Our group has been slowly playing through the Shadow Rune campaign as an alternate game when our full group of RPGers doesn't show up. We just finished the first Act 2 scenario and have come to the conclusion that the game is far too stressful. It keeps both the Heroes and the Overlord on the edge of our seats for the entire session and it doesn't feel like there is a clear winner till the very end. It seems impossible to predict who will win throughout the entire game!

I just wanted to chime in and say that for our group the game has not felt unbalanced in any way, and the scenarios play out in a tense, suspenseful and very entertaining manner. Well done FFG!

Well i played the Shadow Rune campaign for about 5 rimes now with my group and...it's 3-2 in favor of the heroes. So yes, you could say it's balanced. It's just obvious in our campaigns that it's mostly one scenario that could declare you the vicotr or not...fun part is that it's never the finale itself that's the determine quest (well plot wise it is) but mostly the total victeroy is secured 3 quests before that.

Last campaign we had, the heroes were winning from the start and then around the second ACT II quest they choose...BAM...it all turned towards the overlord and you could kinda feel the anti climax on their face

I 100% agree. It seemed like the OL (myself) would have won the last campaign we played, but in Act II, I slipped up once and that was the end. Though I knew at the end(they never beleived me when I would say I would lose. I wonder why ^.^;; )I wouldn't win when the final, but surprisingly I almost did. It was a fantastic finish!

As an OL myself, in the one campaign we played I lost all but the Dawnblade quest and still almost won the finale. There was one X rolled on my part as a frenzy attack that sealed the deal for the heroes.

I think in our last campaign it was the one in Act II with Merick Farrow (don't know the quest by heart anymore). I (OL) won the quest and then the quest after and it was really the turn of tide. That quest wasn't unbeatable for the heroes in my opinion and I wasn't doing anything else then before in the quests but...was it a bad roll on the heroes part or something, i don't remember but it just happened.

I still remember them looking stunned (not condition stunnend :-)) at the board and they were like "What the **** just happened?" I didn't thought much of it at that time but let me tell you..that was the key point in the campaign. I'm sure if they had won this, they would have won the entire campaign. Now I as OL won by actually winning 3 quests against the 6 quests from the heroes. *evil grin

My rolling two blank defiance rolls on the final is what got me. All campaign I was rolling like a boss and then the dice forsook me there at the end >D figures, right? I had it coming. I was pretty mean to them.

My rolling two blank defiance rolls on the final is what got me. All campaign I was rolling like a boss and then the dice forsook me there at the end >D figures, right? I had it coming. I was pretty mean to them.

Well in a way it's nice that each player still has a chance at winning the game, although the odds are against you. Although I prefer playing the overlord, I don't mind seeying the heroes win...well not a few quests at least

I guess a good overlord/moderator (almost the same at times) needs to keep in mind that the fun part is that both factions can win quests. I for one, can enjoy the game , no matter if the heroes or the OL wins. Although there's nothing more fun then shredding those pesky mortals in 2 with my hybrid sentinels!

My rolling two blank defiance rolls on the final is what got me. All campaign I was rolling like a boss and then the dice forsook me there at the end >D figures, right? I had it coming. I was pretty mean to them.

Well in a way it's nice that each player still has a chance at winning the game, although the odds are against you. Although I prefer playing the overlord, I don't mind seeying the heroes win...well not a few quests at least

I guess a good overlord/moderator (almost the same at times) needs to keep in mind that the fun part is that both factions can win quests. I for one, can enjoy the game , no matter if the heroes or the OL wins. Although there's nothing more fun then shredding those pesky mortals in 2 with my hybrid sentinels!

YES! So good to hear that.

First Blood was started by our normal GM, but she was really REALLY frustrated with the whole game because it appeared she couldn't win. So I rose my hand and said I would take the OL spot. I am a good loser and don't mind watching the "greater good" (haha) win then just one (me) win all the time. As we would have it, I won allot, but so did the heroes.

We are gearing up to start LoR and I am SUPER excited! I get new toys. I am full of new ideas on how to torment my heroes and so my heroes have new heroes and strategies to pull me under. It will be great.

Also, as an artist, this game begs for illustrations. We have too many great things happen to not give a visual for it!

The second leg of "A Fat Goblin" in Act I of The Shadow Rune was a real nail biter. Splig was all of three spaces from the entrance when Grisbad the Thirsty blew all of his fatigue to catch up to him and deal the last three damage to Splig. All the heroes collectively released the breath they had been holding.

I would agree that Descent: Journeys into the Dark is not for everyone. A highly competitive group might find the game frustrating, since occasionally things will happen that just can't be prevented. If I (the overlord) had a Tripwire trap when Grisbad was rushing Splig, the goblin would (likely) have gotten away. It's similar to any other game where things just happen that no one can prevent or predict, like someone rolling double 6's to land on Free Parking when they are out of money or that one soldier in Madagascar that defeats a gigantic army in Risk.

Hyper competitive players never will appreciate the luck factor in a game.

They should stick to chess.

Otherwise, all is about the balance between skill and luck.

After my own limited experience, intelligent tactical maneuver and luck do share the reasons of the outcome of a quest quite evenly (so, if you loose, you can blame the dice and if you win, you can boast about your good tactics).

Hyper competitive players never will appreciate the luck factor in a game.

They should stick to chess.

Otherwise, all is about the balance between skill and luck.

After my own limited experience, intelligent tactical maneuver and luck do share the reasons of the outcome of a quest quite evenly (so, if you loose, you can blame the dice and if you win, you can boast about your good tactics).

I guess that's the same about everything in life. If things go bad, it's not your fault but something stupid interfered. While everything is going fine, people seem to boast themselves for being great

Luck is a part of life...if you can't accept that then you have a long way to go. You can force your own luck but luck is still a factor that is unpredictable and there is no explanation for it. Welcome to the theory of chaos

That is why I like games where luck is a factor.

Not total randomness, but enough unexpected possibilities that lead to risk managing and which allow the possibility of to change the tide of anotherwise badly engaged situation.

As an OL myself, in the one campaign we played I lost all but the Dawnblade quest and still almost won the finale. There was one X rolled on my part as a frenzy attack that sealed the deal for the heroes.

Lol that sucks...