... what do you guys think of them?

Now that I've read the rules, I'm giving this game a pass. Hey, if someone in my group buys it, then sure, I'll give it a shot, but unless that happens, this one is dropping off my radar for good now.

Trump said:

I must agree that it looks bland on paper. My biggest disappointment is the very low number of neutral tactic cards that are avaible. While the different objectives is a great aspect of the game, none of them seems developed enough for my taste. I never played Dominion, so I could be wrong, but it seems to me that even the base game, without the expansions, is more developed and complex than Rune Age. Still, I'll wait the reviews before giving up on this game for good. One thing is certain, this is no longer a "must get the first day it's released" to me.

I was initially very disappointed when I saw the new game for the Terrinoth universe was a deck builder... as I have typically disliked this genre.

BUT - I have recently started playing Ascension: Chronicle of the Godslayer on my ipad - and Dominion with some friends of mine - and there are aspects I like from both. Ascension, I like that there is a center pool of cards that change and you compete essentially against the other players for if you want them or can banish them from play to prevent another from getting. And I like the simple clean game that Dominion is.

This one looks like it has the potential - after a quick skim of the rules - to be a decent middle of the two. I like that there are solitaire options, co-op options, and competitive options. It could fit in with whichever group dynamics I am playing with at the time.

I can play Dominion with my wife but she would hate Ascension as that one is a bit more competitive and "attackish" (even though there is really no combat against each other...)

I can play co-op with my wife - I can play competitive against my buddies - or I can crack open the box and enjoy alone whilst watching the tele.

I like that from this perspective the game looks to offer flexibility!

SoylentGreen said:

Yeah, but don't you think that this flexibility comes at the cost of a lack of depth? I never played a deckbuilding game before, so I'm wondering how does Rune Age compare to other games of the same genre.

I, too, have played Ascension with actual cards and on my iPad. I, too, have played Dominion.

I like games that allow direct player interaction. Essentially, Dominion feels like I am playing multi-player solitaire. While Ascension has a little with choosing to banish or buy cards in the center row that your opponent may be trying to acquire, it still doesn't quite feel confrontational enough.

Rune Wars, however, looks like a nice amount of character interaction in both co-op and PvP.

I am keeping my pre-order firmly intact. This is the deck-building game I have been waiting for.

Not to mention, it has the huge bonus of being a viable solo game!

I am worried that player order has too big an impact on who will beat an enemy event card.

The rules state

"When an Enemy is drawn from the Event deck, place it near the objective card. Players can engage the Enemies in battle during their turn."

The player whose turn it is immediately after the Event phase will have the first crack at the enemy, which is unfair to the other players assuming the enemy has a good reward.

The starting player is also favored in the Dragonlords scenario:

"Victory Conditions: The objective card is considered an Enemy. The player who defeats the objective wins the game."

Maerimydra said:

(Cracks knuckles)

OK, I'll take a shot at this. I'm not going to go through every deckbuilder, but I'll talk about all of the popular ones.

Dominion, Thunderstone, and Ascension tend to be solotaire-like affairs where you care less about what others are doing and more about racing for victory.

Puzzle Strike and Nightfall are directly interactive as you are trying to actually kill your opponents.

RuneAge appears to swing between the two extremes, depending on the scenario you choose.

Dominion is the weakest as far as theme goes, with Ascension right behind it. The other three have a lot of theme.

RuneAge appears to be very thematic.

Dominion - Everyone starts with the same basic 10 card deck. 10 random "special" cards are drawn at the beginning of the game that everyone can buy during the game, as well as few basic cards that are always there.

Thunderstone - Everyone starts with the same basic 12 card deck. 8 random "special" cards are drawn at the beginning of the game that everyone can buy during the game, as well as few basic cards that are always there. In addition, the main cards that are worth points are randomly selected before the game too.

Puzzle Strike - Everyone starts with the same basic 10 card deck plus three totally unique cards to give each deck a different flavor. 10 random "special" cards are drawn at the beginning of the game that everyone can buy during the game, as well as few basic cards that are always there.

Ascension - Everyone starts with the same basic 10 card deck. ALL of the "special" cards are shuffled together and six are shown at a time. As soon as one is bought, it's replaced.

Nightfall - Everyone starts with the same basic 12 card deck. Each player will draft 2 types of "special" cards which only they can buy. 8 semi-random "special" cards are drawn at the beginning of the game that everyone can buy during the game.

RuneAge - Everyone starts with the same basic 8 card deck (with 3 of them being slightly different for each race). After a scenario is chosen, the same cards get set up for public purchase every time. Each player has a private supply of cards to purchase that are roughly similar but slightly different.

I can't exactly teach you how to play them all here, but I'll give you a basic idea of gameplay.

