that await

Personally, I have no problem with the rules as written. As others have stated, I just assume that the character found a magic portal, corridors, or something similar that allowed them to move so far, so quickly. Given the danger of the catacombs, and the unpredictability of exiting them, that minor boon seems more than fair.

However, for those that want to house rule this, here's a suggestion;

If the deviation die roll is greater than the number of spaces the player traveled, the player ONLY deviates a number of spaces equal to the distance they traveled. For instance, if the player traveled 3 spaces, and then rolled a "6" for deviation, they only deviate 3 spaces (players still choose a direction to deviate before they roll, of course).

This keeps the mechanic very streamlined and still cuts down on the 'free movement' that seems to bother some people. In essence, it implies that diagonal movement is possible in the catacombs, possibly due to it's more irregular layout.

why look at it as move and deviate spaces?

It's all movement at the end of the day. the rules tell you how to work out the total movement broken up by move and deviate spaces, but it's all movement.

so if it's 1 movement and 6 deviate spaces then the guy has wandered around the catecombs with a momevement of 7. at that point forget about the labeling of it

it's just movement. then it makes a whole bunch of sense,

whos to say they poor guy didn't get scared and just leg it for 7 points of movement ?

Why do you want to change that?

This is just a bait. You want to get faster to the middle of the board - come down to catacombs.

It lurks you. And if you go down, you have to face more powerful creatures - you will die quicker.

This is just another advantage to go down and in most cases you will regret that.

I will leave that as it is.

Having played a couple times with the rules as written, I did not mind the deviation. The one event we did question was whether or not a person could come up out of the catacombs at the tower exit/entry points. We did not see anything to the contrary in the rules, and since you are basically coming up a secret door anyway we allowed it.

It's not just a matter of realism, and I understand there is a lot of randomness. But it's also a matter of game design. The time issue in this game is every important and very tight. if you count the number of turns to get in the middle in the optimal situation with no corridors, you have like 2 or 4 extra turn (according to the original game) that you can spend going in the wrong direction or trapped somewhere. Which leave very little time to search the treasure room.

So the time is very tight and jumping 6 space ahead breaks the game. SInce you can chose your deviation side, Everybody will always enter the catacombs up/down and then deviate toward the treasure room. That is the optimal solution to maximise your movement toward the treasure room and gainning a lot of free turns.

This is why I found the mechanic broken.

As for die roll above movement equal movement deviation, that means that you will have a lot of chance to deviate and that you will always deviate (no chance to go straight). While with the original system I posted, the more you move the more you deviate. Which is similar to the original rules.

Me personally, Id rather play it as written, just because adding extra die rolls, charts, etc. tend to slow down the game more than is needed. That being said, I don't have the game in my possession yet, but I can't see why you would need to fix "random" movement in a game where even death is "random" it seems.