On The Campaign Trail

By Coldmoonrising, in Descent: Journeys in the Dark

Posted at

Mordjinn said:

Whoa. I must say that the campaign system is spot on for our group. Not too deep and not too shallow. Spot on. It is ingenious system and I sure hope the quests will live up to the expectations.

My big big HUGE wish is that there is also some narrative between the quests to give hero players an idea of what to expect as a reward. And even sweeter if there's some "if you saved sir Galahad on the interlude, then you he helps you like this and this in the following quest".

I'm soooooo glad my game store is participating in the preview weekend. Can't wait to see this one in action and get to test it out.

Mordjinn said:

Whoa. I must say that the campaign system is spot on for our group. Not too deep and not too shallow. Spot on. It is ingenious system and I sure hope the quests will live up to the expectations.

My big big HUGE wish is that there is also some narrative between the quests to give hero players an idea of what to expect as a reward. And even sweeter if there's some "if you saved sir Galahad on the interlude, then you he helps you like this and this in the following quest".

Your theory and mine are the same. This system is definitely simple yet ingenious. It is nice to hear how something as complex as DnD has been adapted into a quick and satisfying board game. I am further immersed in the idea that Descent may have a social/town aspect in later expansions, making Descent a competitor to both board games and RPGs, and the customization of home-made quests will be incredible to say the least.

Posted at

Tromdial said:

…and the customization of home-made quests will be incredible to say the least.

Not to mention full-scale campaigns that potentially convert Descent's board game mechanics into an home-brewed RPG. The ideas are limitless.

Posted at

Tromdial said:

Your theory and mine are the same. This system is definitely simple yet ingenious. It is nice to hear how something as complex as DnD has been adapted into a quick and satisfying board game. I am further immersed in the idea that Descent may have a social/town aspect in later expansions, making Descent a competitor to both board games and RPGs, and the customization of home-made quests will be incredible to say the least.

I can see FFG expanding a bit on the town concept in expansions by giving you places to go and maybe even minor encounters to run afoul of. Perhaps that's what you meant. A "social" element, however, strikes me as being outside the scope of Descent. By which I mean talking to NPCs and role-playing beyond simply drawing a card and reading it. They could reintroduce a rumour deck like the one in RtL (which would be cool), but that's about as far as I can see socializing working in Descent.

At least, as far as official expansion material goes. I'm sure there will be some players who will want to go all out converting Descent into an RPG Lite (I may even be one of them, depending on how easy it is to accomplish) but I don't see that as an official direction that FFG would build the game. For one thing it would probably piss off the subset of Descent fans who just want a crunchy tactical combat game (which, based on 1e, seems to be a pretty large subset.)

Secondly, I don't know how much of the "social" aspect of role-playing I even want to see officially defined for 2e. I think I would rather have the lion's share of that stuff defined by homebrew so that I can do it however I want. Give me a combat engine, an XP progression system and some semblance of a campaign setting for backdrop, let me do the rest. Oh wait, the 2e base box already does that. =D

Like I said, rumour cards/quests would be nice, but that's about all. I'll probably try to see how feasible it is to reverse engineer the rumour cards from 1e as a homebrew project some day.

Posted at

Steve-O said:

Tromdial said:

Your theory and mine are the same. This system is definitely simple yet ingenious. It is nice to hear how something as complex as DnD has been adapted into a quick and satisfying board game. I am further immersed in the idea that Descent may have a social/town aspect in later expansions, making Descent a competitor to both board games and RPGs, and the customization of home-made quests will be incredible to say the least.

I can see FFG expanding a bit on the town concept in expansions by giving you places to go and maybe even minor encounters to run afoul of. Perhaps that's what you meant. A "social" element, however, strikes me as being outside the scope of Descent. By which I mean talking to NPCs and role-playing beyond simply drawing a card and reading it. They could reintroduce a rumour deck like the one in RtL (which would be cool), but that's about as far as I can see socializing working in Descent.

At least, as far as official expansion material goes. I'm sure there will be some players who will want to go all out converting Descent into an RPG Lite (I may even be one of them, depending on how easy it is to accomplish) but I don't see that as an official direction that FFG would build the game. For one thing it would probably piss off the subset of Descent fans who just want a crunchy tactical combat game (which, based on 1e, seems to be a pretty large subset.)

