Morthai said:
Sausageman said:
4) probably new classes, not adding something to the old classes, for the same reasons as in 1)
Do you regularly use Walmart as your rule of thumb for where to buy "good board games?"
Not that there's anything wrong with shopping at Walmart or Barnes & Noble, but it's been my experience that stores like that carry only a fraction of the board games that are available to buy. Furthermore, the ones they do carry are usually "mainstream" titles like Monopoly, RISK, and occasionally HeroScape.
There's a whole world of board games beyond those, none of which are selling "poorly" by any means, to be found at your Friendly Local Gaming Store.
I would definitely identify myself as a 'casual' board gamer and new entrant to this market, so the answer to your question is a qualifed, "Yes!" After seeing the D&D Boardgame at Barnes & Noble, I actually stumbled onto Descent while doing research on the game online. If I hadn't done the research regarding a COMPETING PRODUCT, I never would have known this game exists. If I had instead gone forward with an impulse buy in the store, Descent would have never even entered my consideration set. My point is that customers can't buy a product that they are unaware of. So while I feel that your argument regarding mainstream titles is absolutely correct, it is also obvious that these may be useful marketing and distribution channels for prospective new entrants to the market (such as myself, and a whole group of friends who unfortunately should be visiting gaming stores more).
That being said, I am encouraged to hear that the game sells well at local gaming stores (obviously a gathering point for FFG's target segment), I'm just discouraged to see that FFG hasn't made the transition to selling to mainstream customers as WoTC has, as I believe it has a quality game on its hands. You are probably correct. I'm sure FFG did the math and found that the cost of shelf space far outweighed potential sales, and probably feels that sharing the shelf with "mainstream" titles dilutes its brand. However, I'm still left with the question of "What if…" 
Seraph1m said:
Do you regularly use Walmart as your rule of thumb for where to buy "good board games?"
Not that there's anything wrong with shopping at Walmart or Barnes & Noble, but it's been my experience that stores like that carry only a fraction of the board games that are available to buy. Furthermore, the ones they do carry are usually "mainstream" titles like Monopoly, RISK, and occasionally HeroScape.
There's a whole world of board games beyond those, none of which are selling "poorly" by any means, to be found at your Friendly Local Gaming Store.
I would definitely identify myself as a 'casual' board gamer and new entrant to this market, so the answer to your question is a qualifed, "Yes!" After seeing the D&D Boardgame at Barnes & Noble, I actually stumbled onto Descent while doing research on the game online. If I hadn't done the research regarding a COMPETING PRODUCT, I never would have known this game exists. If I had instead gone forward with an impulse buy in the store, Descent would have never even entered my consideration set. My point is that customers can't buy a product that they are unaware of. So while I feel that your argument regarding mainstream titles is absolutely correct, it is also obvious that these may be useful marketing and distribution channels for prospective new entrants to the market (such as myself, and a whole group of friends who unfortunately should be visiting gaming stores more).
That being said, I am encouraged to hear that the game sells well at local gaming stores (obviously a gathering point for FFG's target segment), I'm just discouraged to see that FFG hasn't made the transition to selling to mainstream customers as WoTC has, as I believe it has a quality game on its hands. You are probably correct. I'm sure FFG did the math and found that the cost of shelf space far outweighed potential sales, and probably feels that sharing the shelf with "mainstream" titles dilutes its brand. However, I'm still left with the question of "What if…"
Comming from a retail background. Most stores do not charge for "shelf space" unless it is an endcap or large display type of thing. The store will typically purchase their products form distributors. Rather than directly from manufactorers. Now at one point FF games based off of video games like Doom and WOW were sold at a smaller national chain computer store(Microcenter), but that only lasted a couple of years, and they only caried the games that were based off of the computer games.
RagsMckay said:
My point is that customers can't buy a product that they are unaware of. So while I feel that your argument regarding mainstream titles is absolutely correct, it is also obvious that these may be useful marketing and distribution channels for prospective new entrants to the market (such as myself, and a whole group of friends who unfortunately should be visiting gaming stores more).
Yes, I do understand what you meant. I just wanted to make sure you were aware of the gaming hobby in general. Since you appear to have an interest in board games like Descent, you should also be aware that there's an entire niche market out there filled with similar things that you may be interested in.
It would be nice if FFG games were seen more regularly in places like Walmart - I'm certainly not opposed to that idea. It just sounded, from your original post, as though you were concerned Descent might not last too long without the assistance of the publicity generated by mainstream outlet stores. That's not the case. First edition Descent was in print for about 7 years (give or take) and had five full-size expansions before it was retired. Second edition now comes out and the expansions are already starting to pile up less than a year into it's production cycle. FFG also has other game lines that have been running longer than Descent, with more support.
And on that note, we come to a sobering point which you may not be aware of if you truely aren't familiar with the gaming hobby. FFG likes to print expansions to its more popular games. It's not just one box, it's many (assuming you have any compulsion to have the "complete set", that is.) The core box is perfectly playable by itself - it's not that you need the expansions or anything - but they are out there, and there will likely be quite a few of them to come with this particular game line.
How do You think when we will see any previews fo this expansions? Can't wait for it.