Dominion - You look at the cards chosen for the random set-up and try to imagine which you want to get. You slowly build your engine up at at some point you decide to change gears and spend all of your effort buying victory cards until the game ends. You don't want to start too soon or they'll clog up your deck and you'll stop buying while everyone else continues to buy.

Thunderstone - You can see three victory cards at a time. You'll generally try to improve your deck while slanting it towards what you'll need to get those victory cards (for example, if there's a card you want that's invulnerable to magic, you'll try to buy a lot of non-magic stuff). The decision of when to "change gears" is gone. You'll nearly always go after a victory card if you can and just buy new cards if you can't.

Puzzle Strike - The cards represent combat moves. as you learn new moves, you'll take an occasional jab at your enemy. Every now and then, you'll tear into them with some awesome combo. To win this game, you need to be the last man standing.

Ascension - Decision-making is very low here. Unlike Thunderstone, when you draw a killer combat hand you might not have anyone worth fighting and when you draw a killer purchasing hand, there may not be anything to buy. Ascension is the quickest one to learn and setup, but it does that by being more random.

Nightfall - I'm still just exploring this one so I can only be very basic here. You buy cards looking to create great combos. You unleash damage upon your opponents, clogging their decks with mostly useless cards (wounds). When the wound deck is exhausted, whoever has the fewest wounds wins. So far, what I'm noticing in this game is that skillful deck-building isn't rewarded very well. If you build a deck that's better than everyone else, then they'll all gang up on you and you'll lose. You need to somehow do a LITTLE better than everyone else without them noticing that you're doing a LITTLE better.

Trump said:

Trump said:

So far, what I'm noticing in this game is that skillful deck-building isn't rewarded very well. If you build a deck that's better than everyone else, then they'll all gang up on you and you'll lose. You need to somehow do a LITTLE better than everyone else without them noticing that you're doing a LITTLE better.

It reminds me of Smallworld: the winner is the player who's doing a little better than everyone else without nobody noticing.

The rules are more or less what I expected after reading the previews. I will continue to monitor this game, although I'd still like to play it somewhere before committing to buy it.

What does fray my nerves a tiny little bit, however, is the fluff. There are definitely a few cracks in the continuity of the Terrinoth universe introduced by this game. That's not entirely unreasonable; after all FFG's business is making board games, not writing stories, and the fact that so many games are set in one world is mainly a gimmick. Still, it bugs me a bit. In particular the change from Waiqar being a descendent of Llovar Rutonu (from Runewars) to him being a mage who was captured and tortured by Llovar according to this manual. I think that one bugs me mainly because Runewars is such a recent addition to the pack itself. It's disappointing they couldn't keep their stories straight between such recent releases.

But I suppose I'm probably obsessing too much about the fluff anyway. The idea of multiple games in one universe just really tickles my fancy, so when they don't line up, it irritates me. Not enough to alter my position about potentially buying it, though.

Steve-O said:

Maybe this "captured and tortured" is Waiqar being grounded by his dad... Llovar just had ENOUGH of his kid texting and not getting to his spellwork...

I'm still looking forward to it. You can probably use house rules regarding the neutral cards in the center (only 3 per stack in a 2-player game seems kind of low, even if we're clearly supposed to prioritize faction cards over neutral).

I've played Ascension, and as a free iOS card game (free version you can only play AI) it's great casual fun, but I wouldn't pay money for it. Far too random and almost no player-to-player interaction. Rune Age, depending on the game type, has a lot of player-to-player interaction, and having faction-specific cards as well as neutral cards should help cut down the randomness of some deck-building card games.

Plus the cards look really good.

Ascension has player interaction actually, especially with the expansion.

I am a big fan of the deck building games and I hope to be picking this one up tomorrow.

Toqtamish said:

Yes, it does have player interaction. But very little for what's supposed to be a competitive game. But I have not seen the expansion, so maybe there's better interaction. Probably doesn't help the randomness though, and the cards still look ugly

I find the game has limited appeal: there isn't enough variety at all. 4 unit types and a few neutral cards isn't a great deal to work with. The sheer number of card types is too much as well. It could have been condensed and expanded, fewer scenarios, with no need to scenario specific events, and a focus instead perhaps on competitive play. The mechanics are reasonably sound however, but the rules are appallingly presented and very unclear. I'm disappointed. As usual the production values are there, but I regret my purchase (as I did with LotR LCG, ironically). I'd be happy to sell it on, if anyone in the UK is interested.

After seeing the mechanics of the game, I definitely will be looking at buying this game at some point. there are other games I want more right now, but I will buy this sometime. I enjoy the actaul gameplay of deck building games, but the interaction does often lack. Especially once you know the cards, but this one will have a fair amount of interaction. It's definitely a unique take on the deck building genre which is what has me sold along with the theme.