Secondly, I don't know how much of the "social" aspect of role-playing I even want to see officially defined for 2e. I think I would rather have the lion's share of that stuff defined by homebrew so that I can do it however I want. Give me a combat engine, an XP progression system and some semblance of a campaign setting for backdrop, let me do the rest. Oh wait, the 2e base box already does that. =D

Like I said, rumour cards/quests would be nice, but that's about all. I'll probably try to see how feasible it is to reverse engineer the rumour cards from 1e as a homebrew project some day.

Yes and no. Yes to as far as I see it going cards similar to Rumor cards that interact with random events in town, which may lead to drawing from other decks. For example,

"The player rolls an Awareness check.

If he or she fails, The market is bustling with consumerism and entertainment. You watch in awe as a large man swallows a flaming sword whole.

If he or she passes, Seeing a band of young men surround a merchant and his booth, you approach with interest. One of the hooligans knowing your exploits ushers the rest of the reprobates to flee. The thankful merchant gives you a token of his appreciation.

The player may draw a card from the common item deck (if that's how they still do Descent 2e)."

A broad example, but gives an idea of what may be accomplished. Furthermore, social decks that find combat adventures within the city and link "clue cards" together, weaving a grand plot based on your success would be intriguing.

However, no, I would still like to see RPG campaign books for Descent 2e that make the game a light or heavy RPG. No one is forced to buy these books but it gives a choice for those who want to take Descent to a higher level of adventure and interaction. I wholly agree though that not too much should ever be taken from the base experience of the game, which is a dungeon crawl, but I do like options too and RPG lite to me sounds like fun knowing the game breathes with more than just slaying evil in a cave or other setting. Interacting with townsfolk and nobility to find quests, rewards, and intrigue I feel is a layer of Descent I am greatly wanting.

Posted at

The problem with social interaction is that it's generally dependent on, well, interaction, actual conversations between the player and the GM. How well a conversation goes determines on what the player says, his character's skill at interacting, and luck. Those second two can certainly be included; with a very complex system of mechanics, they might even be used to simulate the first. But the first is the most important, being (I would argue) the main draw of social interaction in RPGs, and it's just not viable. Even with a very simple mechanic like "If the players argues well, they receive an extra five gold," it still wouldn't work in a competitive context, since everyone has an inherent bias and thus cannot be trusted not to judge based on what is to their own advantage.

Posted at

Walk said:

The problem with social interaction is that it's generally dependent on, well, interaction, actual conversations between the player and the GM. How well a conversation goes determines on what the player says, his character's skill at interacting, and luck. Those second two can certainly be included; with a very complex system of mechanics, they might even be used to simulate the first. But the first is the most important, being (I would argue) the main draw of social interaction in RPGs, and it's just not viable. Even with a very simple mechanic like "If the players argues well, they receive an extra five gold," it still wouldn't work in a competitive context, since everyone has an inherent bias and thus cannot be trusted not to judge based on what is to their own advantage.

I would second this idea. As the OL player I want the heroes to lose, period. That means I do not want the heroes to get the information they need to find my next plot. I don't want their conversation with the king to go well, I want the king to throw them in jail. I want the shop keeper the charge them double the normal price because the heroes made him mad. Basically, if I'm running the living breathing world portion it's not gonna be fun for them.

You could say then make a system where the OL doesn't have a say in how things go. There are 2 big problems I see with that. To get a system with a good degree of versatility is going to make things take a lot longer, which most of the feedback FFG got on D1E said was the opposite of what the majority of people want. Second, without a player to make it come to life it's just going to be a complicated form of reading cards from a rumor deck anyways. Pen and Paper RPG's succeed at telling a story because that's the DM's main job.

A good DM is not playing to win, a good OL is. I'm not sure the idea of a game with a strong, believable story component where the DM is also actively trying to kill the heroes and win the game is a realistic goal.

Posted at

Proto Persona said:

…As the OL player I want the heroes to lose, period. That means I do not want the heroes to get the information they need to find my next plot. I don't want their conversation with the king to go well, I want the king to throw them in jail. I want the shop keeper the charge them double the normal price because the heroes made him mad. Basically, if I'm running the living breathing world portion it's not gonna be fun for them.

