Quote from: CRKrueger;544262Do you have any experience with Advanced Heroquest or WarhammerQuest?

How replayable are they?  They seem very focused(of course so is Space Hulk).

How awesome was SpaceHulk such a shame I never bought my own copy of it. Tried Doom but not even close

Quote from: Kord's Boon;544264But it's right there in rules as written, you're just trying to stomp all over my fun just because you're not as smart as me or as strong as my character!

Shut the fuck up and roll the dice.

Quote from: jibbajibba;544266How awesome was SpaceHulk such a shame I never bought my own copy of it. Tried Doom but not even close

Space Hulk is a nice comparison. SH is probably more fun again than the D&D board games, but even more focussed.

On the point of board games, has anyone been keeping an eye on Descent: Journey into the Depths 2e by FFG?

It is moving into 4e's vacating territory pretty swiftly (and looks damn good too as a result)

Quote from: Skywalker;544268Space Hulk is a nice comparison. SH is probably more fun again than the D&D board games, but even more focussed.

I have the 2nd and 3rd editions of SH (and passed on a chance to get the 1e set FOR A SONG...WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME???) and both rock on toast.  SH3 kind of recaptures SH1's gonzo, over-the-top feel (psykers and grenades and assault cannons, oh my!), but both are good.

Quote from: Skywalker;544275On the point of board games, has anyone been keeping an eye on Descent: Journey into the Depths 2e by FFG?

It is moving into 4e's vacating territory pretty swiftly (and looks damn good too as a result)

You mean "Descent: Journeys in the Dark"?  I've played it a couple times, it's pretty good.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;544280You mean "Descent: Journeys in the Dark"?  I've played it a couple times, it's pretty good.

Yep. There is a second edition due any time soon and it seems to be stealing 4e's concepts as quickly as 4e sheds them

Quote from: Skywalker;544282Yep. There is a second edition due any time soon and it seems to be stealing 4e's concepts as quickly as 4e sheds them

Well there they go, then.

Quote from: Skywalker;544282Yep. There is a second edition due any time soon and it seems to be stealing 4e's concepts as quickly as 4e sheds them

Could you give some examples of 4e ideas going into the next edition of Descent?

I liked 4e a lot, and so far I like D&D Next a lot.  Then again, I liked all the editions to some extent.

The thing I liked the most about 4e was the reduced DM prep time, and the return to disassociating monster rules from PC rules (the later of which was not new, it was just a return to old).  I hope they keep those two concepts.

Quote from: Rum Cove;544287Could you give some examples of 4e ideas going into the next edition of Descent?

Sure. There are now four PC archetypes - Warriors, Rogues, Healers and Wizards. Each has two classes. Warriors have Berserkers and Knights, Healers have Priests and Shamans, Rogues have Rangers and Thieves etc. The set up is very reminiscient of Essentials, with the Archetype being a "role" and the class being, well, the class.

The abilities have also become much less about damage and more about Hero interaction and forced movement. Healers can heal Heroes with 3 squares of them automatically. Knights can make it harder for opponents to hurt nearby allies.

They have also added in more interesting Campaign Story Structure and Encounters, which remind me of 4e's overall default play structure.

Its not like the two games are the same. But I think there is a shift in that direction, and for Descent it should make it much more exciting than the current version.

Tbh, I am still not sure If I do not prefer 4th edition to 3rd, but in my case that is definitely damning with faint praise.

To me 3rd edition takes D&D and utterly savages it to appeal to the glut of rules lawyers who where created by Magic the Gathering. Its not that I think its not an RPG, it clearly is, but its an RPG designed for people who like sitting at home optimising characters and beating their opponent with ultra complex rules glitches. (Note you do not have to actually play it like this, but it's still how its fucking designed to be played).

4th I think in many ways is a better game, system mastery is less important, arseing around with your build will often have fuck all effect. There is no assumed constant battle of optimisation between player and GM, so its runs out of the box. Its real sin is then taking years of D&D continuity and rubbishing it, for no reason. If 4th Edition had been set in Greyhawk, had not utterly fucked the Realms and had put the fucking core races and classes in the first sodding Players Guide, I think 5th edition would be a few years off.

Both games have a lot more problems, and we could spend a few years listing them, but I think those are the prime sins of each edition that I hope to god 5th does not repeat.

Quote from: Marleycat;544219The thing is you're right in a way. It's a very tight ruleset and it's stellar at supporting the playstyle it was built for. The monster creation stuff is great and there are other really nice elements to it.

Problem is Dnd is a kitchen sink game and is supposed to support many different playstyes.

And what playstyle is that?

Quote from: Sommerjon;544310And what playstyle is that?

What playstyles do you think 4e supports?

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;544311What playstyles do you think 4e supports?

Any playstyle you really want, with roughly the same amount of effort it takes to make any other edition support any playstyle you want.

D&D hasn't been good at being anything but a murder simulator since AD&D, but people go through insane contortions to make it fit what they'd rather play.


Of course I'm sure this is pure heresy here because obviously 4E can only ever be a board game WoW on paper [insert comparison that fits any prior edition of D&D as well]. The hypocrisy really makes me smile.