Beren Eoath said:
How do You think when we will see any previews fo this expansions? Can't wait for it.
I was wondering the same thing, myself. Eight weeks elapsed between the announcement of Lair of the Wyrm and the first previews. If Labyrinth of Ruin follows the same timeframe, that would put the first previews somewhere around the beginning of April. I'd rather they start showing up sooner, but the beginning of April is my best guess.
It will definitely use a new quest map as the preview states it's set in a new region of Arhynn (or was it Terrinoth?).
new region of terrinoth, Dunwarr Mountain Range
april is the best bet for previews
I asked becouse I wuld love to see this ecxpansion as sonn as possible. If it would show in shops in April/May I would be very happy. But I think more realistic that we will get it in June/July 2013.
I'd rather have them give it the Valve-treatment in that I'd rather have a good finished product that's been playested enough (with all bits 'n' pieces included) that comes out later in the year than a faulty shortcoming product that's been rushed out the door.
Then again , that's easy for me to say as my group have only just begun the base game's main quest (combined with LotWQ) : ).
If they were giving it the valve treatment, they'd start working on it in April/May . . . of NEXT year (unless something shiny came along first and distracted them).
Pascale said:
I'd rather have them give it the Valve-treatment in that I'd rather have a good finished product that's been playested enough (with all bits 'n' pieces included) that comes out later in the year than a faulty shortcoming product that's been rushed out the door.
Then again , that's easy for me to say as my group have only just begun the base game's main quest (combined with LotWQ) : ).
I'm sure thet before they even announced it they playtested it for long hours. So i't not a question of playtest but of printing and putting all pieces together in one box and they ship it to shops all over the world.
Can't wait. I look forward to adding this one to the collection! New campaign = awesome! New classes, dice, heroes, quests, OL cards, travel cards, items, etc = AWESOME!
but…
No new search cards = not awesome qq.
Did they really say no new search cards? or have they just not said? I mean it says there 119 new cards, surely 6 or 7 of those can be new search cards.
Hmmm…well they didn't actually say "no new search cards." However, they made a fairly comprehensive list in both the news add and the "About" section of the LoR page which mentioned everything BUT new search cards. So I suppose they may have just not mentioned them, but likely they aren't in there. Which isn't really a big deal, I just personally want to see that search deck have new and interesting stuff in it. There is just something fun about the random search draw and I think more variety would be rad.
Either way, I can't wait to buy this box!!
Me too! search cards or not
new search cards would completely trow the balance of the search deck totally out. Even the secret room changes the balance quite alot.
Morthai said:
new search cards would completely trow the balance of the search deck totally out. Even the secret room changes the balance quite alot.
Not necessarily. If the percentage of each type of card and money value (of the total deck) remained the same, then the balance/odds would remain the same. I can not off hand remember the size or contents of the entire search deck, but say for instance there were 6 potion cards, 4 "trinket" cards, 1 treasure chest card and 1 nothing card. The expansion could add 6 more new potion type cards (perhaps some of the other potions from 1st ed, or completely new ones), 4 new "trinket" cards, 1 more treasure chest card, and one more nothing card. If the gold values mirrored the initial search deck values, this would in effect give you the exact same odds as the basic search deck while adding some variety. As a side effect, if you were using LotWQ, the odds of the secret room would be halved.
this would still change the balance since an certain class could get more value of this deck by discarding more unwanted cards and having 24 search cards to play with, same the other way around, drawing just useless potions rather than something valuable… I think the number of search cards is imo very balanced and has a good varity of stuff in it and should not been changed.
Well if the search deck remains the same, then Ulma Grimstone's ability says a lot about the apothecary class. Assuming they didn't just give her a useless ability, then a least one or more of the apothecary's class skills must be powered by access to potions. Such a skill might come into conflict with the appraisal of thieves, who will want to maximize gold instead of hunting for potions.
And speaking of thieves, so far we don't exactly what separates treasure hunters from thieves yet, even their desciption of treasure hunters could just as well be applied to thieves as well. I'm sure they have some cool new mechanic for them, but I wish they at least hinted at what it could it be. In comparision, it seems pretty clear what the beastmaster, hexer and apothecary bring to table that's different, even if we don't know their details either.
CrazyJ said:
Well if the search deck remains the same, then Ulma Grimstone's ability says a lot about the apothecary class. Assuming they didn't just give her a useless ability, then a least one or more of the apothecary's class skills must be powered by access to potions. Such a skill might come into conflict with the appraisal of thieves, who will want to maximize gold instead of hunting for potions.
And speaking of thieves, so far we don't exactly what separates treasure hunters from thieves yet, even their desciption of treasure hunters could just as well be applied to thieves as well. I'm sure they have some cool new mechanic for them, but I wish they at least hinted at what it could it be. In comparision, it seems pretty clear what the beastmaster, hexer and apothecary bring to table that's different, even if we don't know their details either.
The preorders are starting to apear so any time soon we should see a preview if this expansion. Can't wait!
Any rumors when we'll be actually able to buy it?
Ad copy says 2nd quarter of 2013, which would be April,May, or June. So soon.