You could say then make a system where the OL doesn't have a say in how things go. There are 2 big problems I see with that. To get a system with a good degree of versatility is going to make things take a lot longer, which most of the feedback FFG got on D1E said was the opposite of what the majority of people want. Second, without a player to make it come to life it's just going to be a complicated form of reading cards from a rumor deck anyways. Pen and Paper RPG's succeed at telling a story because that's the DM's main job.

A good DM is not playing to win, a good OL is. I'm not sure the idea of a game with a strong, believable story component where the DM is also actively trying to kill the heroes and win the game is a realistic goal.

Very informative perspective on why an RPG slant would be difficult to implement. I will return to my thoughts on this and see if it's still viable.

Posted at

Tromdial said:

Very informative perspective on why an RPG slant would be difficult to implement. I will return to my thoughts on this and see if it's still viable.

This is why I was saying before that the best approach is just to make a good dungeon crawl with strong thematic elements (which they appear to have done) and leave the rest up to those group who want more to homebrew. That way everyone can play the game the way they like it best.

The two major reasons D1e failed at this, IMHO, were (a) the sheer volume of illogical rulings made in the rulebooks and FAQs, and (b) the distinct power levels of copper/silver/gold gear. The former made it difficult to extend the game with house rules because even the official rules didn't "make sense" to everyone, and the second just disrupted the power curve and made it difficult to smoothly "level" a party of heroes over an extended campaign. (RtL found ways to address the second point, but really only by exacerbating the first.)

Normally I'm pretty big on house rules for board games, but D1e scared me off that path. I realized pretty quickly I'd have to rewrite the whole system in order to extend it to a proper "RPG Lite" game, and that was just too much work for me. D2e has much more promise in this arena. I'll have to get it in my grubby little hands and play it a few times by the book to get a feel for how easy such a project will be, but it looks promising so far, based on the previews.

Posted at

Steve-O said:

Normally I'm pretty big on house rules for board games, but D1e scared me off that path. I realized pretty quickly I'd have to rewrite the whole system in order to extend it to a proper "RPG Lite" game, and that was just too much work for me. D2e has much more promise in this arena. I'll have to get it in my grubby little hands and play it a few times by the book to get a feel for how easy such a project will be, but it looks promising so far, based on the previews.

Ditto.

Posted at

Bleached Lizard said:

Agree with the above poster (not the one quoted above - the actual post above mine). ALL the dungeons in 2E are unique, so I don't know what Sausageman is talking about. What they've actually dumped are the random, thematically nonsensical dungeons of 1E, which my gaming group disliked precisely because they were so random, made you feel like you weren't on any kind of real adventure and didn't tell any kind of story.

I meant the 'legendary area' dungeons. The three dungeons that you could only enter once per campaign level. And the rumour dungeon levels to boot. Basically anything that wasn't on a card.

I think my issue here is that the two campaigns are very different. First ed had you wandering across a very large land, encountering what you encountered. Second ed seems to be smaller in scale (and time frame), and which is why it's not really comparable - and probably the reason I'm having some difficulties accepting the culling of various things/mechanics.

I really liked the 'Runebound with dungeons' feel of Road to Legend. I don't think Second Ed will be ANYTHING like that…

Posted at

Sausageman said:

Bleached Lizard said:

Agree with the above poster (not the one quoted above - the actual post above mine). ALL the dungeons in 2E are unique, so I don't know what Sausageman is talking about. What they've actually dumped are the random, thematically nonsensical dungeons of 1E, which my gaming group disliked precisely because they were so random, made you feel like you weren't on any kind of real adventure and didn't tell any kind of story.

I meant the 'legendary area' dungeons. The three dungeons that you could only enter once per campaign level. And the rumour dungeon levels to boot. Basically anything that wasn't on a card.

I think my issue here is that the two campaigns are very different. First ed had you wandering across a very large land, encountering what you encountered. Second ed seems to be smaller in scale (and time frame), and which is why it's not really comparable - and probably the reason I'm having some difficulties accepting the culling of various things/mechanics.

I really liked the 'Runebound with dungeons' feel of Road to Legend. I don't think Second Ed will be ANYTHING like that…

I completely agree, and hence I can't wait for some homebrewed rules to merge 2nd edition rules with the 1st edition campaign maps. Though, and someone can correct me, I don't think that it would be too difficult to do at RtL campaign and simply use the 2nd edition rules for the actual dungeons. The biggest issues (I think) would be how characters level with gold/silver die as well as the Overload leveling up. But I'm sure someone can find a way to merge it.